The Decree on Artistic Communes in the Context of the Policies of the Department of Fine Arts of the People's Commissariat for Education, 1918-1921

Kostin Ivan Gennad'evich Postgraduate student; Fine Arts and Architecture Sector; Russian Institute of Art History 194292, Russia, St. Petersburg, Vyborg district, Rudneva St., 25, sq. 15 igk211@gmail.com Other publications by this author

Introduction

At the end of 1918, the Fine Arts Department of the People's Commissariat for Education created a "Draft Decree on artistic Communes." It described the structure of artistic communes and their relationship with the new communist state and society. The artists were supposed to be united in collectives that would function on the basis of the "fraternal cohesion" of artists. The goals of the communes included "the complete emancipation of art and creativity," but also "the systematic maintenance of the artistic needs of the State." The project envisioned the creation of institutions comparable to agricultural or household utilities, which the authorities were trying to popularize at that time.^[1]

The draft decree was not published and has reached us only as an archival document.^[2] Nevertheless, it is extremely important for understanding the program of "leftist art" during the Civil War, the activities of the Art Department, the genesis of the ideas of the Soviet avant-garde. This project, which is a sketch of a possible reorganization of the artistic life of Soviet society, allows us to look at the course of thought of the Department of Art. In other words, it demonstrates the radical horizons of the comprehensive transformation of artistic life that the avant-gardists planned to carry out during their time at the levers of state policy in the field of art.

This article aims to introduce this valuable document into scientific circulation. And also to study it in the context of the artistic policy of the Department of Fine Arts and the state policy of War Communism.

A study of the early period of Soviet art

The analysis of the "Draft Decree on Artistic Communes" allows us to take a deeper look at the process of formation of the Soviet avant-garde. It is especially important to carefully study this document in the context of the historiography of the Russian avant-garde (and those segments of it that were associated with industrial art, the art industry and constructivism).

Russian research in the 70s and 90s focused on the study of the basic concepts of the avant-garde, industrial art, and constructivism.

In key works of the 60s, in particular in the book "The Russian Experiment in Art" by Camilla Gray, the Soviet avant-garde was considered as an integral artistic movement, which aimed at spiritual and formal searches, experiments with materials and art forms.^[3] In Kristina Lodder's important work "Russian Constructivism", the author analyzed the history of the constructivist movement as a formal art that later developed into design.^[4] Western studies rather followed the trend of considering the avant-garde as a largely depoliticized, formal movement, akin to Western modernism.

This point of view has undergone major changes in later studies. The classic works of Maria Goff and Kristina Kayer demonstrated the involvement of the Soviet avant-garde in radical politics and in the problems of production.^[5]

In the existing research, the issues of the content of the avant-garde movements of the 20s and their key ideological aspects have been worked out in detail.^[6] It seems that a more detailed reconstruction of the activities of representatives of the Soviet avant-garde is needed, a more careful analysis of its development, and the study of the genesis of certain concepts.

In this article, I propose to introduce an interesting, previously unexplored document into scientific circulation, and also propose its analysis from the point of view of political, economic, and philosophical aspects. And also to explore its influence on the further development of concepts and practices related to the art community (artistic labor, industrial art, art industry).

The context of the project's appearance

The draft decree is dated December 7, 1918. The date of creation of the document indicates a specific period in the history of the ISO department. It was a time of active work on the creation of the Department of the People's Commissariat of Education. A commission on arts affairs was formed by key employees of the department, and staff was recruited. Representatives of "leftist art" were mainly hired to work in the department. In November 1918, the department was preparing for the publication of the first issue of the Art of the Commune newspaper, the main printing organ of the department.

