Throughout the history of civilization, one interesting and quite natural connection can be traced - the interaction of art and power. It would seem, how can two completely different spheres of human activity influence each other? But nevertheless, when considering such categories as art and power, it becomes obvious that they are much closer than it is seen initially. Both of them affect the will and emotions of a person, changing them and subordinating them to a specific goal.

How art influences power

In order to understand the nature of the interaction between the political system and creativity, it is necessary to know what they are.

Power is the ability and ability to exert a certain influence on the behavior and activities of people using a set of certain means.

Art is the most important part of cultural life, a kind of spiritual and practical development of the world and the relationships in it.

Art is the embodiment of a flight of fancy, a manifestation of freedom and the creative spirit of man. However, it was often used by those in power to achieve certain political and religious goals. How was it done? The bottom line is that both art and power are capable of capturing the minds of the people and imposing a certain line of behavior on them. Thanks to the works of outstanding sculptors, poets and artists, the leaders of the countries strengthened their authority, belittling opponents, and different cities maintained their fame and prestige.

Art makes it possible to translate rituals and religious symbols into reality, to create ideal and majestic images of rulers. They were endowed with extraordinary qualities, wisdom and heroism, which undoubtedly aroused the admiration and respect of citizens.

Thus, one should not underestimate the influence of power on art, which became an excellent tool in establishing a certain political regime. Unfortunately, often the common people became a victim of deception, which was achieved through the works of poets and writers.

Art and power in antiquity

If we consider the interaction of these two branches of social life, it becomes obvious that many centuries ago this was a very important tool for influencing people. Especially strongly art and power depended on each other in the ancient superpowers. Thus, the Roman Empire during its heyday is famous for its sculptures depicting emperors and generals. We see their perfect physique, classic features, filled with courage and courage, and involuntarily imbued with respect for them. What can we say about their contemporaries?

Very interesting intertwined art and power in ancient Egypt. He endowed the pharaohs with the power of mythical creatures. Often they were depicted with a human body and the head of an animal. This emphasized their divine power.

Middle Ages

If we consider art and power in a later period, we can trace significant changes. The techniques of sculptors, painters and poets became more sophisticated as it became increasingly difficult to influence. Now writers, commissioned by the royal administration, created ornate poems in which they described the exploits and majestic deeds of the ruling persons. The art of those times gave mankind many outstanding artifacts. So, Napoleon I, seeking to perpetuate the strength and power of his army, ordered the creation in the center of Paris, which has been perfectly preserved to this day.

The relationship between power and art in our country

The history of the interaction of these categories in Russia dates back to the 15th century. At this time, Byzantium, which was the heiress of Ancient Rome, fell under the onslaught of the barbarians. Moscow became the cultural and Orthodox center of Eurasia. Our state experienced rapid geographical and economic growth, which required the creation of an appropriate image. kings became a haven for outstanding culturally educated and religious figures. They included talented icon painters, architects, musicians and builders.

The relevance of the influence of art on power today

Of course, everything has changed in the modern world, but the topic being described (power and art) remains very important and relevant. The interconnection of these branches of activity is especially strong during periods of significant political and socio-economic changes. Now there is practically no censorship, which means that any person who seeks to express his thoughts and ideas through art can do this without fear of being punished. This is a very important breakthrough regarding the freedom of creativity and spirit.

How does art influence power in our time? Now these two concepts are very far apart from each other, as people can get reliable and complete information about the domestic and foreign policy of their state, as well as openly express their opinion. It is no longer necessary to influence the minds of the population with the help of beautiful poems and sculptures in order to strengthen authority.

Exhibitions on the topic of the influence of power on art

Periodically, exhibitions are held in different cities highlighting this problem. They are of great interest to those who are fond of history and political science. Not so long ago, a similar exhibition was held in a Swedish museum. It bore the symbolic name "Art for rulers". It was possible to see more than 100 expositions with the participation of 400 exhibits from different eras.

