Interview with collector Alexander Kronik
ARTinvestment.RU   07 апреля 2010

The reason for the interview was the publication of the book "the circle. Artists-нонконформисты in the collection of Alexander Kronik", which presentation is scheduled for may

In March 2010, a recognized expert in art of the sixties Alexander Kronik together with a group of authors, has completed work on a landmark work in his career collector. New book «his circle. Nonconformist artists in the collection of Alexander Kronik » - is not just a catalog-Raisonne famous private collection, but also the knowledge base of the sixties, a set of primary facts, evidence and memories of the long period. The presentation is scheduled for May. Once in Moscow came to an advance copy, there was not only a chance to be among the first in hands weighty tome, but a reason to see new items a luxurious home of the museum. Well, of course, was a sin to miss the opportunity to ask questions about the sixties, often arising at the forum ARTinvestment.RU.

On some " Yakovlev »
About the book and its objectives
Origins Collection
the deficit on the market and the aging audience
little about Anatoly Zverev
The present
About collections, collectors and auctions

On some "Yakovlev»

ARTinvestment.RU: Alexander S., of person ARTinvestment.RU Congratulations with the release of your book. Since our last conversation many questions, so let off the bat. The Forum periodically disputes about the authenticity of works offered for sale Vladimir Yakovlev . You commented on one of the last of such cases, when the works were "wrong". Can you tell us more?

Alexander Kronik: Many thanks for your congratulations. Details such. In late November 2001 I was invited to go and no one person who sold gouaches Yakovlev. This man lives on Leninsky Prospekt. He showed me about 70 sheets of ostensibly Yakovlev. Absolutely identical (identical in style and with the same type signatures. - AI. ). I then took pictures of about twenty sheets of gouaches, and then I say to this man: "What are you doing, it's all falshaki, it can be seen with the naked eye? I could not make Yakovlev 70 sheets of the same with the same signature. They alone can still cause doubts, but in the aggregate appear to be clear forgery ". He told me this said: "Yes you do not understand, I have them two hundred pages was. It now has only seventy-».

AI: How He explained their origins? He probably them, in turn, had somewhere acquired?

AK : He told me that he allegedly bought their Sasha Vasilyev, was a friend from Yakovlev. I do not know if this is really only with his words. Here is a look ( puts on the table a few pictures with that look familiar to the forum "wrong" portrait, fish, flowers .)... Very similar (in controversial things from the forum . - AI. )! But Yakovlev is not likely. Poddelschik trying to imitate the method of Yakovlev, dispersing the paint, creating a "Yakauleuski light", but not out. And in general this type can not draw: Look at what the scribble this.

AI: It is striking that the signature suspiciously similar . With one hand, as if in a row, the "eaten" the letter "o».

AK : I even look at the signature does not want . Even if he Yakovlev suddenly, for whatever reason, would have signed here, I was not convinced would. The main thing is not Yakovlev is painted. Here are poddelschik imitates another Yakauleuski moment: table "is not got the shot, went beyond the sheet. Y Yakovlev is similar. But compare how skillfully and artfully draws Yakovlev, when he one-two blows of the brush creates, for example, an apple, and the helplessness of the poddelschika. Often people think that Yakovlev is inclined to the primitive drawing. But his formidable technique. Look at any genuine work of Yakovlev: it is always done in place and be very difficult, despite the seeming simplicity. Just look how to make it an apple. And this flower - it has some way. This is not just a flower, and a portrait of a flower, and even - a symbol. And what is this kindergarten? ( Show pictures on the table .) Even without going into the analysis of signatures, it is clear that this man can not draw. These "Yakovlev" were sold in Russia and in Europe and America. I was with Sotheby's sent for consultation photos of works from among these. I answered them and sent the very same photos falshakov - see for yourself what they look like and what a huge difference between them and the real work of Yakovlev.

