#9 Bend over, bulldozer!

vintage tin rusty bulldozer

Attacks on the Avant-garde, Continued…

For the final class before spring break, we’ll be returning to the Russo-Soviet context and continue to observe the socialist avant-garde under siege by the state. Artists began to dance at the unstiffening edges of socialist realism following Stalin’s death, during the Khrushchev cultural thaw of the sixties and the epoch of stagnation overseen by Leonid Brezhnev in the seventies and early eighties–but they were made to feel the limits of liberalization on certain occasions. We’ll be looking back at two of the most notorious ones: the Manege Affair of 1962 and the Bulldozer Exhibition of 1974. Katherine will help us see these dissident perspectives in her class presentation and the post below!


For tomorrow’s class, I will be discussing the events of the 1974 Bulldozer Exhibition and Izmailovsky Park Exhibition in Moscow and how these repressive acts affected the citizens and art scene of Russia. As we have read thus far, Socialist Realism dominated Russian art throughout the 20th century, even acting as the basis for the Russian Artists Union. Artwork was moderated with police intimidation and was especially prevalent in the exhibition events of 1974.

Oskar Rabin and Aleksandr Glezer directed a group of underground Moscow artists to hold the first open-air art exhibition in Cheryomushki, a remote town just outside of Moscow, on September 15th, 1974. These underground artists merely wanted to show off their artwork, but found they were in for a different kind of surprise; what turned out to be a political provocation. On September 15th, the artists attempted to hold their exhibition in an empty lot but soon found themselves and their art being attacked by bulldozers and militia who claimed they had been scheduled to build a park there. Many were beaten and forced to leave the site, while their artworks were rolled over with bulldozers and completely destroyed. This was an act by the government against free artistic expression. The threat of the symbolic uprising against them needed to be dealt with in order for them to maintain complete control over the population.

Official Soviet news agencies claimed that the exhibition was merely a “cheap provocation with the sole intent of creating anti-Soviet sentiment” (68). Although this was a terribly disturbing occasion, the artists did not give up and attempted to hold another exhibition two weeks later. Threats and strict regulations dominated the Izmailovsky Park exhibit, forcing the artists to swear that they would not show any anti-Soviet, religious, or pornographic art.

The exhibit was surprisingly successful, regardless of bulldozers waiting in the surrounding forest, and this was the first uninterrupted public display of unofficial art in the Soviet Union (70). However, break-ins and confiscations of underground artworks persisted, and, oddly enough, all of the artists from the open-air exhibition were either exiled or died of mysterious circumstances in the late 1970’s.

The letters and interviews with Russian artists at the end of this article propose multiple perspectives on these dramatic events, and I will discuss these different arguments, as well as the artworks of some unofficial Soviet artists in class tomorrow.

Anyway, here are some questions to think about in the mean time!

Why do you think the Bulldozer Exhibition was immediately interpreted as a “political provocation”?

As referred to on page 493 of Chipp’s article, the artists of the Bulldozer Exhibition wanted to display their “art for art’s sake”. Based off of this notion, do you think the event played into the hands of the bourgeoisie?


2 thoughts on “#9 Bend over, bulldozer!

  1. I think the Bulldozer Exhibition was deemed a political provocation because of how public it was. Traditionally, artistic exhibitions are not accessible to the general public; instead, they are housed in big fancy museums for people to come and observe in hushed voices, et cetera. It has an air of formality and “good taste”. When an artistic exhibition is removed from that context, it becomes all-access and anyone can see/be exposed to the nature of the art.

  2. It seems that “art for art’s sake” was sort of bound to be bulldozed by the Soviet Government, regardless of the content of the art itself. If good uncontroversial Soviet art is socialist in content and national in form, art for art sake seems to be the exact opposite of that. If art benefits art, it doesn’t benefit the people, and then can be tied to capitalism and the Bourgeoisie. Khrushchev seemed not only threatened at the Manezh , but disgusted at how he had poured resources into these young artists only to have them create degenerate art that is inaccessible to the masses. Art for art’s sake owes something to socialist society which it cannot repay.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s