If someone knows how to create a vivid image, an unusual combination of words or colors, expressively convey a thought, then his works are considered art.

At the same time, vivid impressive images can be of different colors: you can skillfully describe the feeling of Love, a noble deed, or you can just as skillfully describe dirty deeds, lustful thoughts or, for example, a feeling of hopelessness (the latter are often sinned by decadents or simply sufferers of "unhappy love"). It turns out that art can bring both good and evil, can be both creative and destructive.

That is why the high evaluation of works of art by critics does not mean anything yet, because they most often evaluate precisely the skill, and not the meaning, and, moreover, not the consequences of the influence of this work on society.
And the impact is really great. Why? Let us turn to the depths of art and psychology.

Art is multi-layered: it has the first semantic row, the second and subsequent semantic rows, the author's attitude to the hero (which can be different and is not always openly expressed, which complicates the understanding of the work), half-tones of feelings and shades of emotions ... Due to all this, the semantic richness of artistic works is very large and complex. And when we read a poem or watch a movie, we do not always consciously process all the information transmitted by this work, and what did not fall into the field of vision of consciousness goes directly to the subconscious. A work of art contains a model of life or its separate sphere (for example, a model of a relationship between a man and a woman).

So, due to their figurativeness and multi-layeredness, works of art are imprinted in the subconscious, where the quintessence of the work and the author's view of life remains unnoticed by us. Art affects not so much the mind as the soul.

No wonder Yu. K. Olesha said: "A writer is an engineer of human souls." V. V. Mayakovsky also correctly wrote: “The word is the commander of human strength.” Art is a figurative way of programming human actions, and hence the future.
By laying certain meanings and images into the subconscious, art influences the fate of each individual person, how he will raise children, and the motives of his activities, which will affect his work and leisure activities. By forming the worldview of entire social strata, it is possible to control the behavior of the masses, control the situation in society as a whole, and lay the vector for the further development of this society. Thus, art makes it possible to purposefully manage social processes in the long term.

It should be noted here that the long-term action is one of the most important properties, because this is a very powerful factor. Let me give you a rough example. With the help of bombing, you can destroy the city in a week, but also restore it in a month. With the help of destructive art, it is possible to destroy a society in ten years, but then it will be restored for several decades, and after a certain point, the changes will be irreversible. Or another example. Monetary stimulation improves the quality of work only for the time when this money is paid. The idea “work is joy”, laid down with the help of art, made it possible in Soviet times to raise motivation for work for decades. Since a work of art can carry both useful and harmful programs, it can both nurture a highly moral Person and corrupt him.

Understanding of the managerial nature of culture and art is also present in the highest echelons of power. This is confirmed by paragraphs 80, 81 of the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation, approved. Decree of the President of 12.05.2009:

“The main threats to national security in the field of culture are the dominance of mass culture products focused on the spiritual needs of the marginalized, as well as illegal encroachments on cultural objects.

The negative impact on the state of national security in the sphere of culture is intensified by attempts to revise views on the history of Russia, its role and place in world history, the promotion of a lifestyle based on permissiveness and violence, racial, national and religious intolerance.”

Unfortunately, not only mass culture, but also elite art (theater, poetry) propagate the above things, as well as debauchery and vulgarity of thinking.

Many authors, unfortunately, do not think about this and write everything that came to them by “inspiration” (the use of quotation marks will be justified below). At the same time, many probably noticed that everyone comes to his own, suitable in spirit for him. Why is this happening?

The fact is that the work reflects the worldview and morality of the author, his vision of the world, his behavioral attitudes and paradigms of thinking. Moreover, all this seeps into the work as if by itself, most often imperceptibly for the author, because it comes, again, from his subconscious. (Therefore, by the way, your works can be used for introspection, because they show everyone their own internal problems. Often the result of creativity surprises the author himself, because the processes of the birth of a work in the subconscious in ordinary life are not tracked. Creativity is, as it were, a message to myself.)

