D O C U M E N T - Recherche en IA spécialisée au MIT

D O C U M E N T

D
o
w
n
o
un
d
e
d

F
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
je
r
e
c
t
.

je
t
.

e
d
toi
un
r
t

m
un
r
t
je
c
e
–
p
d

F
/

3
1
1
0
9
1
9
8
8
6
9
7
un
r
t

m
_
un
_
0
0
0
7
4
p
d

b
oui
g
toi
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

STENOGRAM OF THE GENERAL
MEETING OF THE ARTISTS
OF THE UNION OF SOVIET ARTISTS
OF MOLDAVIA (15 MAY, 1951)

Agenda: Preparation for the organization of the Republican

Exhibition of Moldavian Artists.

Chaired by: Comrade Grigorashchenko, the chair of the

executive committee.

Present at the Meeting: Fourteen members of the Union

of Soviet Artists of Moldavia.

In the presidium—members of the committee: comrades
Merega, Dubinovskii, Ershov, Sevastianov, Kobizeva, Livshits.

The chair, Comrade Grigorashchenko, presents a brief report

on the preparations for the Republican Exhibition of 1951.

Comrade Grigorashchenko: Comrades! The question regarding the

organization of the 1951 exhibition was discussed at the plenum of the
Organizational Committee of the Union of Soviet Artists of the USSR.
During the debates at the plenum it was pointed out that our socialist
reality is not suffi ciently conveyed in the work of our artists. . . . Le
executive committee [pravlenie] set new tasks before the Moldavian art-
ists: to start preparing for the exhibition of 1951, to discuss the thematic
range, etc.. but one sees no development in the artists’ work. The com-
mittee also left this work to chance. The heads of the sections have lost

est ce que je:10.1162/arTM_a_00074

109

their sense of responsibility in this regard. The deadlines for the review
of the sketches were not met.

Comrades! It is necessary that we start the work again and that
things not slip from the hands of the committee. It is necessary to help
artists materially. All the funds in the Artists’ Fund must be made
available to artists. It is necessary to organize creative bases. In a very
short time it is necessary to form creative brigades for the preparation
of the exhibition.1

Regardless of the short deadline, the exhibition must be held in

accordance with the highest artistic standards, and we must not leave
this work to chance.

[The head of each section reports on the progress of its members. O.E.]2
Comrade Kobizeva [Head of the Sculpture Department]: Even though

the sculptors have been busy working for the All Union Agricultural
Exhibition, they will also participate in the Republican Exhibition.
Comrade Dubinovskii is currently working on the theme—

“Tamara Cheban.”

Comrade Averbukh—on “The Korean Family.”
Comrades Dobroshinskii and Krakoviak are working on the por-
traits of the heroes of socialist labor, comrade Keptenaru on portraits of
heroes of labor, comrade Nobizeva on a work entitled The Oath of
Democratic Youth to Peace and Friendship.

We will provide Kotovskii’s and Lazo’s one-meter-long models and

the thematic composition Comrade STALIN among the Moldavian
Personnes.

Comrade Sevastianov [Head of the Painting Department]: Comrades!

[. . .] Based on the individual plans of the members of our section for
the Republican Exhibition, we have lined up the following thematic
compositions: Gamburd must submit the work entitled Kotovskii at the
Kishinev District Court. He hasn’t yet started to work on this theme.
For now he wants to go to the countryside in order to collect materials
and paint portraits for the planned exhibition. This means that we
don’t really know whether Moisey Erimovich is going to work on this

The term “brigade” (brigada, in Russian) denotes a group within the workforce and was
widely used in the former Soviet Union, especially in agriculture, where it was intro-
duced during the mass collectivization drives of the late 1920s and ’30s.
The word “section” (sektsia) here refers to the Unions’ departments organized according
to an artistic medium—for instance, the Union’s Painting Section, Sculpture Section,
Decorative Arts Section, or Section of Critique.

s
n

g
r
un
m
t
r
un

110

D
o
w
n
o
un
d
e
d

F
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
je
r
e
c
t
.

je
t
.

