Современный Израиль

Chapter 10

The Phenomenon of the New Barbizon in Israeli Art

Глава 10

The Phenomenon of the New Barbizon

in IsraeliArt*

«Новый Барбизон»: феномен израильского искусства**

Introduction

The New Barbizon is the name of an Israeli art group created in 2011 by five artists: Zoya Cherkassky-Nnadi, Anna Lukashevsky, Olga Kundina, Asya Lukin and Natalia Zourabova. All five artists had studied at art schools in the former Soviet Union (FSU), where they learned the concepts of academic art. Most of them immigrated to Israel during the 1990s1 as a part of the great emigration wave from the FSU at that time.2 Later, all except Kundina abandoned the conceptsofacademicpaintingandmovedindiverseartisticdirections. After years of working in «contemporary» techniques and media, including animation, performances, installations and sculpture, each of them experienced a sense of artistic loss. This led them back to paintingfromobservation,atechniquetheyhadlearnedasartstudents in the USSR.

*Liliya Dashevski

**Лилия Дашевская

1 Except Natalia Zourabova, who immigrated to Israel in 2004.

2 I find the term immigration more appropriate for the 1990s wave than the term repatriation. In this I follow many other social scientists (e.g. Fialkova andYelenevskaya 2007: 2).

333

Часть 2 «Русский» Израиль сегодня и в исторической перспективе

In 2011 Cherkassky3 sought out the others and they formed a group. Together they started painting from observation outdoors – en plein air4 – for the next five years (fig. 1). The exhibition, entitled New Barbizon: Back to Life, held at the Ein Harod museum (located in Kibbutz Ein Harod in northern Israel), was the culmination of the group’s activity since it incorporated most of their body of work. For the last four years (2017–2020) the artists have not worked as a group.5 This makes the years 2011–2016 the group’s «classical period.»

The group’s name New Barbizon clearly points to their affinity with the 19th-century French Barbizon school, while their distinct stylerecallsMatisseandtheearlyModernists.Inmanyinterviewsthe paintersarguedthatintheirmutualpaintingpracticetheyhadreturned to Soviet art. Years of study, work and exhibiting in Israel also left their mark on these artists’ manner. How may we interpret them? Is theirs a postmodern pastiche, which takes pieces from everything and combines them with a touch of irony? Can it be a genuine attempt to return to Modernist values of pure painting? Alternatively, does the attempttocreateanabundanceofartisticlineagesrelatetothetrauma of the painters’emigration?

InthisessayIexaminetheformationoftheNewBarbizongroupin relation to its Soviet and Russian background, and to Israeli art. I also analyzetheNewBarbizonphenomenoninthecontextofimmigration

3After her marriage Zoya Cherkassky added her husband’s surname, Nnadi, to her own. Thus I refer to her as either Cherkassky or Cherkassky-Nnadi, depending on her marital status at the given time.

4This term closely relates to the works of 19th-century artists in France.

5Nevertheless, they often collaborate on different projects. For example, four of them taught together at the New Barbizon Academy, which they establishedtogether.Furthermore,theyregularlyconsulteachother,profiting from a supportive environment, and from time to time paint in pairs.

334

Chapter 10

The Phenomenon of the New Barbizon in Israeli Art

studies. Since these artists’ works represent Israeli society of a certain historical period, the theoretical background for this paper is Hayden White’s literary approach to history. White proposed examining history according to four literary genres: comedy, tragedy, romance, and satire. The New Barbizon painters represent Israeli’s contemporary society – that is, a current historical moment. Thus I believe thatWhite’s approach to history is also appropriate for ananalysisoftheworksoftheNewBarbizon.Thisstudyseekswhich of the four proposed narratives predominates in their paintings.

I believe that the New Barbizon combines Soviet realistic painting6, the Russian tradition of representing socially challenging subjects and the satirical view of society prominent in Israeli art of the 1990s. I would also argue that the feeling of displacement, caused by emigration, created the need to unite in a group as well as to work within many artistic traditions. The material for my paper comprises the New Barbizon paintings, interviews with the painters held by myself and others (published online), newspaper articles, and scholarly sources in art history and immigration studies.

Paths to the New Barbizon

As stated, four of the five painters abandoned painting from observation but later returned to it. I shall briefly describe these paths as they appear in the interviews I held. Zoya Cherkassky emigrated with her family from Kiev to Israel at the age of fourteen. In Israel she attended the prestigious Thelma Yellin art high school in Giv’atayim, a town located in the greater Tel Aviv district.

6 I use the expression «realistic painting» in the sense of figurative, narrative and depicting scenes from everyday life.

335

Часть 2 «Русский» Израиль сегодня и в исторической перспективе

There Cherkassky discovered that her teachers and peers «did not know how to paint,» and perceived realistic painting as redundant and outdated (Cherkassky-Nnadi, 2018). In many interviews she relates the same episode illustrating this local attitude to realistic «Russian» art: after seeing her realistic works, one of her teachers at Thelma Yellin commented: «How does a punk girl like you paint like a grandmother?!» (Cherkassky 2012; 2018).7 In her own words, «It was embarrassing to know how to paint, but even more embarrassing to know how to paint like a Russian» (Shapira 2017).

