Icons and the Russian Avant-Garde

The Last Futurist Exhibition of Paintings 0,10 - Petrograd 1915-16

As part of “Islands of Saints,” a small exhibition of Icons of British and Anglo-Saxon saints at All Hallows by the Tower (12 July – 2 August 2019), art historian Andrew Spira gave a fascinating lecture on the influence of the orthodox Icon painting tradition on the Russian Avant-Garde (which reached its peak between the 1917 revolution and the early 1930s). He used images of work from a variety of little known (to me!) artists, to illustrate how icon painting influenced art and culture throughout the changing political landscape of Russia. He began by explaining what an icon is and how the icon painting tradition emerged.

St Augustine of Canterbury by Tatiana Kolibaba, 2019

Sitting alongside the icons that form the exhibition, which are all in a clearly recognisable (iconic!) style, Andrew explained that the similarity in disposition is because the value in icon painting lies in the tradition itself – the icon is not an opportunity for artistic self-expression or originality. This is because, in the orthodox tradition, icons are seen as an extension of the incarnation – an expression of the divinity of God in the material world. What you see represented in an icon is of interest, but the importance of the icon is that it is an emanation of the incarnation. For Orthodox Christians, icons are sacramental – icons are venerated not worshipped, as worship is due to God alone (and so painting or venerating icons is not considered to be contrary to the Second Commandment).

Byzantine Iconoclasm, Chludov Psalter, 9th century

This ‘theology’ of icons developed during a ‘war on icons’ (“iconoclasm”) which took place first during the period of the Byzantine Empire and fell into two periods. At this time many icons (representations of God, Jesus or saints) were destroyed or replaced with images of the cross, which was seen as a more acceptable symbol by those who opposed the use of icons. Those who favoured the use of Icons believed desecrating or attacking them was the same as participating in the crucifixion – Jesus was an Icon of God. Like many disputes in the ancient world, little written evidence exists about the arguments on either side and what does survive is predominantly from records of the victorious party (the “Triumph of Orthodoxy” saw the restoration of icons to the church after a debate at the Synod of Constantinople on 11th March 843). Another period of iconoclasm took place in Western Europe in the middle ages. 

Late 14th century icon illustrating the "Triumph of Orthodoxy" 

Andrew explained that while the icon painting tradition is obviously rooted in the orthodox faith and the power of the divine, the link between icons and political power was established during this period; with different emperors either for or against their use. The influence of the orthodox icon painting tradition on art and culture and the link to changing political power can be traced throughout Russian history like two threads of the same yarn; the influence of the tradition on the Russian avant-garde cannot therefore easily be separated from the changing political situation in the country. 

16th-century Russian Icon showing St Luke painting an Icon of the Blessed Virgin Mary

During the iconoclast controversy of the Byzantine Empire, a tradition emerged linking St Luke to icon painting. It became a commonly held belief that Luke (known as patron saint of artists) was the painter of the first icon – of the Blessed Virgin Mary, who blessed the icon herself. The scene has been depicted in many paintings and icons (this sixteenth century Russian icon shows St Luke’s hand being guided by an angel, as he paints the scene). 

Icon mounted in the corner of a room

Another tradition which developed was the practice of hanging icons in the corner of rooms. There are different views as to why this tradition emerged, but one possibility is that in many icons, the hand of God is seen emerging from the top corner of the icon. This tradition continues today, as can be seen in this contemporary example. Perfect sanctity emerges from the corner of the image, therefore perhaps the most sacred location to hang the image is the corner of a room. 

Contemporary Icon of St George showing the 'hand of God' in the corner

Andrew explained that while the tradition of icon painting is to avoid self expression or originality, as icons were copied and re-copied, new elements were introduced. The icons in this exhibition are in the spirit of the tradition but are not traditional (from an orthodox point of view) because of their subject matter – these are British and Anglo Saxon saints who are not found within the orthodox canon. The Hospitality of Abraham, an icon painted by Andrei Rublev in the fifteenth century, is his most well known work and regarded as the pinnacle of the tradition.

The Hospitality of Abraham by Andrei Rublev

Rublev, a monk, was considered to be a particularly holy person and this personal devotion is thought to have been important in enhancing the prominence of his work as an iconographer. A modern-day icon painter has written about the vocation of icon painting here.

Rublev’s famous icon is said to represent the Old Testament Trinity (a scene described in the Book of Genesis when God appeared to Abraham and Sarah in the form of three angels on the plains of Mamre). Ever since the icon has emerged, people have sought to determine which angel represents which person of the Trinity – the angel beneath the city is thought by some to represent God the Father; the angel seated beneath the tree as God the Son and the angel seated by the cave in the rock (a place to which monks would retreat to meditate and seek divine guidance) is said by some to represent God the Holy Spirit. However, in the orthodox tradition, such speculation would be seen as blasphemous. 

The famous Rublev icon has been used as the basis for countless others. This later example shows the eternal city in neoclassical architecture. The tree has been moved. In some versions a cross is shown in the halo of the central angel. Western (renaissance) influences began to be incorporated into icons and some icon painters even portrayed images of the Lord Sabaoth (God the Father) himself, as in this example which is described in detail in this fascinating blog. 

