Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.21638/11701/spbu27.2019.104
V. Kelner
Статья посвящена истории создания в Санкт-Петербурге в начале XX в. Еврейского музея. Сам процесс этого сложного и трудоемкого дела начался еще в 1860-е гг. Он был тесно связан с появлением в стране еврейской интеллигенции и осознанием ею своих исторических задач в деле национального воспитания народа. В первую очередь в статье выделяются следующие аспекты этого дела: его общенародный характер, народническая и либеральная направленность, роль меценатства. Несмотря на то что фактическим идеологом всего процесса создания музея был участник русского народнического движения, член партии социалистов-революционеров, писатель, драматург и поэт С. (Ш.) Ан-ский (Ш. Раппопорт), это дело превратилось в общенародное, общенациональное. В нем приняли участие не только революционно настроенные люди, но и представитель русского либерального движения, видный участник русского политического процесса М. М. Винавер, сионисты, идишисты и представители практически всех многочисленных еврейских партий и общественных организаций. В статье подчеркивается, что музей, согласно идее его создателей, был частью единой научной и культурной системы, призванной объединить в единое целое все национальные институты под эгидой официально созданного в 1908 г. Еврейского историко-этнографического общества. Много места в работе уделено истории руководимых С. Ан-ским экспедиций, работавших на территориях еврейской оседлости, по сбору материалов, документов и предметов; ликвидации музея в 1929 г. и дальнейшей судьбе его коллекций, влиянию музеологических идей создателей этого музея на дальнейшее развитие национального музейного дела в стране. Ключевые слова: музей, этнография, Ан-ский, экспедиции, евреи, быт, культура.
这篇文章是关于20世纪初圣彼得堡犹太人博物馆创造的故事。这个复杂而艰苦的过程始于19世纪60年代，它与犹太知识分子的出现和他们对民族教育的历史目标有着密切的联系。本文强调了这一案件的下列方面:它的普遍性、人民和自由主义，以及捐助者的作用。尽管整个博物馆的实际意识形态是俄罗斯人民运动的成员、社会主义革命党成员、作家、剧作家和诗人s。安斯基(h . rappport)，这个案子已经变成了一个全国性的案子。它不仅包括革命的人民，而且包括俄罗斯自由运动的代表，俄罗斯政治进程的杰出参与者m . m . vinaver、犹太复国主义者、意第奇主义者和几乎所有犹太政党和社会组织的代表。这篇文章强调，博物馆是一个科学和文化系统的一部分，旨在在1908年正式成立的犹太历史民族主义社会的支持下统一所有国家机构。许多工作地点包括在犹太人定居地区工作的南非探险队的历史，收集材料、文件和物品;1929年博物馆被拆除，以及博物馆收藏的进一步命运，博物馆创始人的博物馆思想对国家博物馆事业的进一步发展的影响。关键字:博物馆、民族志、安斯基、探险、犹太人、生活、文化。
{"title":"“Time to Gather Stones.” On history of the Jewish Historical-Ethnographic Museum and its collections. 2019","authors":"V. Kelner","doi":"10.21638/11701/spbu27.2019.104","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu27.2019.104","url":null,"abstract":"Статья посвящена истории создания в Санкт-Петербурге в начале XX в. Еврейского музея. Сам процесс этого сложного и трудоемкого дела начался еще в 1860-е гг. Он был тесно связан с появлением в стране еврейской интеллигенции и осознанием ею своих исторических задач в деле национального воспитания народа. В первую очередь в статье выделяются следующие аспекты этого дела: его общенародный характер, народническая и либеральная направленность, роль меценатства. Несмотря на то что фактическим идеологом всего процесса создания музея был участник русского народнического движения, член партии социалистов-революционеров, писатель, драматург и поэт С. (Ш.) Ан-ский (Ш. Раппопорт), это дело превратилось в общенародное, общенациональное. В нем приняли участие не только революционно настроенные люди, но и представитель русского либерального движения, видный участник русского политического процесса М. М. Винавер, сионисты, идишисты и представители практически всех многочисленных еврейских партий и общественных организаций. В статье подчеркивается, что музей, согласно идее его создателей, был частью единой научной и культурной системы, призванной объединить в единое целое все национальные институты под эгидой официально созданного в 1908 г. Еврейского историко-этнографического общества. Много места в работе уделено истории руководимых С. Ан-ским экспедиций, работавших на территориях еврейской оседлости, по сбору материалов, документов и предметов; ликвидации музея в 1929 г. и дальнейшей судьбе его коллекций, влиянию музеологических идей создателей этого музея на дальнейшее развитие национального музейного дела в стране. Ключевые слова: музей, этнография, Ан-ский, экспедиции, евреи, быт, культура.","PeriodicalId":115184,"journal":{"name":"The Issues of Museology","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130152438","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu27.2021.201
K. Ilina
