MEDAL
Author: Victor Sirotin
Proof-reading: Lidia Pecherskaya
For TALANT
It is said that money is not what makes you happy. I don't disagree, but in my time I was happy looking at ancient Greek coins: drachms, tetradrachms, gold staters, and others. Embossed in gold and silver, they depict the faces of mythical gods, rulers, animals, beasts, as well as objects and symbols of pagan culture. I note that, at that time not marked with a nominal value, very tiny coins (approx. 10-12 mm.) sometimes contain great artistic merit.* The style of their performance depended on the era, and therefore was very different: Athenian, Macedonian, Syracuse, and so on. But the most perfect in its plastic and aesthetic qualities are the coins of the era of Alexander the Great. Moreover, many of them contain, speaking in modern language, formally very curious plastic findings. The best of these amazing coins and served later as excellent examples for the emergence of medallic art.
KINGS of THRACE, Macedonian. Lysimachos. 305-281 BC. AR Tetradrachm (29mm, 16.64 g.). Amphipolis mint. Struck 288/7-282/1 BC. Diademed head of the deified Alexander right, with horn of Ammon / Athena Nikephoros seated left, left arm resting on shield, transverse spear in background; ΔI monogram to inner left, KΩ monogram to outer right.
ATTICA, Athens. Circa 454-404 BC. AR Tetradrachm (24mm, 17.17 g, 4h).
The artistic medal as a plastic concept and form that still exists today originated in Italy during the early Renaissance. By custom, the medal was dedicated to a significant person with an indispensable portrait and exploits of the person, if any. These medals later became known as personalia (from the word - persona). The shape and size of the medal is caused by the initially given consideration of them from the palm of the hand (the palm of their size and conditioned) or wearing them on the chest. Having received a wide distribution in Europe, the medal on its stylistics did not differ from the works of other spheres of art. For example, if the medal is made in the Baroque style, then this style immediately refers our attention to the sculpture, painting and even architecture of the Baroque era. The same applies to the period of Classicism, then, as they say, everywhere.
Here is something else to say: if in ancient times coins were minted from pieces of silver and gold (a blow minted - a coin, another blow - another, etc.), then with the invention of advanced technology, when both coins and medals began to stamp, - and those and others have lost many of their artistic merits. Somewhere around the middle of the twentieth century, the genre range of artistic medals (not to be confused with award medals) began to actively expand. By that time, having become a section of art, the medal is unique in that even in its smallest form it is able to respond to the most diverse phenomena of political, social and spiritual life, including, of course, the most diverse events.
.jpg)
Medal of Emperor John VIII Palaeologus, 10,2 cm, 1438 Bronze
Antonio di Puccio, called Pisanello (ca. 1395-ca. 1455)
Leonello de Este, Marquess of Ferrara (1407-1450), ca. 1455
Copper alloy, cast, 68.9 mm
Now medals, their form and images in them, do not know any genre or any other restrictions at all. The current artists-medalists depict in such a form, anything, how you want and from any material, excluding, of course, silver and gold (this is the prerogative of the Mint).
So, we have finished with a brief history of the emergence of "palm plastics". As for its creation itself, due to its "smallness", the medal has to resort to style and plastic features capable of compensating for its size with an abundance of significant symbols and plastically useful associations. The quality and persuasiveness of the latter undoubtedly depends on the mind and talent of the medal sculptor. From the mind because it is necessary to conceive associatively and logically strong, corresponding to the theme of the composition, and from the talent ... Well, it is not even necessary to explain, because without it there is not and can not be true creativity.
We can talk about the artistic medal for a long time - it deserves it. However, I want to dwell on several very important aspects of its creation, one of which is the associations that the medal can and even should evoke, as well as any truly artistic work. Since I originally intended to talk about my own things, I will turn to them as an example. In order not to be unsubstantiated, let's consider some medals from my creativity.