e
d
toi
un
r
t

m
un
r
t
je
c
e
–
p
d

F
/

3
1
1
0
9
1
9
8
8
6
9
7
un
r
t

m
_
un
_
0
0
0
7
4
p
d

b
oui
g
toi
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

D
o
w
n
o
un
d
e
d

F
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
je
r
e
c
t
.

je
t
.

e
d
toi
un
r
t

m
un
r
t
je
c
e
–
p
d

F
/

3
1
1
0
9
1
9
8
8
6
9
7
un
r
t

m
_
un
_
0
0
0
7
4
p
d

b
oui
g
toi
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

111

Page 1 of “Stenogram of the General Meeting of the Artists of the Union of Soviet
Artists of Moldavia (15 May, 1951).” Photo by Octavian Es¸anu with permission
from the Arhiva Organizatiilor Social Politice a Republicii Moldova (AOSPRM).

painting or not, so we cannot yet have a clear idea about the fall exhibi-
tion. [. . .]

Grigorashchenko is working on a series of watercolors entitled The

Friendship of the Moldavian and the Great Russian People [. . .].

Gabrikov is working on a sketch Lenin and Stalin. He hasn’t shown
the sketch either in the section or to me as head of the section. Il a
asked for more time to gain clarity about his compositional theme and
then he will show it [. . .].

Comrade Livshits [Head of the Art Criticism Section]: The basic plan
for the Art Criticism Section is to work on a book. Cependant, the section
will take part in the work on the exhibition. Now the section is working
together with the committee to help the artists: it will offer consulta-
tions to artists. Lectures will also be organized that will help artists
who are producing works, especially lectures concerning the question
of nationality in art and the process of art-making.

The main work of our section will be done after the exhibition:

to prepare the catalogue, to debate the exhibition, and to get coverage
in the press. Maybe we will also be able to organize a few lectures for
the workers in order to demonstrate the achievements of Moldavian
art [. . .].

[After the reports submitted by the heads of the Sculpture, Painting,

and Art Criticism Sections, the artists begin debating. O.E.]

Comrade Grecu: Comrades! I think that our meeting must look

into those shortcomings in our work that prevent the successful prepa-
ration for the exhibition which has been planned for some time. Ce
is the main objective of our meeting today. Bien sûr, we have to list
what we have done and say who is working on what. All the heads of
the sections have set out the work that still needs to be done for the
1951 exhibition which will take place, as you all know, in November.
These presentations by all the section heads were bureaucratic without
exception because they limited themselves to enumerating who was
working on what, and the head of the graphics section even declared
that one artist is already working while another hasn’t started working
yet [. . .].

We have a range of rather basic unanswered questions that con-
cern the artist’s work on himself, the relation of the artist to his work.
When such questions are raised there are people like the artist Vasiliev,
who uses quotes from Lenin to offend a comrade. Quand, during our
last discussion, I asked a question about [redacted] in order to come to a

s
n

g
r
un
m
t
r
un

112

D
o
w
n
o
un
d
e
d

F
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
je
r
e
c
t
.

je
t
.

e
d
toi
un
r
t

m
un
r
t
je
c
e
–
p
d

F
/

3
1
1
0
9
1
9
8
8
6
9
7
un
r
t

m
_
un
_
0
0
0
7
4
p
d

b
oui
g
toi
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

conclusion regarding a certain issue, Vasiliev stated that Lenin once
said: “One fool poses a question and one hundred wise men cannot
answer it.”

This is how we react to something that must be thoroughly clari-

fied and discussed. Therefore our art critics must step forward and
think more seriously about every comrade, to try to understand his
shortcomings, conduct a series of lectures, conversations, and discus-
sions in order to bring to light everyone’s weaknesses and reach con-
crete results.

I think that we are just not working enough, and we are not active

enough because of certain moments that each of us experiences.
Recently I was in the studio of Dubinovskii, and when we started dis-
cussing an interesting issue on which I was speaking in my last cre-
ative report, concerning certain creative exercises that each artist must
carry out daily in order to find in a painting that moment when its psy-
chological content is illuminated, or the materiality of that moment, je
was told: “Comrade Grecu, you’re wasting your time with nonsense.”

I think that such an attitude toward me is not really a good one and

it cannot help me grow [. . .].