In her first years in Israel Cherkassky-Nnadi continued to paint realistically at home until the age of seventeen. However, lacking professional support and interest in her work, she turned to other artistic practices (Cherkassky, 2012). Since graduating from HamidrashaArt College8 (in 1999), she has become a very successful artist on the Israeli art scene.

In 2011 Cherkassky decided to resume painting from observation. This decision derived from a sense of stalemate in her work, which fueled her search for new artistic subjects and forms. This coincided withhermeetingtheRussianartistandartactivistAvdeyTer-Oganyan, in Germany.9 He advised her to resume painting from observation, which Soviet art academies considered the ultimate way to «reset» one’s work and to find solutions for artistic problems (Cherkassky-

7 UnlessstatedotherwisethetranslationsfromRussianandHebrewaremine.

8Hamidrasha is a prominent art school in Israel, renowned for its focus on conceptualism, which «corresponds with the spirit of the time.» Hamidrasha is considered more progressive than the supposedly more traditional Bezalel Academy.

9In 2007 Cherkassky and Ter-Oganyan prepared a scandalous exhibition that was presented in Prague and in Moscow, but a discussion of it is beyond the scope of the current study.

336

Chapter 10

The Phenomenon of the New Barbizon in Israeli Art

Nnadi 2018). Cherkassky realized that she had lost her technique and had to start practicing anew.

Cherkassky would wander around with a sketchbook and paint whatever she saw (Cherkassky-Nnadi 2018). She also decided to examine her childhood drawings, in which she captured scenes from Soviet life, and later, scenes of immigrant life in Israel. All these circumstances led her to the decision to create a large painterly project, dedicated to the FSU immigration of the 1990s to Israel.10 But to accomplish this she still needed to master her technique. Looking for a suitable artistic milieu, Cherkassky first joinedforceswithKundina,andlaterwiththethreeotherartists,most of whom she found through social media.

Asya Lukin’s story is quite similar to Cherkassky’s. As a child she had studied art in Leningrad. She immigrated with her family to Jerusalem as a teenager, and was dismayed by the dearth of painterly knowledge in Israel (Lukin 2018). After her military service she studied at the Bezalel Academy of Arts and Design,11 where she was encouraged to pursue contemporary and innovative paths that had nothing to do with «old-fashioned» painting from observation. In 1999, on a students’ exchange program at the Paris Académie des Beaux Arts, the sculptor Richard Deacon advised her to copy old masters’ paintings at the Louvre. This experience led her back to painting from observation. She started to paint en plein air in France, England and Russia (Shapira 2017, Lukin 2018). In Israel, however, Lukin found it challenging to paint on big canvases, outside and alone. She explained that people in Israel were unaccustomed to

10This project was exhibited in 2018 at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem under the title Pravda.

11Aleading art institute in Israel.

337

Часть 2 «Русский» Израиль сегодня и в исторической перспективе

seeing painters in the open, and routinely approached and disturbed her (Lukin 2018).12 Thus, painting outside in a group provided her with the confidence and support she felt she had missed in Israel.

As a childAnna Lukashevsky studied painting, but did not intend to become an artist.After the collapse of the USSR, Lukashevsky’s family made plans to immigrate to Israel but for various reasons they postponed this decision until 1997.Thus Lukashevsky witnessed the collapse of the Soviet Union, and experienced the «reckless 90s» first hand. Her being ateenageratthetimeaddedtohersenseofmadness,thelackofboundaries and the feeling that nothing mattered any more. She studied in the Slavic department at the University of Vilna because that was an easy way to «killtime»beforeimmigration(Lukashevsky2018).InIsrael,shestudied graphicdesignattheBezalelAcademy.Aftergraduationshesuccessfully worked in prestigious firms, but at some point realized that she had reached the glass ceiling.13 This understanding made Lukashevsky quit her job and begin working as a freelancer. Later, after realizing she was «sick of the lies and pretentiousness» in her life and work, she resolved to abandon her designer career for art (Lukashevsky 2018).

In 2002 she began her M. A. studies at Hamidrasha, where she discovered conceptual art (the school’s main approach). She tried to do readymade and digital art but the feeling of pretentiousness still lingered. When Lukashevsky’s mother suggested she should paint realistically, as she had as a girl, she indignantly rejected the idea.At the same time Cherkassky, Lukashevsky’s friend, resumed painting from observation. Lukashevsky joined the others in their painting sessions, and finally she felt she had found her truth.

12I will return later to the point of painting outside in Israel.

13Remennick in her 2013 study discusses the working patterns of FSU Immigrants in Israel, as well as the notion of the glass ceiling.