The article focuses on the reconstruction of the research understanding of the “university museum” concept. University museums originated at the end of the 17th century as rooms for teaching students. Over time, university museums were eventually opened to the public and included in the missionary activities of a university. They also began to serve as an intermediary between the closed university and the community. The museums became “a shop window for universities, a source of prestige and pride which contributes to the quality of life within a university”. For 50 years researchers have been discussing the uniqueness of university museums and the problems they face. The close connection with the academic sphere, direct access to the knowledge and skills of scientists, the traditions of scientific schools, research and publications, makes university museums unique in comparison to other museums. One of the important problems is the correlation between university and public in university museums. It includes the distinction between university and public museums, the professionalization of university museum staff, attracting visitors and sponsors, and the degree of dependence of the exhibition policy of university museums on society and the state. The theoretical understanding of the problems of university museums has provoked the organization of national and international associations dedicated to solving practical issues and popularizing university collections.
{"title":"In search of identity: The university museum as a research question (1960s–2020)","authors":"K. Ilina","doi":"10.21638/spbu27.2021.201","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu27.2021.201","url":null,"abstract":"The article focuses on the reconstruction of the research understanding of the “university museum” concept. University museums originated at the end of the 17th century as rooms for teaching students. Over time, university museums were eventually opened to the public and included in the missionary activities of a university. They also began to serve as an intermediary between the closed university and the community. The museums became “a shop window for universities, a source of prestige and pride which contributes to the quality of life within a university”. For 50 years researchers have been discussing the uniqueness of university museums and the problems they face. The close connection with the academic sphere, direct access to the knowledge and skills of scientists, the traditions of scientific schools, research and publications, makes university museums unique in comparison to other museums. One of the important problems is the correlation between university and public in university museums. It includes the distinction between university and public museums, the professionalization of university museum staff, attracting visitors and sponsors, and the degree of dependence of the exhibition policy of university museums on society and the state. The theoretical understanding of the problems of university museums has provoked the organization of national and international associations dedicated to solving practical issues and popularizing university collections.","PeriodicalId":115184,"journal":{"name":"The Issues of Museology","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128694958","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu27.2021.109
Vadim V. Velitchenko, Archaeological Museum-Reserve named after E.D.Felitsyn
What is the attraction of the “living history” format in the development of a modern museum? This article is devoted to this issue and an attempt is made to clarify the specific differences between living history museums and classical ones, focusing on the possibility of the former to “immerse” the visitor in the recreated cultural and historical space of a certain era. The experience of Russian living history museums shows that by implementing new programs aimed at interacting with visitors, museums perform not only their main function of collecting and preserving, but also contribute to the popularization and comprehensive study of historical and cultural heritage as well as solving educational tasks. The author of the article aims to acquaint the reader with the most effective and popular projects to activate museum activities in the Krasnodar territory and the Southern Urals. Master classes on various topics, traveling exhibitions, costumed performances, quests, and, finally, festivals of historical reconstruction are just some of the modern forms of interaction with visitors, which can serve as a basis for developing interactive educational programs. The relevance and prospects of the immersive format in museum activities are provided by the need to solve the problems of fostering the cultural and historical memory among young visitors, the most popular museum audience, and the younger generation’s interest in living history. The implementation of new forms of interaction with the audience will help museums not only attract a wide range of visitors, but also increase financial opportunities for development and become more competitive.