Some authors absolve themselves of responsibility by citing "inspiration", while others even claim that the plots and images come from God. So why are quotation marks used when referring to inspiration in this article?

The word "inspiration" means that God breathed his idea into the author. By inspiration come the purest and most truthful works that are in harmony with God's plan. And looking at many works that catch your eye, you understand that they came to the author clearly not from God. In addition to God, there is a collective unconscious, about which Jung wrote and many other sources of information. A work of art can be born in the head of the author under the influence of some groups of people, philosophies, the surrounding culture, or even everyday events. In the end, no one canceled the influence on the author of his environment and culture. And “inspiration” in such cases is just a beautiful word that can be easily replaced with “impression” or “delusion”.

This means that all created works must be analyzed from the standpoint of morality, and only then decide whether to show it to the people or it is better not to, so as not to transfer your delusions to others. You can write everything that came, but publish - not everything. This is an appeal to the authors. But equally, and appeal to those in power, who select works for cultural events, productions, collections, published at public expense.

To Raikin, as an example of the wrong attitude to art (for details, follow the link)

At the end of the 20th and the beginning of the 21st century, the opinion became fashionable that art should be free, that some standards and frameworks should not be imposed on it, and that even “dirty” art is necessary, because it reflects reality, that it can also be highly artistic and in demand, and this is supposedly normal. Sometimes there are opinions that good and evil are generally relative concepts, so art cannot be evaluated from these positions. Is it so?

Let's start with the main one. For individual individuals, good and evil are indeed relative, because what is good for one may be bad for another. But if we look at the scale of all mankind, we will see general patterns and understand that there are processes that can be traced as clearly beneficial or harmful to society as a whole. There are values ​​common to all confessions, all legal systems, for antiquity and modernity. For example, at all times murders and rapes were forbidden, and those societies where it was allowed, sooner or later became obsolete. All normal people want love, harmony, health, peaceful life. The Voice of Conscience (if it is not suppressed) tells everyone the same thing. People who have a sense of justice and are able to see the general patterns in the world understand that there is objective good and objective evil. These people intuitively feel that there are common values ​​that the soul of any person strives for and without which happiness is impossible. It is these values ​​that should be the criterion for evaluating any activity.

Since art is, as we found out above, a means of control, it must be creative in the interests of society and the state. Such art is able to educate people who are able and willing to live like human beings, who strive to make the world a better place, to create, build healthy relationships, and lead a healthy lifestyle.

And if art creates a sense of hopelessness, carries attitudes harmful to society (selfishness, nihilism, the cult of sex, violence, etc.), then it is destructive and will not give anything good, no matter how skillful and highly artistic it may be.

Someone will say: well, one must expose the vices, display the dark sides of reality! Well, here we must distinguish: does the author in the work give a negative assessment of vices, does he give an alternative to them? Or does he simply relish human vices, vividly and figuratively describing them, thereby, in fact, making them more popular or even attractive?

“All pseudo-innovative attempts to do without ethical tension, without understanding where is up, where is down, where is good, where is evil, are doomed to failure and oblivion, because the artist’s job is to draw a clear meaning from the chaos of life with the will to good, and not add chaos to the chaos of life. his own soul." (Fazil Iskander)

I would also like to recall the words of M. V. Lomonosov: “Mistakes are not worth noting much: to give something better is what befits a worthy person.”

Creations that “reflect the harsh reality”, in which the author’s negative attitude towards vices is not felt and no alternative is given, spoil the taste of the reader and corrupt the minds. They work against society and the state.

Considering that art is the most powerful tool for influencing the psyche, the true worthy goal of creativity should be the improvement of the world and the dissemination of high universal ideals.

Thus, only those authors and only those works of art deserve state support that carry high morality, spread the ideas of justice, encourage creativity, and if they raise any problem or touch on the topic of vice, they do it in such a way that the viewer (of the reader) a clear understanding of how not to do it and what tragic consequences it can lead to is created. At the same time, it is advisable to give a hint on the way to solve the problem raised or offer an alternative.

