.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
Vassiliev is regarded as a key member of the Non-Conformist Art movement, confronting and questioning the narrow limits of ‘Official’ Soviet art throughout the 1960s-1980s. However, he continuously rejected such a classification of his work. Rather than confining himself to the discussion of immediate political and societal issues, Vassiliev’s work encompasses broader concepts that reach beyond questions of social order. This understanding of his work becomes particularly relevant when studying his later works, such as the present work, The Lost Road. Early Spring.
Despite moving to America in 1990, Russia and Russian art continued to play an important role in Vassiliev’s work and, in his later work, we continue to see the influence of the long history of landscape painting within Russian art. Rather than reject past artistic experiments, Vassiliev embraces them and possesses a unique ability to combine such traditional ideas with influences from early 20th Century abstract art and non-conformist ideas, creating something entirely contemporary. The past and present seem to collide in his work, and this work, too, appears timeless – at once belonging to the past, but yet still present. Linked to this idea of timelessness, is the idea of transitional space. While this painting is almost photographic in its portrayal of an exact space, there is still a sense that we are seeing a non-place, a nowhere space.
The idea of space is explored through the road starting at the bottom edge of the painting and disappearing into the distance (a common theme in Vassiliev’s later works). It gives the audience the idea of an attainable here contrasted with an inaccessible there, which is often strengthened by the apparent difficulty to arrive at there. In this case, fallen branches and muddy ground make the journey seem almost impossible. The fact that the viewer is unable to enter the painting himself and follow this route, makes there seem even more distant. The viewer is left with a frustrated sense of desire and longing.
Throughout his works, Vassiliev lays importance on the theme of memory. Often the starting points for his work, individual specific memories become universal explorations of memory and the act of remembering. In an interview in October 2011, Vassiliev talked of his interest in the process of remembering. In particular, he discusses his desire to capture the ‘thing’ which gave him the initial memory, rather than his feelings about it thus eliminating himself from the painting in order to see whether this initial representation will evoke the same feelings in the viewer as it did in himself. This landscape can thus be seen as a representation of a place which inspired a memory, which we are left to interpret independently of the artist. Vassiliev says himself that ‘Memory is not just an imprint, it’s a construction’ and it is this idea of constructing memory that he aims to explore in his art by removing himself from the picture and allowing the viewer to construct his own memory based on an initial starting point. Here, in his focus on memory, we can perhaps see the continuation of non-conformist ideas in his work as he lays vital importance on individual, free memory, perhaps a response to the constructed memory of the Soviet state he grew up learning.
Despite moving to America in 1990, Russia and Russian art continued to play an important role in Vassiliev’s work and, in his later work, we continue to see the influence of the long history of landscape painting within Russian art. Rather than reject past artistic experiments, Vassiliev embraces them and possesses a unique ability to combine such traditional ideas with influences from early 20th Century abstract art and non-conformist ideas, creating something entirely contemporary. The past and present seem to collide in his work, and this work, too, appears timeless – at once belonging to the past, but yet still present. Linked to this idea of timelessness, is the idea of transitional space. While this painting is almost photographic in its portrayal of an exact space, there is still a sense that we are seeing a non-place, a nowhere space.
The idea of space is explored through the road starting at the bottom edge of the painting and disappearing into the distance (a common theme in Vassiliev’s later works). It gives the audience the idea of an attainable here contrasted with an inaccessible there, which is often strengthened by the apparent difficulty to arrive at there. In this case, fallen branches and muddy ground make the journey seem almost impossible. The fact that the viewer is unable to enter the painting himself and follow this route, makes there seem even more distant. The viewer is left with a frustrated sense of desire and longing.
Throughout his works, Vassiliev lays importance on the theme of memory. Often the starting points for his work, individual specific memories become universal explorations of memory and the act of remembering. In an interview in October 2011, Vassiliev talked of his interest in the process of remembering. In particular, he discusses his desire to capture the ‘thing’ which gave him the initial memory, rather than his feelings about it thus eliminating himself from the painting in order to see whether this initial representation will evoke the same feelings in the viewer as it did in himself. This landscape can thus be seen as a representation of a place which inspired a memory, which we are left to interpret independently of the artist. Vassiliev says himself that ‘Memory is not just an imprint, it’s a construction’ and it is this idea of constructing memory that he aims to explore in his art by removing himself from the picture and allowing the viewer to construct his own memory based on an initial starting point. Here, in his focus on memory, we can perhaps see the continuation of non-conformist ideas in his work as he lays vital importance on individual, free memory, perhaps a response to the constructed memory of the Soviet state he grew up learning.