AI: It is known that in addition to circulating counterfeit great damage inflicted market works Yakovlev reckless publication of the 'wrong' work in books and catalogs. In fact, many counterfeit and fake manner legalized through publication.

AK : Actually, the fact of publication itself does not legalize. Of course, if it is not a directory lifetime exhibition at the Tretyakov Gallery or other equally prestigious museum. Here's another example. In the last year published a book about the collection of Claude and Nina Gruen (Claude and Nina Gruen Collection. - AI .), Which gave work to the Museum of Norton Dodge. The authors of the book - Alla Rosenfeld, John Boalt, Alexander Borovsky - all the most authoritative people, but on the first page - falshak Yakovlev. Here: see for yourself, from the same photographed me then. I could not draw such Yakovlev. What is it: legalization or embarrassment? After all, many people recognized counterfeiting, they called me a few collectors, versed in Yakovlev: Did you see this falshak? Well, you see yourself.

great harm Yakovlev also brought the German monograph galleries Bayer: the book is filled with falshakami. Why do not they cut off, I do not know. The authors of the monograph texts again authoritative art historians Carl Amirmaher and Vitaly Patsyukov. Gallery Bayer has issued two major monographs: Zvereva in 1994 and Yakovlev in 1995, but they each second (or third) picture - a fake. In these books there is a very serious article, but the illustrations - "compote": these things are interspersed with numerous falshakami.

AI: So, now, when things are published in catalogs, - do not cut down the ax ...

AK : On the contrary, it is a negative example. Now, if I say that thing happens from the gallery Bayer, I'll double suspicious of her attitude, although in these directories are published, along with the fakes and the genuine, nice stuff.

AI: The question about the provenance of Yakovlev and the discussion in our forum, where strange things stood confirmation Alexander Glezer. Tell us more about what happened in the notorious second run gathering Glezer?

AK : Well, first of all, I almost Glaser not know. I understand from the stories of mutual friends and from books, Glaser went abroad in the seventies, organized in Montgeron Russian Museum in Exile, a number of exhibitions. In the nineties he sold his collection. After the adjustment, he started going back and forth, buy some things, someone (perhaps the same man with whom I made a photo falshakov) him and pushed this "Yakovlev". If at all the origin of these things from the collection of Glezer - the truth. After all we are is not checked. And who does not make mistakes? For example, in a huge album of Alexander Glezer's "Contemporary Russian Art" (The Third Wave, 1993) on page 109 published "work Mikhail Grobman «Fish", 1969, from the collection of the Norton and Nancy Dodge, Zimmerly Museum. So, the most authoritative expert on Grobmanu himself Misha Grobman deny his authorship. This book I have. And there, at my request Grobman wrote: "This work is not mine! Mich.. Grobman 14/08/95 Tel Aviv. What is the error publisher or falshak in a reputable collection, I do not know. What Glaser can not go wrong? When he had a collection prior to departure, there was no falshakov in principle. Prior to 1987, I have not heard about any falshakah Zvereva and Yakovlev. And the market for them was not. Put it near the Zvereva or buy the work of Yakovlev. More precisely, can, and then were fake, but the market they are not walking. And the "market" was not then. If someone had to buy a painting or a picture, then why buy from someone if you can directly buy from Zvereva? Therefore, initially (in the mid 1980's - early 1990) all and "yawning" fake, because both had no idea that someone would do falshaki yesterday all available Zvereva. Even those who did falshaki, it was easier to get the most Zvereva (of course, in life, ie until autumn 1986), take a workshop or giving a drink, have fun, and he took them to this work. Why tamper?

Nor was such a demand. At the request of Zvereva I tried, but none work to sell but could not. I have all your friends about Zverevo said, but nobody bought. Except for one case: in 1986 a friend went abroad and bought a souvenir of Russia a few works. I describe this incident in "their circle". And no one of my friends are not eager to buy it. The foreigners, diplomats, those who gained entry into this circle, they - yes, bought the work, but until mid-1980 the risk of "fend" for counterfeiting non-conformists was minimal.