Our collective would be capable of solving these questions, but why
there are biased opinions about individual comrades, I just don’t know.
Par exemple, comrade Livshits says: “Comrade Grecu, I think you are a
Cézannist!” Every time I come to [him] with some question he always
answers me like a person whom he knows from a certain position, même
though he did not find this out himself—someone told him about it. je
feel offended both after my creative report and in relation to individual
comrades, because comrade Livshits has a prejudice toward me. If he
sees my shortcomings, then he needs to look at them more deeply, être
patient and find a way to convince me; if I am wrong, he needs to tell
me that I am lost, and that’s it [. . .].

Comrade Dubinovskii: Comrades! The situation is very alarming

en effet. This is my personal opinion, and we need to talk seriously
about this now.

The first thing is the complete indifference. Take, par exemple, notre

meeting today. It is always the same people who gather here and who
also participate in our exhibitions, but those to whom we must talk
surtout, work with them, give them attention; those who contribute
the least—they remain again on the sidelines.

I cannot agree that one of the reasons for the complete indifference

D
o
w
n
o
un
d
e
d

F
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
je
r
e
c
t
.

je
t
.

e
d
toi
un
r
t

m
un
r
t
je
c
e
–
p
d

F
/

3
1
1
0
9
1
9
8
8
6
9
7
un
r
t

m
_
un
_
0
0
0
7
4
p
d

b
oui
g
toi
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

g
n

t
e
e
m

je
un
r
e
n
e
g

e
h
t

F
o

m
un
r
g
o
n
e
t
s

113

of certain comrades is the reason comrade Grecu talked about. That’s
indifference to one’s profession, [pour] they are like singers who do not
find it necessary to practice their arpeggios in order to develop their
voices; instead, they sing only when they are before a concert, quand
they can receive money for this. We have to talk very seriously about
this obligation today. This problem closely relates to our exhibition and
it can have an impact on the exhibition itself [. . .].

I literally feel the inertia on the part of the majority of Union mem-

bers, not only with regard to the exhibition but to everything [. . .].

I believe that our mistake, the mistake of the committee first and
foremost, is in fact that we did not come to this meeting with precise
evidence; we don’t know who is working on what. Formally speaking,
everyone can take up an interesting theme, but we must not end up in
the situation of Rudenko from Tiraspol or of Maloi, who could not real-
ize the themes they had conceived.

I believe that by merely listing who is working on what we cannot
have hard knowledge of how the work is going, and we cannot see the
true face of our exhibition.

I think that literally from tomorrow on we need to reconstruct our

work in order to visit each artist, in order to see who is working on
what, activate people toward daily work. The situation is grave, com-
rades, very serious. Il y a 5 months left until the exhibition [. . .].
We have forty-four members in our Union. I don’t know what puts the
brakes on [their] travail. Today we have to uncover the reasons why the
artists have sunk into complete indifference; they have ceased being
artists and are only listed somewhere as artists [. . .].

Comrade Ershov: [. . .] One can conclude, from the statements
[et] speeches made by the heads of each section, it seems to me,
that the artists are uncertain about their themes. Spécifiquement, it is not
clear to me, who is working on what; nothing has been said about this
until now. Is it possible to say who is working on what? C'est possible.
But can anyone in such a short time develop a theme more or less
seriously? Non. Why? D'une part, these people are so to speak
badly provided for materially, and on the other hand, we do not have
concrete instructions as to who is supposed to be working on what.
Take for instance Semyonov: he was working on this painting Kotovskii.
The painting is done. The acquisition of this picture or its rejection is
unknown [sic].

I consider that one of the reasons is clear enough, because the art-

s
n

g
r
un
m
t
r
un

114

D
o
w
n
o
un
d
e
d

F
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
je
r
e
c
t
.

je
t
.

e
d
toi
un
r
t

m
un
r
t
je
c
e
–
p
d

F
/

3
1
1
0
9
1
9
8
8
6
9
7
un
r
t

m
_
un
_
0
0
0
7
4
p
d

b
oui
g
toi
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

ist cannot work anymore. He cannot provide for himself materially,
and if he ever paints another painting in the future and if this uncer-
tainty still persists, he would simply paint for himself. I think that on
the part of the Directorate of Artistic Affairs and on the part of the
museum administration, it will be necessary to think seriously about
such comrades. After all, we are dealing not only with Semenov; nous
also have Khazov who hasn’t finished his portraits, and a number of
other comrades who do not know what lies ahead of them [. . .].