{"title":"The “living history” format as one of the most promising areas of museum development","authors":"Vadim V. Velitchenko, Archaeological Museum-Reserve named after E.D.Felitsyn","doi":"10.21638/spbu27.2021.109","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu27.2021.109","url":null,"abstract":"What is the attraction of the “living history” format in the development of a modern museum? This article is devoted to this issue and an attempt is made to clarify the specific differences between living history museums and classical ones, focusing on the possibility of the former to “immerse” the visitor in the recreated cultural and historical space of a certain era. The experience of Russian living history museums shows that by implementing new programs aimed at interacting with visitors, museums perform not only their main function of collecting and preserving, but also contribute to the popularization and comprehensive study of historical and cultural heritage as well as solving educational tasks. The author of the article aims to acquaint the reader with the most effective and popular projects to activate museum activities in the Krasnodar territory and the Southern Urals. Master classes on various topics, traveling exhibitions, costumed performances, quests, and, finally, festivals of historical reconstruction are just some of the modern forms of interaction with visitors, which can serve as a basis for developing interactive educational programs. The relevance and prospects of the immersive format in museum activities are provided by the need to solve the problems of fostering the cultural and historical memory among young visitors, the most popular museum audience, and the younger generation’s interest in living history. The implementation of new forms of interaction with the audience will help museums not only attract a wide range of visitors, but also increase financial opportunities for development and become more competitive.","PeriodicalId":115184,"journal":{"name":"The Issues of Museology","volume":"109 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123024942","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu27.2022.202
Ludmila V. Konkova, T. D. Baranova
In May 2022, the 315th anniversary of the birth of Carl Linnaeus was celebrated. He was the famous Swedish naturalist and taxonomist of wildlife. During his life, he studied many natural sciences: botany, zoology, mineralogy, assay and others. He devoted several years to practical medicine. His significant role in the development of natural science is reflected in numerous publications. However, his contribution to the development of museum field is not mentioned at all or mentioned in passing. In fact his activity was closely connected with collections, the development of their storage and the creation of museums. There is no separate publication on this topic among Russian museological researches, so it seems necessary to fill this gap. The article is devoted to the role of Carl Linnaeus in the history of the development of museum field. The authors trace the life story of Carl Linnaeus, highlighting the important episodes that he devoted to museum activities. They included his work on the description and storage of famous European collections, the research of his own natural science collection and the publication of their results. Also he has constructed a building for manuscripts and collected natural materials. For many years Carl Linnaeus studied the flora and fauna of Sweden, as well as the way of life and customs of the peoples who inhabited its northern part. His trip to Lapland played an important role for the development of European local lore and ethnography. Other scientific works raise issues of terminology and principles of storage and description of natural science collections. The article reveals the history of the Uppsala Botanical Garden, the Linnaean Museum of Natural History and its collection, the contents of several scientific works and dissertations and the contribution of Linnaean Russian students to the development of domestic scientific knowledge and museum practice.
{"title":"Contribution of Carl Linnaeus (1707–1778) to the development of museum field","authors":"Ludmila V. Konkova, T. D. Baranova","doi":"10.21638/spbu27.2022.202","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu27.2022.202","url":null,"abstract":"In May 2022, the 315th anniversary of the birth of Carl Linnaeus was celebrated. He was the famous Swedish naturalist and taxonomist of wildlife. During his life, he studied many natural sciences: botany, zoology, mineralogy, assay and others. He devoted several years to practical medicine. His significant role in the development of natural science is reflected in numerous publications. However, his contribution to the development of museum field is not mentioned at all or mentioned in passing. In fact his activity was closely connected with collections, the development of their storage and the creation of museums. There is no separate publication on this topic among Russian museological researches, so it seems necessary to fill this gap. The article is devoted to the role of Carl Linnaeus in the history of the development of museum field. The authors trace the life story of Carl Linnaeus, highlighting the important episodes that he devoted to museum activities. They included his work on the description and storage of famous European collections, the research of his own natural science collection and the publication of their results. Also he has constructed a building for manuscripts and collected natural materials. For many years Carl Linnaeus studied the flora and fauna of Sweden, as well as the way of life and customs of the peoples who inhabited its northern part. His trip to Lapland played an important role for the development of European local lore and ethnography. Other scientific works raise issues of terminology and principles of storage and description of natural science collections. The article reveals the history of the Uppsala Botanical Garden, the Linnaean Museum of Natural History and its collection, the contents of several scientific works and dissertations and the contribution of Linnaean Russian students to the development of domestic scientific knowledge and museum practice.","PeriodicalId":115184,"journal":{"name":"The Issues of Museology","volume":"122 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121470401","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu27.2021.107