AI: Returning to the photographed forgeries. Signature does not seem strange?

AK : Signed this could be, well, that is, "VYakovlev. But she could not be at seventy sheets of the same. In his book, his circle "look, there are a lot of work Yakovlev and, accordingly, a lot of options signatures.

AI: Can you say that now the man who wants to learn independently understand Yakovlev, may use the book "the circle" as a reference standard works Yakovlev, seeing them as models?

AK : I believe and am convinced that, yes. This was the main objective of the book, when I was conceived and done. Incidentally, in the section "Catalog" I explain, from whom I work, and their origin speaks for itself.

AI: I think that the problem is in the fact that Yakovlev is very uneven artist.

AK : He- is uneven artist? I have a book about 200 things Yakovlev - show at least one that I can say that he does not know how to draw. Yakovlev very smooth artist. Somehow I Plavinsky said that in his opinion, Yakovlev - it is just such an artist, a is the maximum percentage of the masterpieces made by a number of things. Do artists is that one thing out of a hundred or a thousand - for themselves, the outstanding level thing, a masterpiece. And Yakovlev, a lot of them.

AI: A specialist with nasmotrennostyu and an array of knowledge determines falshak outright. But is there any formal express ways that give a sense of authenticity, without going into music?

AK : There is, for example, Krasnopevtsev reliable way. It's called "Ushakov with a notebook Krasnopevtsev. In this notebook he Krasnopevtsev and his wife, dated and described almost all things of the artist. By the way, Sasha Ushakov had one word for "K" may determine the authenticity of the signature Krasnopevtsev - great experience, nasmotrennost, deep knowledge of the artist and a good eye! I know this: he seemed to feel (or felt) some kind of "flavor" Krasnopevtsev.

AI: No, I'm the methods available to a dilettante? For example, Yakovlev often leaves sweeping curls - that's like this ...

AK : You understand that in such an interview is not possible " teach "something or give a real" recipes "attribution. In addition, I am not an art critic and do not always know how to explain what I see and feel. But, for instance ... The Yakovlev specially placed light. He "chases" the light of a wave-like, inseparable from the paper flick of the wrist, and the picture is very smooth transition from dark to light; concerned, usually the background. It is the master of such a reception. A typical "Inundation" smooth erosion. I also want to say that counterfeiting Yakovlev do (or did) so far mainly three hands. And they are all recognizable. And yet, I am absolutely convinced that had recently emerged as much less falshakov Zvereva and Yakovlev.

AI: Why? The market has become more transparent information?

A. K. : Information was available, there are more knowledgeable people had seen at falshaki. I repeat: a fake work may be questionable. And when people saw many falshakov this "hands", he did not make a mistake, recognize a fake. In the 1990's - early 2000's almost any exhibition in any gallery can be found a fake work of Yakovlev and Zvereva. Now, there are far fewer. But there is another thing: some are beginning zapoloshno cry at things that are clearly not falshak that falshak. In general, in my opinion, one way out - to examine the work of artists. Much has already been lost, but at our disposal, there is still a lot of information: many nonconformist artists, thank God, still alive, others were alive yesterday, available to their friends and relatives. I think this is the case of museums and scientists, art historians. Required a scientific approach whose time has probably not yet ripe (Actual). Together with the Foundation artist Vladimir Yakovlev in good time we filmed a number of large "lifetime" collection Yakovlev, gathered a wealth of information about the life and work of the artist. More than a thousand things photographed. I have captured about one hundred works 1970 from the collection Grobman, collection Kotreleva, Moseshvili, sisters Olga Yakovleva, artist Leo Povzner - another Yakovlev. The fund and I have a huge archive of Yakovlev. I also hope that the book "the circle" will help researchers and scientists in the study of non-conformists.

On the book" the circle "and its problems

AI: Now it's time more sober assessment of creativity of the sixties. It seems that in this way a new understanding (of what is good and bad) we are waiting for a lot of surprises?