The very idea of creating an artistic commune is clearly connected with the projects of the authorities to realize their vision of a communist society as a network of communal organizations. This was an essential part of the program of the central Soviet government in Moscow. In the Northern region, communes of various kinds have generally become the basis of a political course. The Petrograd Labor Commune was proclaimed, and the Union of Communes of the Northern Region (SKSO) was established. In the autumn of 1918, a program began to ignite a new stage of the agrarian revolution — the creation of committees for the rural poor, whose main goal was the creation of agricultural communes. The creation of various communal organizations was proclaimed a goal in almost all spheres of public life in the Soviet Northwest.^[7]

The art department and the avant-garde artists were aware of the ongoing processes. Thus, they were responsible for the implementation of Lenin's Monumental Propaganda Plan. They personally participated in the unveiling of the monuments together with the leadership of the SKSO, including G. Zinoviev. Kazimir Malevich organized the congress of Committees of the rural poor of the Northern region. Representatives of the department personally and quite closely communicated with A. Lunacharsky, who also spent a significant part of his time in Petrograd.^[8]

All this required compliance with the main line of local and central Soviet policy. Hence the name of the newspaper Art of the Commune, and the attempts reflected in the decree to develop a model of the artists' commune.

The author of the text of the document is not specified, and the documents that have come down to us do not shed light on the process of working on it. Nevertheless, it can be assumed that the main authors of the document could be key theorists of the ISO department: O. Brik, N. Punin, B. Kushner. The leading role could belong to Brik, who in his articles addressed the problems of the commune. In general, the text looks like the result of the work of a team of authors.

The traces of this decree were lost at the end of 1918. We do not find any serious discussions of this project in the Art of Commune newspaper or other print media. Nevertheless, in the "Art of the Commune" there are a number of indications of some work on the organization of artistic communes. So, there is information about two artistic communes created by December 1918. However, no additional information was provided in the newspaper. From the documents accompanying the project, we can learn that at that time the communes were "in the formative stages."^[9] The documents also indicated other specific measures for the creation of artistic communities:

We are looking for communal spaces that can be adapted and equipped as soon as possible. The Bureau has already entered into negotiations with public and government agencies on orders for works of art and has already received several orders.^[10]

These mentions of the communes confirm the work on the draft decree and are an important evidence of the seriousness of the intentions of the Art Department to develop this format of organizing art production.

Nevertheless, the draft decree (or the decree itself) has not been officially published and has not been directly developed. The question arises about the reasons for the rejection of the concept of an artistic commune and the preservation of the draft decree only in the form of a working document. In my opinion, this may be due to one of several reasons or a combination of them.The most important of these was probably the radical ideas outlined in the statement. It is quite difficult to imagine artists settling en masse in one place and creating egalitarian "intentional communities". Other reasons were most likely the disagreements that accompanied the work of the Art Department, as well as opposition from other groups of artists. By the end of the summer of 1918, the department was at the center of a scandal related to the reform of the Academy of Arts. In the fall, his work caused controversy in connection with the design of Petrograd for the First anniversary of the October Revolution. Publishing a decree proposing to completely rebuild the entire art system would have too far-reaching consequences and would be even more controversial. The available documents do not allow us to answer the question of the reasons for the rejection of the project. They were probably discussed at department meetings, but their minutes were lost. The most likely reason, in my opinion, is the radicality of the project and its unpopularity among the artistic intelligentsia.

As I will try to show below, although the decree was not published, and the ideas of the artistic commune were abandoned, nevertheless the general direction of the department's thought remained. Despite the fact that the artistic ideas did not receive direct development, they were transformed into the concept of "artistic work". In this form, they were further developed already in the early 20s.

In general, the context of Soviet politics had a decisive impact on the very appearance and nature of the "Draft Decree on Artistic Communes." The concepts of the "revolution of the spirit" and the transformation of artistic life on new communist foundations were transformed here into a specific format of living together and working with artists, which would be the basis of a new social system of art. The ideas of proletarian art promoted on the pages of Art of the Commune, the fusion of communism and futurism, and the formation of a new type of "proletarian artist" were a clear development of the ideas expressed in the draft decree.

Decree on artistic communities

The "Regulations on State Labor Art Communes" is a three-page typewritten text. The document was not signed, stamped, or marked in any way. It was preserved in the materials of the People's Commissariat of Education in RGALI in a single copy, with handwritten texts related to the project attached to the document.