We have also talked a lot about brigades. We need to organize bri-
gades, comrades [. . .]. We have too many geniuses who consider them-
selves great artists and who do not want to form brigades.

In order to be able to paint something big and serious in time for
le 1951 exhibition, brigades have to be formed. Take, par exemple, le
theme “The Construction of Hydroelectric Power.” Can one artist suc-
ceed in painting such a theme in the course of three months? Why not
create a brigade? [. . .]

Comrade Silin: In his report, the chairman of the executive com-

mittee, comrade Grigorashchenko, painted a rather dark picture of the
current state of the work of our artists for the 1951 exhibition. [. . .] Le
committee has apparently not understood the objectives placed before
the artists of Moldavia by the Third Congress of the Communist
(Bolshevik) Party of Moldavia, the objectives that were put forward by
the plenum of the Organizational Committee of the Union of Soviet
Artists of the USSR—with comrade Grigorashchenko in attendance—
and finally the objectives put forward by the Directorate of Artistic
Affairs of Moldavia, of which comrade Grigorashchenko has unfortu-
nately not said a single word. The committee must immediately review
this question; since there is very little time left until the exhibition, it is
imperative for everyone to raise his sense of responsibility in preparing
the artists for the 1951 exhibition and to offer the artists every kind of
practical help, for such a work pace seriously risks the failure of the
exhibition we are presently discussing, and it seems to me that no one
will allow this to happen [. . .].

In our Socialist reality, artists must—I want to underline this espe-
cially—they must show the Socialist labor of the Soviet people by creat-
ing truthful and life-affirming, deeply political, and party-minded
works that glorify the greatness of our time, [works that are] worthy of
our Soviet people. Dans ce cas, and on the request of the vice chairman
of the Directorate of Artistic Affairs of the Moldavian SSR, comrade

D
o
w
n
o
un
d
e
d

F
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
je
r
e
c
t
.

je
t
.

e
d
toi
un
r
t

m
un
r
t
je
c
e
–
p
d

F
/

3
1
1
0
9
1
9
8
8
6
9
7
un
r
t

m
_
un
_
0
0
0
7
4
p
d

b
oui
g
toi
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

g
n

t
e
e
m

je
un
r
e
n
e
g

e
h
t

F
o

m
un
r
g
o
n
e
t
s

115

Prilepov, who is absent today due to illness, I just want to convey to you
that only such works will be bought by the Republican Museum of Art.
There is money for acquisition, but there are no artworks.

If the artists present such works, the acquisition could even take

place tomorrow. When I told comrade Prilepov that the available
amount may not be enough for the acquisition, he declared—and asked
[me] to tell you—that if the available amount of fifty thousand rubles is
used, then the Directorate will find ways to add that same amount, mais
the main thing is that there is nothing to buy. So far the artists haven’t
submitted anything [. . .].

Comrade Averbukh: The Directorate of Artistic Affairs gave us a

signal regarding the 1951 exhibition. Without this, nothing would have
happened. Several reviews of sketches were planned, they were not pro-
vided [. . .].

When the executive committee was just formed, we invested great
hopes in this, but unfortunately these hopes were not justified. I’m not
saying that we need nannies, but still we need to pay attention and find
out what the artists are doing. I made a political caricature in wood,
Boris Nikolaevich looked at it, approved of it, but was anyone really
interested in it? Did anyone else say one word of encouragement?
Nothing [. . .].

In this way the committee is detached from the collective; it takes

decisions outside of any connections with the collective, it’s simply
indecent to hear the talk that is circulating [. . .].

The committee must always be informed about what the artist is
working on. The other day I made a sketch, but I’m afraid to work on it.
I’d like the comrades to look at it, because this is a totally normal thing.
The committee must always be in close contact with the artists [. . .].

Comrade Merega: [. . .] On the 29th of March, the Committee for

Artistic Affairs of the USSR issued an order requiring the organization
of the exhibition of 1951. We called a meeting for March 30 pour
clarify the tasks set forward before the Union of Soviet Artists of
Moldavia. Among them was the immediate task of preparing for the
1951 exhibition. I will not keep your attention on this any longer. I will
read you what activities have been planned as part of the preparations
for and execution of the 1951 exhibition of works by Moldavian artists.