AK : In the book "its terms" attempt "sober" is just done. In my essay, there is also a scientific texts: Article Catherine Bobrinsk "the personal participation", in which, together with an analysis of the collection, raised issues of concern; article recently deceased Sergei Kuskova "Russian expressionist," where the author spoke about Yakovlev wise and interesting, like no other. Computer programs to create the maximum "its terms" was the introduction of the book in the scientific revolution - that it was not only interesting to fans, but also useful to scientists.

AI: Apart from the impressive visual range, that is special is in the book?

AK : There are comments on which I sat for the longest time, they are collected in a catalog part. For example, the Yuri Avvakumov is called "Zeuxis. I explain in the comments why "Zeuxis": was the ancient painter, who for the image the image of Helen took the best features of the most beautiful of the cities. Yura pornoresursov took pictures and he laid them one upon the other - and that's what happened. Koleichuk uses "samokollazh", and I give an explanation, what samokollazh, as the author invented this technique and what he has in mind. Zvereva I write about the circumstances under which he is painted, as he joked with where I got this thing. Especially great and informative comments on the work Sitnikova and the Rabin . Securities seems that the majority of artists I'll refine the details of comments and biographies. For example, in Paris, Rabin I fooling his book twice for several hours, discussed and refined several times all the details with Yankilevsky , Nemukhin , Grobmanom, Gashuninym , Kirtsova, widow Roshal and others. Each work is provided with a collection of catalog information on the size, technology, the signature and date, publications (if any) and participation in exhibitions. Describe the back of the painting and all copyright labels. By doing this book, I shoveled about 250 books and papers of all countries on nonconformism. The book has a scientific apparatus: a list of literature, exhibitions, index, biographies of artists. There is a site of www.svoykrug.com . "His circle" was published in a remarkable publishing "The Art of XXI Century", and copies printed in Italy.

AI: Today is particularly acute question the reliability: the Internet is littered with strong narratives, false facts about the sixties. Soon there was somehow difficult to wade through the many myths and fabrications.

AK : I'm on it, too, ran in the preparation of the book ... editor of the book pre-made biographies of artists whose works are included in the collection, gathering facts primarily on the Internet. But I decided to contact all the artists who are alive, or with their relatives and to check everything. And as the water looked. In internet information was a lot of misinformation and outright delusion. If we, for example, wrote about Yankylevsky what is written on the Internet, then Volodya with me not to greet afterwards. In his book deal based on documents and verified facts. For example, see: a picture book, open work book Vladimir Yakovlev. Now it's possible to reliably read, when and where he worked Volodya. How we collect materials in the fund Yakovlev? They took the camera, went to Nemukhin record his memories of the artist. Plavinsky said something, I wrote. Otsnimali entire collections, some of which have been scattered.

The origins of the collection

AI: What brought you to the idea to become collectors? And why do you have to communicate with unofficial artists?

AK : thought up myself. He lived in the Soviet Union could not endure the Soviet government, despised her. Been reading books about impressionists. And suddenly switched on, which we now live and work in the brilliant people who are not yet understood, "the masses" and not recognized by officialdom. Internet was not, the information was not, but we still somehow proznavali. My friend Misha Fyodorov-Roshal, he dangled the artists, we all went to the Hutch graphs in Georgian. All of which was something informal - attracted. I began rasprashivat friends told me about Zvereva, it turned out that my friend knew him, or rather, my friend was his girlfriend. I called, we met and became friends. About Zvereva legend walked through Moscow. On the same day in autumn 1984, I met with Plavinsky. All this is described in "their circle».

AI: In the announcement of the book mentions your emigration. Where and why?