The document's structure and peculiar bureaucratic language attest to the left's familiarity with early Soviet legal thinking and lawmaking. It recalls the "Decree on Agricultural Communes", as well as documents regulating the work of agricultural communes. In particular, it is from the practice of the commissariats of agriculture that the form of the "Bureau of Artistic Communes" is taken.^[11] The idea of creating a specialized state body that organizes and supports communes was one of the key aspects of the early Soviet approach. The approximate work plan of the artistic communes strongly resembles the standard charter of the agricultural commune, which each commune had to adopt, counting on the help of the state.

Let's consider the contents of the document in detail. The draft decree began with "General provisions". They listed the following principles of functioning of the planned artistic communes. Thus, it was argued that "The State Labor Art Commune is a comradely union of artists based on a common (communal) organization." The main goals of the art commune were stated to be that it "serves as an instrument of fraternal unity of artists and is a powerful means of developing art and penetrating it into the life and way of life of the people." The "ultimate goal" of the artistic commune was called "the complete emancipation of art and creativity and the systematic maintenance of the artistic needs of the State."^[12] The general provisions of the decree demonstrate the main goals and objectives attributed by the authors to possible artist communities: work to fulfill government orders, socialize artists' everyday life, and reorganize artistic life based on the principles of collectivism.

Further sections developed this vision. The commune, according to the text of the draft, "strives to establish full contact between them and the people's organizations," as well as "to create strict labor discipline in their work and internal organization."^[13] This is an important detail, given the connection of the decree with other projects of the organization of communes. In the "establishment of full contact" of artists' communes with "people's organizations", one can see the idea of a network structure of a communist society, the notorious "federation of communes", which dates back to anarchism, but was also close to the Soviet leadership of that time.

An important clarification in the context of the radical collectivism of the planned decree is the description of the status of an individual artist. According to the decree, "every artist of the commune was "obliged to work according to his strength and abilities, to obey the charter and all the rules of the Communes, and to contribute in every possible way to the successful development of the Communes." The attempt to maintain a balance between the artist's personal creativity and the communal structure of work is particularly interesting here. In comparison with the concepts of the artist's autonomy, the "uselessness" of art, and the freedom of creative genius adopted in pre-revolutionary culture (and generally characteristic of Modern Europe), the concept of subordination to "the charter and all the rules" cited in the draft decree looked like a very big step towards the artist's autonomy.

The decree defined the issue of financing and supplying the communes as falling entirely on the shoulders of the State. So, the project stated:

The State-owned Artistic Labor Communes are maintained at the expense of the State, which has the exclusive right to use the artistic labor of the Communes.

note. Works of art that were not commissioned by Government Agencies, but on their own initiative and are necessary for further work, both by their author and by the entire Commune remain in the Commune.^[14]

Ownership of the works was thus state-owned (in the case of a state order) and communal, with the independent work of individual artists or the commune as a whole. Private ownership of the works was generally denied.

A characteristic moment was a fairly clear (and absolutely complete) description of the state's supply of art communes:

The State provides the Communes with premises for housing and occupation, necessary materials for work (canvas, paints, clay, marble, etc.) and all necessary means of living, as far as possible in kind, according to the established subsistence standard.^[15]

In other words, the state had to take over such communes for full supply. The indication of the preference for in—kind supplies is probably both ideological (rejection of monetary funds) and pragmatic - in the context of the collapse of supply and the collapse of the monetary system, the supply of even basic foodstuffs was much more important than cash payments.

The reverse side of the communes' exchange with the state also assumed in the decree a complete list of works performed by the communes of artists:

Art Communes supply the State with artistic products by performing artistic tasks of a public and governmental nature, such as the construction of monuments, the decoration of Folk Houses, theaters and festivals, book illustrations and the production of all kinds of drawings and visual aids for schools, the creation of posters and samples of government papers and everything necessary for the development of the state art industry.^[16]

It is not difficult to see in this list the really functioning practices of designing books, newspapers, public holidays, etc.