A. S. Bragin
The article considers the scientific basis for the study of the activities of university museums by Polish scientists. The main support for Polish university museums is said to be provided by the Association of University Museums (AUM). The author analyzes its research and popularization activities. The main purpose of the work is to study the history of the formation and development of six university museums of the Silesian Voivodeship in the Republic of Poland: “Museum of Geology of Deposits named after Czeslaw Poborsky at the Faculty of Mining and Geology of the Silesian University of Technology”, “Museum of the Faculty of Geosciences of the University of Silesia”, “Museum of Silesian Organs”, “Center for History and Traditions of the University of Economics in Katowice”, “Museum of Technology of the Silesian University of Technology” and the “Museum of Medicine and Pharmacy in Sosnowiec”. The author also examines their collections and exhibitions. Theoretical research in the field of studying university museums is considered in detail. For the analysis, scientific articles, books, brochures, mass media materials and information on museum websites are used in order to provide a complete picture of the historical and current state of university museums in the region. In the process of writing the article, the author contacted several guardians and university museum staff to clarify the dates and information provided in various sources. The work partially uses their responses received by e-mail, with the indication of information about the source.
{"title":"University museums of the Silesian Voivodeship (Republic of Poland)","authors":"A. S. Bragin","doi":"10.21638/spbu27.2021.107","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu27.2021.107","url":null,"abstract":"The article considers the scientific basis for the study of the activities of university museums by Polish scientists. The main support for Polish university museums is said to be provided by the Association of University Museums (AUM). The author analyzes its research and popularization activities. The main purpose of the work is to study the history of the formation and development of six university museums of the Silesian Voivodeship in the Republic of Poland: “Museum of Geology of Deposits named after Czeslaw Poborsky at the Faculty of Mining and Geology of the Silesian University of Technology”, “Museum of the Faculty of Geosciences of the University of Silesia”, “Museum of Silesian Organs”, “Center for History and Traditions of the University of Economics in Katowice”, “Museum of Technology of the Silesian University of Technology” and the “Museum of Medicine and Pharmacy in Sosnowiec”. The author also examines their collections and exhibitions. Theoretical research in the field of studying university museums is considered in detail. For the analysis, scientific articles, books, brochures, mass media materials and information on museum websites are used in order to provide a complete picture of the historical and current state of university museums in the region. In the process of writing the article, the author contacted several guardians and university museum staff to clarify the dates and information provided in various sources. The work partially uses their responses received by e-mail, with the indication of information about the source.","PeriodicalId":115184,"journal":{"name":"The Issues of Museology","volume":"89 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126579970","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.21638/11701/SPBU27.2020.207
A. Amosova, Tat’iana M. Konysheva
The article is devoted to the analysis of the updated museum exposition entitled “The Object ‘Pavilion’”, implemented in a bomb shelter under the building of the St. Petersburg administration for the anniversary of the Victory in the Great Patriotic War, by May 9, 2020. The authors study history of The Smolny Museum, as well as its current expositions and memorial spaces available for visitors within the walls of the government building: the exposition “From the history of women’s education in Russia. Smolny Institute for Noble Maidens” and “December, 1. Shot in Smolny”; V. I. Lenin’s study and the room in which he lived with his wife, N. K. Krupskaya; The white-column assembly hall, where in the fall of 1917 the II All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers ‘and Soldiers’ Deputies was held. The period of the war and the siege of Leningrad (1941–1944) occupies an important place in the museum’s theme. One of the most attractive memorial spaces of the museum is the underground bunker located under the territory of the Smolny garden, museumified in 2019. The article describes the technical parameters of the underground structure and considers its history, studies and compares two versions of the bomb shelter exposition (“Bunker A. A. Zhdanov”, 2019 and “The Object ‘Pavilion’”, 2020). The updated exposition is distinguished by a significant expansion of the exposition space, an emphasis on demonstrating the previously hidden functional premises of the bunker (dining room, disinfection room, rest room, etc.), a more detailed display of the historical events of the blockade related to the management of the city and the front, the introduction of multimedia technologies. The article is based on the historical sources of the museum origin.