Elena Smolitskaya

In 2015, Saratov hosted an international scientific and practical conference on the theme "Art and Power", a collection of reports was published last year.
Against the backdrop of articles a la Raikin: how artists suffered from totalitarianism then, and how they suffer from "censorship" and the "necrophilic state" now, the report of one communist artist (from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation) sounded unexpectedly pleasant. Short and to the point, like a shot in the midst of whining.
I present it here in full, diluted with illustrations.

Zhivotov Gennady Vasilievich
Professor, Honored Artist of the Russian Federation
Russian State University for the Humanities

The Artist and Power: A Historical Retrospective

I argue that there is no history of art, but the history of the customer.
We all admire the great sculptors of ancient Greece, and it seems to us that it was they who gave birth to the Greek miracle. But we somehow forget that at that time the whole city was discussing the statue, and the name of Phidias is inextricably linked with the name of Pericles. As soon as the Greek cities fell into decay, Greek art also came to naught, and no new Phidias, even if they were at least a thousand times more gifted than their eminent ancestors, could create anything like this. The connection between art and power, between art and the state, is much stronger than we sometimes think.

We will not consider administrative and penitentiary manifestations of power: prisons, police, courts, and so on. For us in the state, the main thing is its ideology, its highest meanings, and I would like to dwell on the most important thing: the relationship between ideology and art.

In the Middle Ages, the church was the most important exponent of the state ideology. The Church has been the driving force behind the creation of the greatest masterpieces, there is no denying that. During the Renaissance, both ecclesiastical and secular authorities were customers for many great artists. Suffice it to recall the Medici family, to which Lorenzo the Magnificent, the ruler of Florence, and several popes belonged. And next to it are the names of Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, Raphael.

Another striking example is the Napoleonic Empire. Great art, great names. Then all this collapsed, and the bourgeoisie came to power, which vulgarized everything. The exchange ground Van Gogh, Cezanne, Monet, created myths from them, hung labels and price tags on them.

There has never been a bourgeoisie in Russia in the full sense of the word. For centuries, Russian art has been inextricably linked with the Orthodox Church. But from the era of Peter I, the dominance of the West began in secular art. After all, what is the Hermitage? These are works by Dutch, French, Italian and other European artists collected by Catherine II. Even the famous gallery of portraits of commanders of 1812 is an order of the state! was created by the English artist Dow.

But in the 19th century, Tretyakov appeared in Russia. And to this person - a private customer - we owe the flourishing of Russian art. The state, in the person of the tsar and the grand dukes, realized it, and a few years after the opening of the Tretyakov Gallery, they founded the Russian Museum. In addition to Semiradsky, the state began to encourage Surikov, his state-imperial idea. "The Conquest of Siberia by Ermak", "Suvorov's Crossing the Alps" - these paintings by Surikov were bought by the emperor. The main trustee of the Russian Museum was the Grand Duke.

A new era began in the 20th century. The Western elite of the liberals and the generals in February 1917 overthrew the monarchy and, continuing the First World War to the delight of their patrons from the Entente, destroyed the state in six months. The old foundations were destroyed, but after October 1917, the Soviet government immediately began to design new ones. It would seem that there is no state yet, it is just beginning to emerge, but it has already clearly formulated its tasks: a plan for monumental propaganda, a cultural revolution. There are no administrative cells, but the ideology has already been created. The result was an unprecedented rise in popular energies, at the peak of which are the greatest names and the greatest masterpieces. It was an era not of schools, but of revelations. The sculptor Dmitry Filippovich Tsaplin, a Russian peasant from the Saratov province, can be considered a symbol of that era.

But gradually the revolutionary element entered the granite shores of the "Great Style" of the Stalin era. A powerful, well-oiled vertical relationship between artists and government was created. Not all artists of the revolution fit into this system, but many of them "combed their hair" and became realists. Academic schools began to play a huge role. They taught excellently, and excellent artists were prepared for the beginning of the Great Patriotic War in the Soviet Union. Recently, while making a drawing for Victory Day, I was leafing through the albums and saw a painting by Pyotr Krivonogov: a salute in honor of the capture of the Reichstag. This is amazing! But today, few people remember this artist of the Grekov studio, who went through the entire war in the army.