The decree also outlined the work of the Bureau of Artistic Communes. As mentioned above, the presence of such a body was a characteristic practice of Soviet communal management at that time. In the draft decree, its function was to organize communes, supply them, and "distribute Government orders systematically among the Communes." The Bureau was also given the functions of some basic economic planning, which was expressed in the responsibility to ensure the most rational use of the "artistic forces of the Communes."^[17] A separate paragraph stated that artists and communes could accept private commissions, but the remuneration for this work went to the bureau to further supply the communes.^[18]

The bureau was also given the functions of education and "aesthetic development" of communes and their members. For this purpose, measures were envisaged to provide "necessary books and printed works of art, tickets to theaters, concerts, lectures, etc."^[19] The bureau should also promote the development of artists' creativity by organizing "special excursions and trips necessary for artistic observations and impressions," as well as providing visits to museums, collections and industrial enterprises.^[20]

It is important to note that despite the obligations to promote the aesthetic development of the communes, the draft blocked state control over creative activity in a separate note: "The creative activity of Communes is not subject to the control of the Bureau of Artistic Communes."^[21] It was also emphasized elsewhere that "Communes are completely autonomous in their internal life."^[22]

An important clarification in the section on the bureau was the mention that the bureau is also called upon to work with "private" artistic communities, which could later transfer to the charter of the state.

The bureau was headed by a head who was to be appointed by the People's Commissar of Education and approved by a special commission. The head assembled a board, which included: a representative of the Art Department, "1 representative of Professional Art Organizations and representatives of Communes, equal to other representatives." In general, a collegial, "democratic" form of communal management was planned, under the strict control of the People's Commissariat of Education.^[23]

The order of organization of the communes, according to the draft decree, was as follows. All members of professional art unions recommended by 3 members of existing communes could join the communes. A community of 5 artists meeting these requirements could organize a commune. The management of the communes, as already mentioned, had to take place on the terms of autonomy, within the framework of the activities of the general assembly of the commune.

The artists could leave the commune "at any time", "but all the works they created during their stay in the Commune remain the property of the State."^[24]

The liquidation of the commune was to take place within the framework of the procedures outlined in the draft decree. The newly created commune was on probation for the first 3 months. After that, the bureau decided to take over the commune, which could be refused. The Bureau had the right to close the commune "at any time" if it "finds that its members are evading their obligations."^[25] After the liquidation, all works, property and materials of the commune were transferred to the bureau.

Concluding the review of the text of the Draft Decree on Artistic Communities, it is worth drawing conclusions about its content.

The main content of the decree was devoted to the description of the commune itself as an institution and forms of state control over communes. The decree also clearly aimed to maintain a certain balance between the autonomy of artistic creation and measures of state control.

The structure of the new art system, if we imagine the full implementation of the decree in life, would be completely subordinated to public administration. Artists would have lived and worked in communes controlled by the state.

From artistic communes to the concept of artistic work

As mentioned above, the concept of an artistic commune was probably too radical. By 1919, the concept of the commune as a whole had been disavowed even at the level of the top Soviet leadership. Thus, in his works "The Great Initiative" and "The Childhood Disease of Leftism in Communism," V. I. Lenin pointed out the prematurity of attempts to introduce communes everywhere or designate various organizations with this term.^[26] Nevertheless, the creation of communes and their support by Soviet state structures did not stop.

Similar processes took place in the artistic sphere. The artistic commune was discarded as a form of organization. In the newspaper "Art of the Commune" we do not find any serious discussions of this decree. The draft decree was not published, let alone becoming the basis for the creation of artistic communes (and even more so for the "collectivization" of artistic creativity).

Nevertheless, it cannot be said that the ideas of the decree do not occur in the future and do not receive any development. Indeed, we will not find a "Bureau of Artistic Communes" in the organizational structure of the Art department. But since December 1918, evidence of the work of the Bureau of Artistic Labor, headed by P. Vaulin, has been appearing in the Art of the Commune. This bureau was responsible for organizing the department's work with factories and plants (not always indirectly related to art). Probably, the concept of "artistic labor" (which meant the connection between art and industrial production) became a kind of receiver of the idea of an "artistic commune".