AK : I in 1990 left the then Soviet Union, was stripped of his Soviet citizenship. At that time he was deprived of all automatically leave, but in 1991, authorities stopped doing, acknowledging a mistake. In connection with this later I had already renewed Russian citizenship. I went to Israel, and in 1992, confirming the nine exams and a year probation svoy MGUshny law degree, was licensed by the lawyer, then a notary. He worked, lived through all that passes all immigrants. But in general I am a member of the Bar in 1980, 30 years old. Most of my collection was transported to Israel, then I again took her to Russia.

AI: From the pictures released properly?

A. K. : What do you mean? Read in "their circle". They let the "norm": five oil and ten charts per person. And only with certified paper that the authors of the paintings did not object to export their creations. And then, only if the author lived in the USSR. With all the idiocy inherent in the Soviet system, it turned out that those artists whom she had driven (eg, Rabin and Komar with Melamid ) and whose work does not take into any museums or at exhibitions - can not be exported. It turns out that artists who in the USSR anathema - and were the most valuable to the Soviet authorities.

AI: That is, once Rabin left, then ...?

AK : That the Ministry of Culture would not release his work . I describe the case when one of his favorite things - a "smoking room» Komar - I attributed Komar OV, , and only this trick helped me take a picture.

about the deficit on the market and aging Auditorium

AI: In addition to the forgery of individual artists "at risk", another of the known problems of the market of the sixties - the shortage of quality work.

AK : You, Vladimir, once very rightly said that the market has dried up over not because of lack of demand, due to lack of supply. The crisis gave rise to what effect? It would be logical to assume that everything will run to sell - and prices will fall significantly. But something else happened. Prices, however, did not rise, but the good things and did not fall, and the last half year sentence drastically reduced. I used 2-3 times a week and called something suggested or consulted about some proposals. There is no such.

AI: In the past two years, there have been more shows of the sixties. But at all striking a feature: visitors mostly respectable people, but young enough. How to reverse this situation?

AK : I do not know. Perhaps the institution type Vinzavod could break. People go there en masse and "take" what they offer. And about the Sixties, and they do not know. I once went on a wonderful exhibition Pirosmani in Proun "on Winzavod. And people who are not oriented to anything, including young people, surpassing "actual" picture of inertia was to watch and Pirosmani. Some went out, spat - type, humbug some, give our money. And many, I am sure, have discovered a great Pirosmani. A lot of young people has always been in the museum ART4.RU. Exhibitions of nonconformists in the Tretyakov Gallery, museums MMOMA also attracted a lot of young people. It's not so bad with the youth!

little about Anatoly Zverev

AI: The situation with all the fakes so exhausted that some dealers are already fundamentally do not work with things Zvereva, fear problems. It turned out that the artist is legendary, but the market does not match this legend.

AK : This refers fakes and weak things. Things beautiful, real Zverev, is not concerned. They can be seen immediately, and they are in demand. And buy them can still be relatively inexpensive. It's still the whole topic nonconformism there are lots of "muddy water". Must spend more time, I repeat, scholars and museum professionals have a better understanding of this period and this direction. In addition, animals and Yakovlev've never participated in drafting their own monographs, did not care about promoting their own creativity, unlike many other artists, who in life had "akademizirovat" their creativity and make some clarity to questions of attribution.

AI: Have read in some of memories, that the animal is usually indifferent to the works of colleagues who are very jealous of Yakovlev, criticized him, put bad grades - "Coke". Is it true?

AK : No, I do not know this. Zverev, firstly, not indifferent attitude toward creative colleagues, and secondly, do not criticize anyone. A Yakovlev he was not jealous, but really, really appreciated it. Yakovlev on Zverevo also with great reverence spoke. Zverev could staple someone say that "artists extinct in the invasion Vasnetsova at the Tretyakov Gallery, or to put someone" count "for a specific picture. But overall, he was friendly to fellow artists, and much Yakovlev (like many) to give strong and respected. In "its terms" in the article about Sergei Yakovlev Kuskov leads with my words, the story that I, in turn, wrote a Plavinsky. Somehow, waking up at Mikhailova-Romanova, Plavinsky gets up and sees that Zverev depicts a seascape. And he says Dima: "Old man, I have drawn here the sea, sun, winding road. A Yakovlev would have made this character. С огромным уважением Зверев относился к Яковлеву.