I sculpted the medal "Alexander Pushkin" when I was a student, which did not prevent the Pushkin Literary Museum from buying it the same year. The same year, the Pushkin Literary Museum was delighted to acquire it. The expert Pushkinist of the museum, to whom I appealed, especially liked the reverse side of the medal (reverse), on which I depicted "Pushkin's" Arion, rescued by a dolphin, and therefore victoriously and happily trumpeting the horn. Without dwelling on the artistic merits of the piece (which, I believe, were noted by the fact of its acquisition), I will draw attention to a very important part of any artistic work, which are the associations we have noted, to which I believe it is important to add symbols. It should be noted that the understanding of the latter and the birth of the former occurs first of all in educated people, endowed with imagination and developed taste.
Viktor Sirotin. Alexander Pushkin, 1979. Bronze, casting. 69 x 69 mm.
In order not to turn a brief analysis into a lengthy review, we will consider only some aspects of the medals, including the back side (reverse) of the medals explaining the theme. Now it will be "A. Pushkin", whose profile I have placed on its obverse side.
About the legendary Arion, with whose muse A. Pushkin identified his own, I have already mentioned. That is why I chose this ancient Greek poet as a symbol. By the way, I have put the singer's name in Russian font, associated with Greek, close to the border and in a circle. Now about the semantic context, which in this case should have been revealed by plastic means.
It was here that I "had" to resort to symbols and associations, through which I wanted to reveal my understanding of the great poet's work as fully as possible. Actually, apart from my theme, these requirements should be applied to every artistic thing.
The first is the shape of the small (69 mm.) medal; it is absolutely round. Being minted and polished, it according to my idea should be associated with the "sunny" poetry of the great poet (in fact, Pushkin's poetry is much more meaningful, but we agreed to talk about the symbols on which the author decides to emphasize and on which, as usual, built the reverse of any medal). This is the first association, the number of which, generally speaking, should be limited, otherwise they will make the reading of the theme uneven.
So, let's call it Association No. 1.
Further, Arion on a dolphin sails on the sea, the waves of which are depicted by the "crumpled" surface of the medal. This is Association No. 2.
The third one is caused by the same surface of the sea, which is also associated with a crumpled sheet of paper. In the "load" of the association on the whole surface of the "sea" ("sun", writing "paper") I let the autograph of one of the poet's poems, maximally approaching its fulfillment to Pushkin's handwritten one. In this way, the theme is as if confirmed by the document of Pushkin's text.
"Document", directing the viewer's attention to the multidimensional manuscript work of A. Pushkin, I will call Association No. 4.
Thus, with the help of several plastic methods I managed to expand the symbolism and create associations, in my opinion, the most identical to the work of A. Pushkin and reflecting the nature of his poetry.
Plastic of other medals I led differently precisely because they are different: a different essence, a different "face", a different semantic load. For example, the reverse of the medal "Albrecht Durer" (by the way, this is the first thing I did in the third year of "Stroganovka") I filled simply with the name of the great artist. The main theme or idea of the medal is the beginning - the birth of creativity, which I wished to display in the image of the great painter. To this end, I settled on a brilliant self-portrait of Dürer, made in his teens.
The medal dedicated to Van Gogh, for the reason mentioned above, I executed in a completely different plastic way.
It depicts the great painter in rough, self-cut clothes against the background of the church in Arles, which he painted himself. And here, taking Van Gogh's self-portrait as a basis, I wanted to express my understanding of the work of the great sufferer, who ended his life as a beggar, rejected by society; and here I chose the sun for the reverse side. But if in "Pushkin" it is bright, joyful and optimistic in cooperation with Arion, then in "Van Gogh" the sun is hard, "scorching", and the shape of the luminary, pulsating with a multitude of "prominences", is "wrong", as everything that the great Dutchman depicted was "wrong" and difficult to perceive. And, of course, where there is a "sun", there is a "sunflower". And in this medal I have built the symbolism and the so-called "associative row" according to my understanding of the great artist's work and mission.
Viktor Sirotin. Vincent Van Gogh, 1978. Bronze, casting. 95 x 92 mm.
When it comes to the "key" or style of an image, this is a special article.
Artists of different genres, including medallic, concerned with finding their own style, which is both natural and necessary, often fall into traps that they set for themselves. I will dwell on it in more detail, because the problem, exactly so - the problem, deserves it.