There is some evidence for this point of view. So, in 1919, the first (and only) issue of the Khudozhestvenny Trud magazine was published.^[27] A number of theoretical and practical materials were posted in this issue. Of particular interest in the context of the idea of a possible organization of art communes is an article about the State Porcelain Factory (b. Imperial Porcelain Factory). It showed the process of collective creativity of artists. The series of photographs accompanying this article is also very revealing. It depicts collective work at the factory, joint "artistic work". It seems that this is how the authors of the art department presented the most realistic possible format for introducing the idea of an artistic commune.

The development of the concept of artistic labor and related ideas of industrial art certainly did not end with this publication, although the magazine "Artistic Labor" ceased to be published. An important step in the further development of these concepts was the First All-Russian Conference on the Art Industry in August 1919, designed to bring together supporters of the fusion of art and industrial production. The published materials of the conference stated the need for government guidance for the aestheticization of mass production. The position of the Art Department was to create a single centralized body dictating the artistic style for the whole society.^[28]

The concept was further developed in the collection "Art in Production". The materials of the collection demonstrated the evolution of the views of the department staff.^[29] They proclaimed the goal of turning the worker into a conscious creator, as well as overcoming the "bourgeois" concept of "applied art."^[30] In this way, the problem of decorative art was solved, which was actively opposed by O. Brik and other authors of The Art of the Commune.

"Industrial art" evolved from large-scale and in many ways too unrealistic projects, such as art communes, to a more specific program of integration of art and production, becoming one of the leading trends of the Soviet avant-garde of the 1920s.

Conclusion

The "Draft Decree on Artistic Communes" is an important document in the history of the Department of Fine Arts. It reflects key aspects of the department's views on communism, art and production. This was the culmination of reflections based on combining the discourse of the commune and the aesthetics of the Futurists. Although the articles in the Art of the Commune newspaper were more radical and innovative in their content, they were not as practice-oriented as this potential decree.

At the same time, the refusal to implement the decree is also an important fact. Being probably too radical, it could not be implemented.

Returning to the research of Maria Gough and Kristina Kayer, it is worth noting that this period of the end of the Civil War and the first years of the NEP is the initial chronological framework for them. While, as I tried to show in this article, the ideas of production art and concepts close to them have undergone a great evolution. At the same time, in the 20s we are dealing with much more compromise and moderate versions of these ideas. In other words, the artistic commune acts both as the source of the "leftists'" reflections on art in a communist society, and as a kind of ultimate horizon of these reflections, their final form.

This gives the decree a special significance in the context of the history of the Department, which is the meaning of one of the ultimate ideological horizons. The decree looks like one of the far-reaching trends, which, even if it could not be implemented, shows us the ultimate utopian projects.

Appendix to the article: Regulations on State labor art communes. THEY'VE BEEN WAITING. Fund 665. Op. 1, Ed. hr. 1. L. 1-2.

position

ABOUT THE STATE LABOR ART COMMUNES.

APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF THE COMMISSARIAT OF PUBLIC EDUCATION.

At the meeting of 7/X II–18th year.

§ 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS.

1. The State Labor Art Commune is a comradely union of artists based on a common/communal/organization.

2. The artistic Commune serves as an instrument of fraternal unity of artists and is a powerful means of developing art and penetrating it into the life and way of life of the people.

3. The ultimate goal of the Communes is the complete emancipation of art and creativity and the systematic maintenance of the artistic needs of the State.

To achieve this goal, Artistic Communes should strive to:

a/To establish full contact between them and the people's organizations;

b) To create strict labor discipline in their work and internal organization.

4. Each member is obliged to work according to his strength and abilities, to obey the charter and all the rules of the Communes, and to contribute in every possible way to the successful development of the Communes.

§ 2. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE STATE AND THE COMMUNES.

1. The State-owned Artistic Labor Communes are maintained at the expense of the State, which owns the exclusive right to use the artistic labor of the Communes.

NOTE: Non-commissioned artwork

Government agencies, but on their own initiative

and those necessary for further work, both by their author and by the entire Commune, remain in the Commune.