这篇文章专门分析了2020年5月9日在圣彼得堡政府大楼下的防空洞中为纪念卫国战争胜利周年而更新的博物馆展览“The Object’Pavilion”。作者研究了斯莫尔尼博物馆的历史，以及目前在政府大楼内为游客提供的展览和纪念空间:“从俄罗斯妇女教育的历史来看”的展览。斯莫尔尼贵族少女学院”和“十二月一号”。在斯莫尔尼拍摄”;列宁的书房和他与妻子克鲁普斯卡娅居住的房间;1917年秋，第二次全俄工兵代表苏维埃代表大会在这里召开。战争时期和列宁格勒围城(1941-1944)在博物馆的主题中占有重要地位。博物馆最具吸引力的纪念空间之一是位于斯莫尔尼花园地下的地下掩体，该掩体于2019年被博物馆化。本文描述了地下结构的技术参数，并考虑了其历史，研究和比较了两个版本的防空洞博览会(“Bunker A. A. Zhdanov”，2019年和“The Object’Pavilion”，2020年)。更新后的展览的特点是展览空间的显著扩展，重点展示了以前隐藏的地堡功能场所(餐厅、消毒室、休息室等)，更详细地展示了与城市和前线管理相关的封锁历史事件，并引入了多媒体技术。本文是根据博物馆起源的历史资料。
{"title":"“The Object ‘Pavilion’”: The re-exposure in the bunker in Smolny in honor of the 75th anniversary of the victory in the Great Patriotic War","authors":"A. Amosova, Tat’iana M. Konysheva","doi":"10.21638/11701/SPBU27.2020.207","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/SPBU27.2020.207","url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to the analysis of the updated museum exposition entitled “The Object ‘Pavilion’”, implemented in a bomb shelter under the building of the St. Petersburg administration for the anniversary of the Victory in the Great Patriotic War, by May 9, 2020. The authors study history of The Smolny Museum, as well as its current expositions and memorial spaces available for visitors within the walls of the government building: the exposition “From the history of women’s education in Russia. Smolny Institute for Noble Maidens” and “December, 1. Shot in Smolny”; V. I. Lenin’s study and the room in which he lived with his wife, N. K. Krupskaya; The white-column assembly hall, where in the fall of 1917 the II All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers ‘and Soldiers’ Deputies was held. The period of the war and the siege of Leningrad (1941–1944) occupies an important place in the museum’s theme. One of the most attractive memorial spaces of the museum is the underground bunker located under the territory of the Smolny garden, museumified in 2019. The article describes the technical parameters of the underground structure and considers its history, studies and compares two versions of the bomb shelter exposition (“Bunker A. A. Zhdanov”, 2019 and “The Object ‘Pavilion’”, 2020). The updated exposition is distinguished by a significant expansion of the exposition space, an emphasis on demonstrating the previously hidden functional premises of the bunker (dining room, disinfection room, rest room, etc.), a more detailed display of the historical events of the blockade related to the management of the city and the front, the introduction of multimedia technologies. The article is based on the historical sources of the museum origin.","PeriodicalId":115184,"journal":{"name":"The Issues of Museology","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133645038","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu27.2021.110
Oksana B. Vakhromeeva
In 2021, the 135th anniversary of George Semenovich Vereiskiy (1886–1962) was celebrated. Vereiskiy was a talented, methodical, and self-disciplined artist who focused on the subject of his work. He was a member of the “World of Art” association, curator of the State Hermitage’s Department of Engravings, teacher of painting, laureate of the second degree of the Stalin Prize (1946), People’s Artist of the RSFSR (1962), honored worker of the arts, and member of the Academy of Arts. Vereiskiy was involved in various forms of art, especially drawing and painting. He worked in many genres (portrait, landscape, interior, still life, residential and industrial genres). In his drawings and lithographs in the 1920–30s, he was a pioneer of industrial themes. The main source of his work was love for Russian nature (his landscapes are imbued with a soft lyricism). His clarity of perception of the surrounding reality and high civil position enabled him to make the most important aspect of art — a portrait. Without exaggeration, it can be argued that Vereiskiy for more than half a century created a large portrait gallery of his contemporaries, from science and artists to the Knights of St. George from the First World War and military officials of World War II (1941–1945). Vereiskiy’s artistic heritage is very extensive and it is still waiting for its explorer. This article was created in order to establish a precursor for the study of the artist’s creative heritage, fragmentarily concentrated in a number of museum collections, which are discussed below. The reference point to the artist’s creative heritage is his autobiography, which the article introduces into scientific circulation for the first time.