AI: Чем больше читаешь разных противоречивых рассказов о тех временах, тем больше задаешься вопросом: напишут ли когда-нибудь правду о шестидесятниках?

А. К.: Не знаю, у каждого своя правда. Про Зверева пишут, например, что иногда он безобразно себя вел. А я ни разу за два года, что с ним общался, такого не видел. В моем присутствии ни разу такого не было. Хотя я прекрасно могу представить, что если его разозлить, то он что угодно мог натворить, и верю в некоторые из этих историй. Я общался с ним часто, иногда по нескольку дней подряд, но не видел и не слышал, чтобы он хамил, ругал кого-то, визжал, — ни разу.

AI: О Звереве пишут, что он отличался фантастической производительностью.

А. К.: Вот вам другой пример из книги: я специально замерил, как быстро Зверев сделает рисунок. Лошадь получилась за 18 секунд. Талочкин рассказывал и другую историю про скорость Зверева. Они пошли с ним в Парк Культуры, где посетителям вырезали силуэты из бумаги. И Зверев, как увидел это, прямо остолбенел — так его поразил этот мгновенно вырезанный силуэт. Он взглянул на Талочкина, взял бумагу с ручкой и ровными параллельными горизонтальными линиями мгновенно, как принтер, нарисовал его профиль с большой бородой. Талочкин вспоминал, что это было блистательно.

AI: Немухин очень тепло отзывается о Звереве. Он у него жил одно время.

А. К.: Немухин, а с ним меня познакомил как раз Зверев, знал его очень давно и был его ближайшим другом. Всегда поддерживая Анатолия Тимофеевича, помогая ему во всем много лет, что было, поверьте, непросто, Немухин иронично называл Зверева «подкидышем Третьяковской галереи». Все эти годы Зверев частенько приезжал к нему, ночевал, работал, оставаясь иногда на несколько дней. Телефон Владимира Николаевича он помнил в любом состоянии.

О современном

AI: Кто из современного российского искусства вам интересен?

А. К.: Особенно никто. Но мне нравятся некоторые вещи Олега Кулика, Авдея Тер-Оганьяна. Гутов нравится. Осмоловский очень симпатичный интеллектуальный человек, но его творчество мне не близко. Вообще, пока я не вижу ни одной безусловно мощной фигуры. А фигура такая возникает, когда она, в свою очередь, окружена другими мощными людьми. Малевич был пророком тоже не в кругу каких-то дилетантов или пустых карьеристов, а среди мощных художников-новаторов. Мне кажется, что актуальщики западные-то — это какая-то слабая штука. А когда это вторично, как в России по отношению к этой западной штуке… Поднимают скандал вокруг целующихся милиционеров, а это вообще не ново: давно уже были лондонские констебли целующиеся. Высосанные из пальца проблемы. Главным становится не искусство, то есть не искусность, энергия, энергетика художника, а его менеджерские таланты. Еще из актуальшиков мне нравится Константин Батынков. На Биеннале в «Гараже» в прошлом году мне очень понравился Дмитрий Гутов (сетка с супрематической композицией под потолком) и Валерий Кошляков (избражение греческого храма, выполненное скотчем на стене). В отличие от многих других Кошляков имеет свою индивидуальность. А в целом я просто не вижу интересующей меня фигуры, которой хотелось бы заниматься. Вот, например, мой друг Никита Гашунин — он не относится к шестидесятникам, но я собирал его вещи — это мощный художник. Он в группировку актуальщиков не лез никогда. Искусство у него другое. Не мог он взять и к выставке быстренько наделать пять вещей или придумать идею и заказать ее воплощение у «подмастерья».

AI: А в западном современном искусстве что близко?

