Again, a pleasant discovery. On the table in the storage auction — expressive graphics and object with "formula" pattern, in which the unmistakable strong school of Pavel Filonov. Who is it? Follower? Student?

it is.

Boris Gurvich. A member of Pavel Filonov's first convocation, one of his best students.

He joined the "Masters of analytical art" around 1924, when he was not yet twenty. He has had five years of teaching in the Central art studios and the Academy of arts Mstislav Dobuzhinsky and Kuzma Petrov-Водкина. Under the direction of "witness of the unseen" (as Filonov called at the time, twisted), the young artist began to develop an innovative analytical method. Instead of to the end a careful drawing — intuitive "growing" picture. Instead of story — "formula". Instead of "seeing eye" — "eye of knowing". Do students and "studying the masters". In the new analytical method, when the picture began, the disciples of Filonov's I didn't know how it will end: it was ordered to go with your gut. In comments to the diaries of Pavel Filonov, the researchers note that Gurvich was one of the brightest students, "ideology", with leadership qualities. Under the leadership of Pavel Filonov learners master Gurvich worked for five years — whole "Golden period" of the school.

That is, until the split of the Association in 1930.

What happened?

it started long before the split. With bright people so often: interesting, but difficult. The memories of friends and their own diaries to give Filonov-учителе person uncompromising and quarrelsome. And then there's the superimposed historical factor. In 1920-х was a bitter struggle for the priority of ideas and the place in art. It was necessary to seek alliances and Filonov was difficult to count on the indulgence of my colleagues. Yes, many artists are very appreciated and openly expressed their support. For example, the future of the Stalinist academician Isaak Brodsky was under the strong influence of Filonov and for many years tried unsuccessfully to acquire his painting. And for example, Malevich was not a high opinion of found Filonov way (although he personally sympathized with). Talented Matyushin, who persistently called to his group he chose in the end work with the ideologist of Suprematism. Influential functionary of the artist Igor Grabar obstacles Filonov did not repaired, but also not loved and not supported. Detractors, competitors and open enemies were many: there was a struggle for influence, for orders, and the course allowed all kinds of dishonest means. And then there's obnoxious, and uncompromising character of the Maestro, going on the principle, despite the damage to themselves and others.

In the end, the end 1920-х years to be near Filonov young artists became uncomfortable at least: the teacher often too far, was harsh to the disciples, and propagated atheism, it was prohibited to sell the students work without permission. In General, already unsafe. Blew out the other wind, the outlaws ran out, and he lived as if nothing has changed. However, the state began distinctly to put before the art of the practical and ideological tasks for education of the masses. Political leadership was needed to understand propaganda, not avant-garde search. Members of the group Filonov with their method in a new politicalthe site's design was clearly not. A little while, and instead of the regular exhibitions and the work of young artists would have finally to leave with the master in the underground and go on a starvation existence. This is the best. Because the pressure on Filonov by officials from the culture that started to sound dangerous accusations of counter-revolution. His disciples began to persecute (some people were shot then, but that was later). It is not surprising that the split was a matter of time. The conflict with his student, Yulia Kapitanova (Arapova) was merely a pretext for the departure of most of the artists from Filonov. After her foolish public statements pupils Filonov requested to be excluded from the group, but the teacher stood up, what then regretted. The reasons are as clear today, was deeper.

Among left Filonov in the 1930s were Boris Gurvich. The researchers write that he's not just gone for the company, and was among the organizers of the split — group leader, who demanded independence. It just so happened. The teacher of personal animosity Gurvich entertained. After the departure of the analytical method is not abandoned, it continued to develop, but by itself (worked, of course, more in the table). From the diaries of Pavel Filonov becomes clear that Gurvich after retiring not once tried to help the teacher with the orders, attempted to reach a conciliatory conversation. But Filonov, which is also clear from his diaries and did not forgive his bright student and care are not taken. He rarely from whom it was taken — was such a character.

two years after the split of the group IIA, the government finally screwed into the nut and ended the independence of art associations. Socialist realism was chosen as the basis of the ideological education of the population. Moreover, because the war was not far off.

Gurvich unlike Filonov built into the system. Before the war he designed the Soviet pavilion at the world exhibition in Paris in 1937, worked on the design of the pavilions of VVC current — ENEA in 1939, worked a lot in theatre and film. In those years, Gurvich participated in the performances of the Leningrad and Ukrainian theaters. Then the war — front. After the war — again the main theater of the Leningrad theater of the Lenin Komsomol Russian drama theatre in Vilnius, Leningrad theatre of drama and Comedy, the Moscow theatre of Satire. In particular, in the theater of Satire, the artist was engaged in design of the performances of "Shadow" (1958) and "the Twelve chairs" (1960). But it was mostly utilitarian solution of applied problems. As an independent phenomenon of analytical art in the USSR were not in demand. Gurvich occasionally participated in group exhibitions — for example, the exhibition "Soviet show" in 1962 in Leningrad. But personal exhibitions have Gurvich never was. Until the beginning of the collapse of Soviet power, which is a little Gurvich did not survive. The artist died in 1985.

Only 47 years after death in the homeland again reminded of the Pavel Filonov (his exhibition atTiming took place in 1988, and he died during the siege in 1941). And there's museums gradually began to return to the history of art and other artists of analytical art. Solo exhibition Gurvich took place five years after the artist's death in 1990, in Leningrad, in the hall of the local branch of the Union of artists. And in 2006 he released the album "Boris Gurvich," prepared by the Danish art historian, a specialist on Russian avant-garde by Troels Andersen. He personally knew Gurvich, went to him in Leningrad, photographed, recorded memories. Buy this 120-страничное publishing today is not easy, but still possible. Russian translation of articles this album was made well-known specialist in the circle of Malevich and the Russian avant-garde Alexander Shatskikh.

end — about the market. Everything is simple. In the auction market recorded only one sale of the painting Gurvich. But what! In 2008, his "formula" without a name was sold at Sotheby's 10-кратным excess of estimate — for almost $ 250 000. Whether to accept this price for some-то new landmark? Unlikely: a one-time tenfold excess at the peak of the market hype provides a very shaky basis for conclusions. But as a proof of the high interest in quality works by artists of analytical art — yeah, that's good. We have AI Auction will not be painting, and graphics. But also analytical and very good.

Vladimir Bogdanov, AI

What else to read on the topic on AI:
Gurvich, Boris Isaakovich (1905-1985). Biography;
Creative Association "masters of analytical art"