{"title":"The unfulfilled museum collection of works by G. S.Vereiskiy: The artist’s autobiography as a key to his creative heritage","authors":"Oksana B. Vakhromeeva","doi":"10.21638/spbu27.2021.110","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu27.2021.110","url":null,"abstract":"In 2021, the 135th anniversary of George Semenovich Vereiskiy (1886–1962) was celebrated. Vereiskiy was a talented, methodical, and self-disciplined artist who focused on the subject of his work. He was a member of the “World of Art” association, curator of the State Hermitage’s Department of Engravings, teacher of painting, laureate of the second degree of the Stalin Prize (1946), People’s Artist of the RSFSR (1962), honored worker of the arts, and member of the Academy of Arts. Vereiskiy was involved in various forms of art, especially drawing and painting. He worked in many genres (portrait, landscape, interior, still life, residential and industrial genres). In his drawings and lithographs in the 1920–30s, he was a pioneer of industrial themes. The main source of his work was love for Russian nature (his landscapes are imbued with a soft lyricism). His clarity of perception of the surrounding reality and high civil position enabled him to make the most important aspect of art — a portrait. Without exaggeration, it can be argued that Vereiskiy for more than half a century created a large portrait gallery of his contemporaries, from science and artists to the Knights of St. George from the First World War and military officials of World War II (1941–1945). Vereiskiy’s artistic heritage is very extensive and it is still waiting for its explorer. This article was created in order to establish a precursor for the study of the artist’s creative heritage, fragmentarily concentrated in a number of museum collections, which are discussed below. The reference point to the artist’s creative heritage is his autobiography, which the article introduces into scientific circulation for the first time.","PeriodicalId":115184,"journal":{"name":"The Issues of Museology","volume":"96 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133255253","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.21638/11701/spbu27.2019.203
O. Lysenko
{"title":"Picture frames from the Romanov Gallery of the Imperial Hermitage. To the history of creation and existence","authors":"O. Lysenko","doi":"10.21638/11701/spbu27.2019.203","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu27.2019.203","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":115184,"journal":{"name":"The Issues of Museology","volume":"01 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127443296","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu27.2021.204
A. Amosova, Alina K. Cherchintseva
For the first time, the display of frontline life in the museum space was realized during the war years in the framework of military-historical exhibitions that supported the morale of people, served as a means of information about the situation at the fronts. The tragic daily life of the siege was first presented in the format of an exhibition, and later in the Museum of the Defense of Leningrad. The range of topics covered included partisan life, features of organizing urban space, and others. As a result of the Leningrad Affair, the topic of defense and siege was tacitly banned. During Khrushchev’s “thaw”, the Museum of the History of Leningrad was the first to break the silence by undertaking a series of exhibition projects dedicated to the complex topic of the siege. Since the late 1980s, the staff of the revived Museum of the Defense of Leningrad has organized exhibitions devoted to radio broadcasting in the besieged city, reflection of the realities of the siege in painting, graphics, and sculpture, which expanded the content coverage of the topic concerning everyday military life. The baton was picked up by other historical museums of St. Petersburg, which implemented museum displays dedicated to the daily life of a person at the front. This study analyzes the forms of interpretation of the siege and frontline everyday life in the space of Leningrad — St. Petersburg historical museums in the second half of the 20th century. Particular attention is paid to iconic expositions and exhibitions of the period under study: their ideological content and museum objects included are considered and key exposition decisions are analyzed. The article is based on a corpus of archival materials, sources of museum origin, and materials from periodicals.