It is good that the name of Arkady Plastov is not forgotten. Stalin took his painting "The Fascist Flew" with him to the Tehran Conference. Plastov was an academician, a recognized master, and at the same time he was deeply rooted in the people, he sang of the village in its labors and holidays.

The Gerasimovs Alexander and Sergey, Boris Ioganson, Alexander Laktionov are the great names of socialist realism. The ideology was clear, the state clearly expressed its will.


Ioganson Boris Vladimirovich,Construction of ZAGES

Laktionov Alexander Ivanovich - Cadets publish a wall newspaper

So it was in all types of art - let's name only the triad of great names of Soviet cinema: Sergei Eisenstein, Grigory Alexandrov, Ivan Pyryev. Soviet art created images-dreams: both Deineka's "Future Pilots" and Pyryev's "Kuban Cossacks" - that a fairy tale would become a reality...

But with the death of Stalin, and especially after Khrushchev's speech at the 20th Party Congress with his "exposing the cult of personality," a shock came, the collapse of shrines. The "thaw" has begun. A "severe style" appeared - Nikonov depicted unfortunate geologists dying in the mountains, Popkov began to talk a lot about the village, about its suffering, etc.

In addition, even in the Stalin era, the brigade method appeared in art. The congresses were drawn by brigades, and everyone received bonuses. And later, during the "thaw" and later, in the Brezhnev era, the era of large state orders began, which means big money. Artists created good works of art, because they were well taught. But big money gave rise to clans: not always those who were more talented got access to the order.

The above does not mean that the Soviet state did not support other artists. Let's remember how life was organized in the Union of Artists: commissions were created - maritime, sports, military, etc. Artists were sent to all points of the Soviet Union as a kind of landing: to great construction sites, to frontier posts, to fishing artels, to the rural outback. And they painted pictures on the spot. This is how my friend Gennady Efimochkin, the same age as the Moscow Union of Artists, worked all his life. It is inconvenient to write on a large canvas somewhere on a rock above the Angara, and he painted small sketches. Based on these watercolors, he has been painting for the last twenty years, recreating the image of Soviet Atlantis ... And this is wonderful art. Efimochkin will paint his paintings until his last breath, because he is at war - an ongoing war of images. Once we lost the decisive battle of this war and lost our homeland - the Soviet Union.

But the war is not over, although many do not even think about it. And earlier, in Soviet times, did artists think about it? When you were looking for a customer among foreign diplomats and ran around the embassies, did you think about it? And when friends were invited to "bulldozer exhibitions", what did they think about? We looked to the West - from there magazines filtered through Poland, Hungary, there slipped the so-called "modern art" in the person of Warhol, Pollock, Beuys and others. They dreamed of Montmartre, forgetting that Montmartre is a haven for impoverished artists. In the Soviet Union, artists dreamed about it, having food, workshops, orders, and so on.

Why did this happen? The fact is that there is a struggle of meanings, but there is a struggle of images. In the struggle of meanings, we were much stronger than the West, our government thought about meanings first of all. And the images for us at that time were created by ... Hollywood. At the same time, the Soviet caesura allowed the best American, French and Italian films to be released. And a person had the feeling: “After all, they don’t show us everything, and the best, probably, they don’t show. And there, in the West, what art, what cinema!

Hollywood has created and continues to create images of American civilization, launching them around the world. And they turn out to be stronger than both the American army and American sanctions. And now, after the most patriotic broadcasts, American films are regularly shown on our television. The question arises: does our state today have an ideology?

The future of our art depends on the answer to this question, because, as I said, there is no history of art, but the history of the customer.

A simple and obvious idea. Nothing to add. And as many would not like, but without ideology, nowhere. Everything starts with her and everything ends without her.
In the meantime, its establishment at the state level, I remind you, is prohibited by the Constitution of the Russian Federation ...