А. К.: Мне некоторые вещи Хёрста нравится. Просто для меня эту тему портит вся эта коммерциализация, которая вводится художником еще на стадии создания произведений. Мне это претит. Я этого не понимаю. Кто это, менеджер? Маркетинговый гений? Человек, который оформляет заказ у таксидермиста или ювелира? Пожалуй, еще Жан-Мишель Баския мне нравится, очень сложный художник — я к нему внимательнее присмотрелся после ваших, Владимир, рассказов.

О коллекции, коллекционерах и аукционах

АI: Остались ли несбыточные мечты в отношении коллекции? Кого еще хотелось бы включить, но не довелось?

А. К.: В последнее время несколько желаний исполнилось. Я очень давно искал именно такую, особую вещь Пятницкого и нашел, благодаря своему парижскому другу, на одном небольшом парижском аукционе, жанровое масло. И еще Соостер. Мне давно хотелось значительную вещь Соостера (Переводит взгляд на очень узнаваемое «Яйцо», висящее на центральном месте.) Еще всегда хотелось иметь работу Владимира Вейсберга. Он, может, напрямую к нонконформистам не относится, но очень важен для меня. Нравится, но сейчас он очень дорогой, труднодоступный. Хотел бы, наверное, иметь в собрании работу Шварцмана. Но не так однозначно. Я не успел в нем разобраться.

AI: Какие сегодня основные пути поиска вещей для собрания?

А. К.: Понятно, что за 25 лет обрастаешь связями, многое уже приносят. А вообще надо не лениться и самому искать. Ситниковский архив я так и купил, потому что не поленился. Мне один человек позвонил: слушай, я тут с одним художником познакомился, поехали посмотрим вместе. Я еще не знал тогда, что мы к Боре Жутовскому едем, с которым я и сам до этого был знаком. Я сначала подумал: да ну его, зачем тащиться куда-то, а потом поехал, разговорился с Борей и неожиданно для себя уехал с архивом Ситникова. Понимаете? Едешь и тут и там по десять раз ерунду какую-то видишь, но то там, то здесь выхватываешь какие-то важные подробности и мелочи, которые и есть основа эрудиции коллекционера.

AI: Интерес к каким художникам, по Вашему мнению, значительно вырастет в ближайшем будущем? Кто сейчас недооценен?

А. К.: Я считаю, что Яковлев сделает прорыв, Никита Гашунин, Владимир Янкилевский, мне тоже кажется, сильно недооценен. Он слишком философский, достаточно непростой и сильно опережает свое время.

AI: Коллекционеры дружат между собой или больше соперничают? Собираются вместе?

А. К.: Часто дружат. Не так чтоб собираются, но можно всегда посоветоваться. Несмотря на пресловутую конкуренцию между коллекционерами, я всегда могу получить добрый совет от Алшибая, от Дудакова, от Сановича (интервью записано за два дня до смерти коллекционера И. Г. Сановича.  — AI.), Добровинского и многих-многих других. У меня никогда не было конфликтов на этой почве. Скорее — взаимоуважительные отошения. Алшибая, например, Ленинградом занимался. У меня появилась как-то работа, я знал, что она из Питера, подписана инициалами, а кто — не знаю. Михаил Алшибая приехал и сразу сказал, кто это, и показал аналогичные работы. C Мишей можно посоветоваться всегда. Но его трудно поймать, он практикующий хирург, много работает, он реально может по году собираться приехать в гости. Действительно днями и ночами трудно работающий хирург. За что ему почет и уважение.

AI: Позади огромная работа, книга, 25 лет коллекционирования шестидесятников. Задам странный вопрос: не надоело?

А. К.: Я смогу на это ответить через год после выхода книги. Потому что в издании «Своего круга» есть некая этапность. Я остыл ко многому, и есть некоторый элемент уставания. И требовательность теперь намного выше. Окончательно в коллекцию мое собрание оформилось именно с этой книгой, когда я сел и осмыслил, что у меня есть.

Редакция ARTinvestment.RU