338

Chapter 10

The Phenomenon of the New Barbizon in Israeli Art

Natalia Zourabova was born in 1975. She began painting at a very young age, and after studying at various evening art schools she went to the Moscow Lyceum of FineArt – MSKHSH (МСХШ).Although shecouldnotenvisageengaginginanythingotherthanartshedidnot applytotheSurikovArt Institute.Extremelyfrustratedatthecollapse of the USSR, she felt there was no need for her skills and knowledge; soon she stopped painting. She studied stage decoration at the Russian Academy of Theatre Arts (GITIS) – and enjoyed success, workinginMoscowandlaterBerlin.In2004sheimmigratedtoIsrael and settled in Be’er Sheva, where her first years proved a complete shock and caused her a personal crisis. Isolated from cultural life, with poor language skills and overburdened with a baby, she felt isolated. This made her return to painting. Her first projects included big, figurative canvases with scenes from her everyday reality.At this time Zourabova did not paint from observation but created figurative digital sketches, which she would later enlarge on big canvases. In 2009 she exhibited them for the first time and even sold several of her works. This success made it possible for Zourabova and her daughtertomovetoTelAviv,whereshefoundherartisticenvironment by joining Cherkassky and Kundina.

Olga Kundina immigrated to Israel as a young but mature artist. Unlike the others, she had never stopped painting from observation. LivinginRoshPina,aremotetowninnorthernIsrael,shewasunaware ofthegenerallynegativeattitudeoftheIsraeliartworldtorealistpainting in general and to painting from observation in particular (Kundina 2018, Shapira 2017). Kundina recalls that during one of her visits to Cherkassky’s studio inTelAviv she suggested that she and Cherkassky go to paint outside. Cherkassky would draw in her sketchbook, so this was her first Israeli experience painting en plein air on canvas.

339

Часть 2 «Русский» Израиль сегодня и в исторической перспективе

The coincidence of historical and personal crises, the dissolution of the USSR and the subsequent immigration resulted in four of the five artists sensing the futility of realistic painting. At the same time, they became better acquainted with the Israeli preference for contemporary Western conceptual art.14 Only Kundina, who was older at the time of her immigration and more familiar with Western art through her tutor Yurii Zlotnikov, continued to paint realistically. She did not study in Israel and lived far from the Israeli artistic scene. This isolation helped her to continue in her artistic tradition.15

Another important characteristic of the New Barbizon group is thatmostofitsmembersalsostudiedconceptualart,popularinIsrael. The 1990s was a hopeful decade for a «new and calm Middle East,» and also a decade of great disillusion. The postmodern discourse becamedominantinallaspectsofIsraeliartandcultureandremainsso tothisday.SincethentheforemostgenresintheIsraeliartscenehave been photography, video and installation, dealing with the politics of self-identity, such as feminist identity, Oriental and Mizrahi identity, homosexuality, and so on (Rabina 2008: 258).

The New Barbizon artists had to cope with two problems simultaneously: overcoming general Israeli skepticism about realistic painting and dismay at painting en plein air in particular. In various interviews Lukin, Cherkassky-Nnadi and Zourabova mention the difficulty of painting outside in Israel, due to the rude Israeli crowd

14Some underground artists were aware of the changes that had occurred in Western art and were inspired by them (Scammell, 1995: 50). According to Kundina, her teacher Yurii Zlotnikov was one such artist, who was familiar with and inspired by contemporary Western art (Kundina, 2018).

15Both Kundina and Lukashevsky claimed in their interviews that realistic painting was more acceptable on the periphery of the art world (Kundina 2018; Lukashevsky 2018).

340

Chapter 10

The Phenomenon of the New Barbizon in Israeli Art

that likes to comment on everything and to intervene in the process (Cherkassky-Nnadi 2018, Guilat 2017: p. 265). One might imagine that this discomfort working outside is associated with gender, as all five artists are women, hence more susceptible to harassment.

The artists themselves refuse to discuss the group as an essentially female union, and their challenges in painting outside as genderrelated. Both Kundina and Cherkassky-Nnadi ridiculed critics who interpreted their group in feminist terms. Both explained that they invited male artists to join the group, but it just «didn’t work out.»The refusal of the New Barbizon painters to discuss their gender as part of theirworkiscompatiblewiththegeneralattitudeofex-Sovietwomen- emigrants to gender-related questions. For example, the scholar Larisa Fialkova, who herself is an FSU immigrant to Israel, highlights this in her article dedicated to the personal stories of ex-Soviet women immigrants in Israel. She even writes that she herself was not aware of the additional challenges posed to female emigrants before Israeli scholars pointed this out to her (Фиалкова 2005: 44). Fialkova, like many other ex-Soviet women, ascribed their challenges to general immigrationproblemsratherthanmattersofgender.Theunwillingness to differentiate between men and women derives most probably, from the way gender was understood in the USSR. According to Elena Gapova the USSR created gender equality, at least to some extent. This occurred because Soviet socialism treated similarly productive (paid) and reproductive (unpaid) work: both «could not be sold,» but both provided benefits to the producers from the father-state.After the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the return to a capitalist market, the question of gender equality «resurrected itself» (Gapova 2016: 11).

Nevertheless, critics and audiences immediately observed that the New Barbizon group consisted only of women, and they reacted

341