An interesting pattern is constantly observed. Art as a manifestation of the free, creative powers of a person, the flight of his imagination and spirit was often used to strengthen power, both secular and religious.

Thanks to works of art, power strengthened its authority, and cities and states maintained prestige. Art embodied in visible images the ideas of religion, glorified and immortalized the heroes. Sculptors, artists, musicians at different times created idealized majestic images of rulers-leaders. They were given extraordinary qualities, special heroism and wisdom, which, of course, aroused respect and admiration in the hearts of ordinary people. Traditions coming from ancient times are clearly manifested in these images - the worship of idols, deities that caused awe not only for everyone approaching them, but also for those who looked from afar. The valor of warriors and commanders is perpetuated by works of monumental art. Equestrian statues are erected, triumphal arches and columns are built to commemorate the victories won.

What qualities do artists, sculptors emphasize in the images of statesmen, rulers of different eras andcountries ? What kindthe senses cause these images in you?
What are the similarities and differences between these images? What are the common (typical) features that symbolize power.

By decree of Napoleon I, who wanted to immortalize the glory of his army, the Triumphal Gate was built in Paris. On the walls of the arch are engraved the names of the generals who fought alongside the emperor.

In the XVIII century. opened a new chapter in Russian history. Peter I, according to the apt expression of Pushkin, "cut a window to Europe" - St. Petersburg was founded.

New ideas are reflected in all kinds of art. Secular painting and sculpture appeared, music changed to a European style. The choir of the sovereign's choristers has now been transferred to St. Petersburg and is becoming the Court Singing Chapel (often Peter I himself sang in this choir). The arts proclaim praise to the Lord and toast to the young tsar of all Rus'.

Now the Glinka Choir Chapel is a majestic monument of Russian culture, famous throughout the world. The chapel helps to maintain the connection of times and the continuity of traditions.

In the twentieth century, in the era of Stalinism in our country, pompous, magnificent architecture emphasized the strength and power of the state, reducing the human personality to an insignificantly small level, ignoring the individual originality of each person. The soulless mechanism of state coercion highlights the grotesque beginning in music (D. Shostakovich, A. Schnittke and others).

The democratic sentiments of the people find especially vivid expression in art at turning points in history. These are revolutionary songs, marches during the October Revolution in Russia (1917), posters, paintings, musical compositions from the Great Patriotic War (1941-1945). This is both a mass song, reflecting the labor enthusiasm of the post-war years, and an author's song of the second half of the 20th century. (a kind of urban folklore), which expresses not only the lyrical moods of the younger generation, but also a protest against the restriction of individual freedom, which is especially pronounced in rock music.

Give examples of historical eras with authoritarian and democratic rule.
Select works of art that reflect the ideas of thesestates . Refer to reference literature.
Look at paintings, fragments from films, listen to musical works that express the ideals of the people at different times in different countries. What can you say about their social ideals?
By what means and for what purpose does art influence people today?

Artistic and creative task
Prepare a report orcomputer presentation on a topic related to the suggestion to the people of certain feelings and thoughts by means of art. Analyze various works of art of the same type of art in different eras, or select an era and present its holistic image based on works of various types of art.

Lesson content lesson summary support frame lesson presentation accelerative methods interactive technologies Practice tasks and exercises self-examination workshops, trainings, cases, quests homework discussion questions rhetorical questions from students Illustrations audio, video clips and multimedia photographs, pictures graphics, tables, schemes humor, anecdotes, jokes, comics parables, sayings, crossword puzzles, quotes Add-ons abstracts articles chips for inquisitive cheat sheets textbooks basic and additional glossary of terms other Improving textbooks and lessonscorrecting errors in the textbook updating a fragment in the textbook elements of innovation in the lesson replacing obsolete knowledge with new ones Only for teachers perfect lessons calendar plan for the year methodological recommendations of the discussion program Integrated Lessons