The fact is that, having received professional education, and subsequently not too far departing from the received school and developing as if his creative style (no matter in what field of art), the artist just and builds a trap for himself, and builds often even without realizing it. And it "slams" when the artist, believing that this is his style, adopts it, as a rule, for the rest of his life. In fact, the artist believes and calls his "style" the school he has adapted (that is why I put this word in "").
Having further stopped, or even fixated his attention on the technique of execution (this is the usual cost of any "school") and having mastered it, the artist often unconsciously subordinates any theme to his "style", believing that this is his "creative credo", his "personal style". In fact, with this approach to creativity, the hapless seeker of style follows the least complicated path, because he does not live in each new theme (for which it is necessary to find a special stylist for its disclosure) and does not grow to its importance, but only "grafts" it to himself, bringing it down to his own level. "relegating" because when depicting, in particular, outstanding people of the most different character and spheres of activity (I emphasize this specifically), the artist, in fact, stylistically everywhere depicts "himself". Thus, due to the narrowness of creative worldview and vision of himself in the world, the artist not only does not grow (because growth is not assumed by the very attitude to work), but sometimes even degenerates in his art, in this case reduced to a mere craft.
To be fair, everything I am talking about here is directly, directly and primarily related to the "medal" representation of this or that person. In other genres of art, such as painting and sculpture, personal attitude-embodiment in the theme and person is extremely important, otherwise one can question the very necessity of such creativity, which may not be such.... Another thing is that even in these genres, wandering in short (or long - it is not fundamental) "pants" of the art school, the artist can forever remain a "schoolboy", that is, a skillful performer of the basics and "requirements" of this or that school. In a word, I primarily refer the above remarks to the art medal.
And one more thing: if in painting and sculptor when depicting someone stylistically easy to "jump off the subject" without much harm to it, medalists to do it is much more difficult - they are easier to "pierce" because of the small area of the image. "Punctures" of this kind are visible literally, as on the palm of the hand, because, depicting in the medal of others, the medalist stylistically performs "self-portraits". Self-image, of course, no one forbids, but, in relation to the topic (may my colleagues forgive me) the question arises: what do you have to do with it?
And in fact, if you take up portraying not yourself, you should express the essence and character of another person, which is also useful, because by portraying a great man and "digging" into his essence, you grow yourself to the extent that you are allowed to. But instead, the apologists of the "self-portrait" pseudo-style, in essence, adjust (read - bend) the great ones to their own, sorry, level. Such "style", having to do with self-repetitive "self-portraits", has nothing to do with style as such. It has nothing to do with style as such, because stylistically they are made in a monotonous way, and even with reliance on hackneyed "artistic" techniques.
So, to put it briefly, in a living creative action, the artist in each of his works - and most of all in his personalities - must, as someone has said, be born and die. That is, each theme must be borne, suffered and portrayed in such a "key" and character that belongs not to the artist, but to the one whom and what he portrays. The artist himself, once he has taken up the gouge, needs to depict in pictorial or plastic language the essence that is not him. Style, as such, will not escape from the author, for it consists in the character of the one who has it.
Perhaps we can wrap up the conversation here, especially since I originally wanted to talk not so much about my works as about the associations that creativity gives birth to, and to share my understanding of style, without which it is impossible to fulfill an artistic work. I will conclude the conversation where I started it.
If associations complement each other, reveal the character of the person, contribute to the disclosure of the theme and enrich the work, then I call them positive associations. I think it is necessary to note this, because too often the works of authors give rise to associations which I call parasitic associations. It is these associations that, when considering a work, make the viewer's mind and imagination confused, confuse him, and, contrary to the artist's own wishes, lead him away from the subject, for they give rise to completely different kinds of thoughts and images.
Now, perhaps, that is all.
_____
* Nowadays they are called "coins", "money" - at that time there were no such words and concepts, which indirectly confirms the absence of nominal, "monetary" designation of coins. The absence of the nominal denomination just brings to mind: the aesthetic element in the household of that time was not only important, but even dominated, including in determining the value of the exchange product, which were coins. Their price depended on the weight and, again, on the aesthetic presentation of the noble metal.