Andrew explained that following the end of Napoleon’s rule and the collapse of the French Empire, the Russian elite sought to distance themselves from Europe and the Russian empire grew under the control of the Tsars. A nationalist style emerged, encouraged by both church and state, a crowning achievement of which was the construction of the Cathedral of Christ The Saviour in Moscow (destroyed by Stalin in 1931 but rebuilt under President Yeltsin). The original building was decorated with ecclesiastical paintings by Ivan Kramskoi. 

One of Kramskoi’s most famous paintings; Christ in the Wilderness (1872) shows how representations of Christ developed outside the church during the nationalist period – a time when the majority of Russians did not have as many freedoms as people living in Britain and France had. Some middle class writers and artists (such as the Narodnikis) sought to educate the wider population, to improve their conditions. At this time images of Christ (outside of the icon painting tradition) were used by artists as a political statement, associating Him with those who objected to the institutions of the church and state. While there is no tradition of the suffering of Christ in the orthodox icon painting tradition, Kramskoi’s painting, with the centrality and simplicity of the picture can be said to be based on the tradition. 

Christ in the Desert, Ivan Kramskoi, 1872

The figure was inspired by a man Kramskoi had seen sitting at the side of the road. Describing how the painting came about, he later wrote; "At daybreak he sits tired, tormented, and careworn amongst the stones, cold stones. His hands are convulsive and pressed together tightly, very tightly; the fingers press into the flesh, the feet are sore, the head bowed. He has been deep in thought and has been praying for a long time, so long that his lips are as if stuck together…."

Like Kramskoi, the work of Kuzma Petrov-Vodkin, also active at this time, spanned the worlds of painting and icon painting, each informing the other. The bright colours of his 1912 work ‘Bathing of a Red Horse’ which is said to herald the coming social change in Russia, is heavily influenced by the orthodox icon painting tradition, both in the bold colours and portraiture. Many artists and intellectuals of the time saw the revolutions as apocalyptically significant.

Bathing of a Red Horse, Kuzma Petrov-Vodkin, 1912

The paintings of Mikhail Nesterov similarly spanned both painting and icon painting, a detailed account of the latter is presented here.

The Angel of Sorrow , Mikhail Nesterov, 1900

In the work of Nicholas Roerich (who left Russia shortly after the 1917 revolution) shows influences of the orthodox icon painting tradition as well as Eastern mysticism. 

And We See, Nicholas Roerich, 1922

His landscape paintings are particularly celebrated. He later designed backdrops and costumes for the avant-garde composer Stravinsky, including The Rite of Spring and costumes for the unfinished ballet “La Liturgie” in which Diaghilev sought to free up the stiffness of the orthodox liturgy in dance and music (of which Les Noces is a surviving fragment).

Moses the Leader, Nicholas Roerich, 1926

It is Kazimir Malevich who can be credited with the emergence of what is known as the Russian Avant Garde in art. His iconic “Black Square” was purposefully exhibited in the corner of the 0,10 Exhibition “The Last Futurist Exhibition of Paintings” in Petrograd in 1915 prompting fellow artist Aleksandr Benua to write : 

“...in the corner, high above, right under the ceiling, in the holy place hangs the "work" of Mr. Malevich depicting a black square in a white frame. Without a doubt, this is the "icon" which the Futurists offer as a replacement for the Madonnas….this is not a mere joke, not a mere challenge, not a chance little episode ... it is one of the acts of self-assertion of the principle which has for its name the abomination of desolation, which boasts that through pride, through arrogance, through violation of all things lovable and gentle it will bring everyone to ruin.”

The Black Square, Kazimir Malevich, 1915

Malevich himself wrote: “I had the idea that were humanity to draw an image of the Divinity after its own image, perhaps the Black square is the image of God as the essence of His perfection on a new path for today's fresh beginning.”

In his lecture, Andrew explained that for Malevich, art had to be independent of any intellectual knowledge. However, many of his works show recognisable symbols – crosses. It is possible to read into his abstract settings familiar from icons, such as Rublev’s Trinity

Other artists were more direct about the influence of their abstract work, including Kandinsky: 

St. George (II) , Wassily Kandinsky, 1911

and Vladimir Tatlin whose work includes Madonna and Child:

Vladimir Tatlin, Madonna and Child, 1913

Tatlin believed that space in traditional art form was a lie – he experimented with the use of air as a material in his collages, frequently mounted in corners;

Counter-relief, Vladimir Tatlin, 1914

This was a fascinating lecture, opening my eyes to so many new works of art and periods of history. The exhibition guide which accompanies the small exhibition of Icons of British and Anglo Saxon Saints, reminds us that Icons have been described as a window into heaven – a window which enables us, through prayer, “to enter into a world transfigured by the deifying presence of the risen Christ.”

It is an amazing and continually inspiring world! Thank you to Andrew Spira, Whitespace Gallery and All Hallows by the Tower for such an interesting exhibition and programme of events. 

Links
Islands of Saints – Whitespace Gallery
Andrew Spira – Icon Painting and the Russian Avant Garde
Malevich at Tate Modern