2. The State shall provide Communes with premises for housing and occupation with the necessary materials for work (canvas, paints, clay, marble, etc.) and all necessary means of living, as far as possible in kind, according to the established subsistence standard.

3. Art Communes supply the State with artistic products by performing artistic tasks of a public and state nature, such as the construction of monuments, the decoration of Folk Houses, theaters and festivals, the illustration of books and the production of all kinds of drawings and visual aids for schools: the creation of posters, projects and samples of Government papers and everything necessary for the development of state art industry.

§ 3. BUREAU OF ARTISTIC COMMUNES

1. In order to organize Communes and assist existing Communes in carrying out their tasks, the Bureau of Artistic Communes is established at the Art Section of the People's Commissariat for Education.

2. The Bureau of Artistic Communes has the task of:

a/ Organization of Communes;

b/ Supply of the existing Communes with everything necessary, according to Section 2 of this

provisions;

c/ The planned distribution of Government orders between Municipalities;

d/ The most rational use of the artistic forces of the Communes,

coordinating the activities of individual Communes;

d/ Organization of periodic exhibitions of works of Art Communities;

e/ Assistance to members of Communes in their spiritual and aesthetic development, such as providing them with necessary books and printed works of art, tickets to theaters, concerts, lectures, etc.

g/ Assistance to members of the Communes in arranging special excursions and trips necessary for artistic observations and impressions, as well as to Museums, art repositories and industrial enterprises, which will be serviced by the Communes.

s/ Facilitating the unification of individual Communes into Communal Federations.

3. The Bureau of Communes, in addition to its tasks of organizing State Art Communes, also promotes the organization of private Art Communes (not dependent on the State) and, as needed, transfers them to the status of State Labor Art Communes.

4. The Bureau of Artistic Communes develops estimates for the organization and maintenance of Communes and is the body responsible for managing, financing and monitoring the activities of Communes.

NOTE: Creative activities are not subject to the control of the Bureau of Artistic Communities.

the activity of the Communes.

5. All Government relations with the Communes take place through the Bureau.

6. The Bureau is headed by a Bureau Head appointed by the People's Commissar for Education and an approved State Commission.

Under the Head of the Bureau, there is a Board consisting of: 1 representative of the Department of Fine Arts, 1 representative of Professional Art Organizations and representatives of Communes in a number equal to other representatives.

§ 4. THE ORDER OF ORGANIZATION OF COMMUNES.

1. All artists who belong to Professional Art Unions and are recommended by 3 members of existing State Labor Art Communes may be members of Communes.

2. Any group of artists satisfying the condition of the previous paragraph, consisting of at least 5 people, may submit an application to the Bureau of Communes about their desire to form a State Labor Art Commune.

3. Communes are completely autonomous in their internal life. The internal order is established and changed by the general meeting of the Commune.

4. The admission and exclusion of members of an existing Commune is carried out by the general meeting and approved by the Bureau of Communes.

5. Members of the Commune may resign from the Commune at any time, but all works created by them, during their stay in the Commune, remain the property of the State on the grounds set out in § 2, paragraph 1. of this provision.

6. The commune or individual members of it have the right, by agreement with the Bureau of Communes, to accept orders from public organizations or individuals, and remuneration for such work is fully at the disposal of the Bureau of State Communes to cover the costs of maintaining existing Communes and organizing new ones.

§ 5. THE OPENING AND LIQUIDATION OF ARTISTIC COMMUNES.

1. When organizing each Commune, the first three months are considered a probation period, after which the Bureau of Artistic Communes must finally decide whether or not to take over the Commune.

During the probation period, the Commune receives full maintenance based on the principles set out in section 2 of this regulation.

2. The Bureau of Artistic Communes has the right to close a Commune at any time if it finds that its members are evading their obligations.

3. In the event of the termination of the activity or the liquidation of a Commune altogether, its property, as well as artistic material and all works created during their stay in the Commune, remain the property of the State and are transferred to the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Artistic Communes.

The article is published in the version approved by the reviewers (after receiving a positive review recommending the manuscript for publication) with corrections made by the author (after receiving the editor’s comments, if any).
Read all reviews on this article