[Reads the plan of activities.]
Comrades, these are the activities planned by the executive com-

mittee for the exhibition of 1951 [. . .].

s
n

g
r
un
m
t
r
un

116

D
o
w
n
o
un
d
e
d

F
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
je
r
e
c
t
.

je
t
.

e
d
toi
un
r
t

m
un
r
t
je
c
e
–
p
d

F
/

3
1
1
0
9
1
9
8
8
6
9
7
un
r
t

m
_
un
_
0
0
0
7
4
p
d

b
oui
g
toi
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

Comrade Grigorashchenko: What are the comments regarding the

activités?

Comrade Dementiev: I’m surprised that the leadership of the col-

lective hasn’t made use of such an old and proven method as the social-
ist competition.3 This may bring very effective results!

Comrade Silin: Comrade Dementiev! Socialist competition is prac-
ticed first of all in those socialist institutions where labor is determined
by certain norms. As a matter of fact it is not recommended we take
on socialist obligations if they will make for more work than a person
is allowed to take on. How could artists even compete in creative activi-
liens? We could misinterpret here the very principle of socialist competi-
tion! [. . .]

Comrade Gamburd: We are discussing here a whole range of ques-

tions that have been raised already in our collective during general
meetings and in our sections. To find solutions to these questions is
not that simple, but there is one question that we must fundamentally
discuss, the question of how artists relate to the surrounding reality,
and how they work and live. It is no secret that we work very little on
improving ourselves and come to exhibitions with an insignificant
number of pieces that are also not of high quality. Such meetings are
organized every year, and each year we worry that we will fail the exhi-
bition. I believe that the main cause behind the inertia within our col-
lective lies in the collective itself, even though everyone is blaming the
committee [. . .].

Comrades, it is the artists who are guilty!
Comrade Ershov: [. . .] Comrades, we have transformed this meet-

ing into empty talk.

Comrade Sevastianov: I think that the main question that interests

us right now is the exhibition of 1951. [. . .] Shall we go to each artist’s
home? How can we characterize this? On April 19 at the sectional
meeting it was decided that we would look at the sketches during the
first days of May, but nobody presented anything. Bien sûr, the com-
mittee is guilty. Since nobody does any work, it will be the committee
that will have to prepare the sketches. Is this how you see it? [. . .]
Comrade Grigorashchenko: A lot has been said here today,

The socialist competition was a part of the Soviet economic model in which socialist
workers were encouraged to “over-fulfill” their quota in order to reach production targets.
Those who managed to do so earned the title “hero of labor.”

D
o
w
n
o
un
d
e
d

F
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
je
r
e
c
t
.

je
t
.

e
d
toi
un
r
t

m
un
r
t
je
c
e
–
p
d

F
/

3
1
1
0
9
1
9
8
8
6
9
7
un
r
t

m
_
un
_
0
0
0
7
4
p
d

b
oui
g
toi
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

g
n

t
e
e
m

je
un
r
e
n
e
g

e
h
t

F
o

m
un
r
g
o
n
e
t
s

117

but nothing specific. I will begin where Dmitry Kuz’mich stopped—
I would like to talk about discipline, which is now badly needed in
order to mobilize us and the whole collective [. . .].

Yes the committee has made a mistake, and now they must
acknowledge it, and not only acknowledge, but also quickly fix it [. . .].

We could now talk for a long time about who is guilty. Everybody is
guilty, and first of all the committee. The committee will try very soon
to bring to life the planned events, which hopefully will get things
moving, but a lot will also be demanded of you. It will be demanded
first of all that you demonstrate conscientiousness toward those tasks
that have been placed before you.

Comrades! I will not hold you here any longer, but at the end of my
speech I would like to note that under any circumstances the exhibition
must and will take place. An assurance of this will serve the very sharp
speeches made here today, speeches that will also have practical useful-
ness and help us straighten the course of our work. Ce, in any case, est
the wish of those who gathered here today. We can all rest assured that
they will take part in the exhibition.