Академия искусств Украины ИНСТИТУТ ПРОБЛЕМ ...

МИРОВОЗЗРЕНЧЕСКИЕ УНИВЕРСАЛИИ
8
effort to propose radically new conception, her own view on the crisis phenomenon in art,
on the methods of creation of a new artistic canvas of the culture. Yulia Romanenkova puts
an accent on the underestimated role of the transition periods of the world art, justifying
them for a viewer as a consumer of the art product. The author makes acute the problem
of the unity of the finalizing periods in the history of art, putting at the background worldview
universalities; viewing many classical works of art from another angle and through
quite another prism. The author proposes to introduce the new terminology into the art
studies, which has no analogy either in the Russian or in the Ukrainian language, and which
has never been widely used before. One of the terms is Stilwandel or Stilwandlung and it is
used in the title of the monograph. This term means transformations happening within
artistic style at the period of its fading. This concept stands also for signs of the birth of a
new style birth. «Mannerist constant», «mannerist dominant» of the creative process, «laoconian
work of art» are another new introductions of the author.
The monograph investigates the categories that earlier were designated by philosophers,
culture and art researchers mainly by academic and traditional methods. Yulia
Romanenkova undertakes a risky attempt to put crisis periods of the art history as its milestones
and not as «Golden ages» as it was done previously. The periods of crisis become the
main points, which were subjected to rethinking in the monograph.
For the first time the crisis in art was closely looked upon in the post Renaissance period
when the Renaissance was followed by the Mannerism. Judging on the nature, character,
philosophical and aesthetical foundations of the Mannerism, the researcher insists upon
its non temporal character. Such a condition of art, style, creative personality repeats each
time when the pick of creation process, flourishing of the epoch come to an end. The idea
of the transitional character of every historical epoch was articulated previously by many
scientists, but in the book this idea has been transformed and proved by examples, gathered
from various epochs and styles. The stages of the so-called degradation of art were analyzed
from the opposite viewpoint. The features, previously characterized as degradation and
signs of fading are regarded now as forerunners of a new kind of art and a future outburst
of the creative activity. The author proposes a new scale of evaluation of the period of art
stagnation. The idea of the universal character of mannerist features, their presence in any
period dictates the necessity of their unbiased reevaluation. The researcher finds out «her
own Mannerism» and presents proofs, based on the artistic material of various epochs. The
actuality of conception grows visibly in the contemporary process of culture creation.
It is difficult to come to terms with a thought that Mannerism was much more important
and interesting for the history of art then the Hellenism and the Renaissance. Well
known and widespread scale of art values is being transformed; a lot of positions are changing
its places. The author claims that fixed grandiosity of Phidias and Polycletos was less
alive then disharmony, asymmetry and turbulence of Skopas. The latter made more influence
contribution into the understanding of the art process. The main component of art
should not be searched at the heights of Michelangelo or old Titian. Such theory does not
mean overthrowing art idols or a revolt against geniuses and sing anthems and praise «second
role» personalities in art as main goal. The research does not try to win a victory over
ПЕРИОДОВ STILWANDLUNG
titans. There is no effort in the book to change the places of the first and secondary ones.
The notion of the pedestal art is formulated in one of the chapters of the book. The notion
means the creations of the «second role» personalities. The tragedy and the anxiety of the
second role personality give valuable and fruitful material for the art research. Critical self
esteem, search of the individual style, following the great examples leads to the emergence
of a new style, original methods, and means of the artistic expressions. But the main point
is a search for something new, and this process is most important. The intricate process of
search became the principal object of the author’s investigation. The proofs of the presence
of the mannerist universalities in the contemporary art are convincing. The material is not
historically stable yet; it supposes certain difficulties when dealing with it. The author states
that the threshold between 20th and 21st centuries is one of the vivid examples of
Stilwandlung, and its universalities are easier to detect on the canvas of the contemporary
culture, then in the previous periods. The works of many artists are subjected to deep and
strict analyses, aiming to find out novelty and originality of artists’ individual manner.
Analogous lines are drawn to the works of arts of earlier periods, dismantling the claims of
some contemporary artists to innovations. The book posts the problem of the dilettantism
and professionalism.
The monograph by Yulia Romanenkova should not be considered as a rewritten «Art
Bible», and the author does not present herself as «a messiah» of the theory of art and artistic
critique.
The theory of «the repeated Mannerism» describes its constant «reincarnations»,
doubts significance of the pick periods in art history and justifies the periods of «fading»
and downfall. The book prompts to review traditional outlook on the art phenomena. Even
if the reader come to the quite opposite conclusion after reading the monograph, main goal
of this work is reached. The monograph strives to overcome one-sided narrow analyses. The
author’s conception is challenging and opens a new perspective on the analyses of the crisis
periods in art and their role in the future emergence of the new artistic phenomena.
Undoubtedly, this book should stir hot discussions among art researchers, historians and
art critics.
Victor SYDORENKO,
Academician, Director of the Modern Art Research Institute
of the Academy of Arts of Ukraine