{"title":"Ways of interpreting the siege and frontline daily life in expositions and exhibitions of Leningrad — St. Petersburg historical museums in the 1940s–1990s","authors":"A. Amosova, Alina K. Cherchintseva","doi":"10.21638/spbu27.2021.204","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu27.2021.204","url":null,"abstract":"For the first time, the display of frontline life in the museum space was realized during the war years in the framework of military-historical exhibitions that supported the morale of people, served as a means of information about the situation at the fronts. The tragic daily life of the siege was first presented in the format of an exhibition, and later in the Museum of the Defense of Leningrad. The range of topics covered included partisan life, features of organizing urban space, and others. As a result of the Leningrad Affair, the topic of defense and siege was tacitly banned. During Khrushchev’s “thaw”, the Museum of the History of Leningrad was the first to break the silence by undertaking a series of exhibition projects dedicated to the complex topic of the siege. Since the late 1980s, the staff of the revived Museum of the Defense of Leningrad has organized exhibitions devoted to radio broadcasting in the besieged city, reflection of the realities of the siege in painting, graphics, and sculpture, which expanded the content coverage of the topic concerning everyday military life. The baton was picked up by other historical museums of St. Petersburg, which implemented museum displays dedicated to the daily life of a person at the front. This study analyzes the forms of interpretation of the siege and frontline everyday life in the space of Leningrad — St. Petersburg historical museums in the second half of the 20th century. Particular attention is paid to iconic expositions and exhibitions of the period under study: their ideological content and museum objects included are considered and key exposition decisions are analyzed. The article is based on a corpus of archival materials, sources of museum origin, and materials from periodicals.","PeriodicalId":115184,"journal":{"name":"The Issues of Museology","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126223679","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.21638/spbu27.2022.112
S. Vivatenko, T. E. Sivolap
The relevance of the topic raised in this article is justified by the importance of the issue of restitution of cultural property after the Second World War and the interest it arouses in society at the current stage of development. During the time that has passed since the defeat of Nazi Germany, many former owners of works of art, from whom the Nazis requisitioned their collections, have regained their artifacts. The process of restitution continues up to the present. The idea of restitution arose from the idea of protecting cultural property from encroachment. And if shortly after the war, the families of former owners of works of art tried to return their art property from private collectors, now lawsuits are usually directed against museums. One of the well-known restitution cases in recent years is the lawsuit against the New York Museum of Modern Art, which is an attempt to return family values by the descendants of the German artist Georg Grosz and collector Alfred Flechtheim. Dispute resolution has not yet been brought to its logical conclusion. The purpose of the article is to establish the problems of returning the lost cultural property that was illegally acquired by the Nazis during the Second World War and sold to museums, as well as to private collectors. Today, many of these works of art are owned by American collectors or museums. The descendants of repressed cultural figures who suffered from the Nazi regime demand the restoration of their rights, through the restitution of art artefacts or compensation for lost works of art.
{"title":"Museum restitution problems: The cases of the Grosz and Flechtheim families against the New York Museum of Modern Art","authors":"S. Vivatenko, T. E. Sivolap","doi":"10.21638/spbu27.2022.112","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu27.2022.112","url":null,"abstract":"The relevance of the topic raised in this article is justified by the importance of the issue of restitution of cultural property after the Second World War and the interest it arouses in society at the current stage of development. During the time that has passed since the defeat of Nazi Germany, many former owners of works of art, from whom the Nazis requisitioned their collections, have regained their artifacts. The process of restitution continues up to the present. The idea of restitution arose from the idea of protecting cultural property from encroachment. And if shortly after the war, the families of former owners of works of art tried to return their art property from private collectors, now lawsuits are usually directed against museums. One of the well-known restitution cases in recent years is the lawsuit against the New York Museum of Modern Art, which is an attempt to return family values by the descendants of the German artist Georg Grosz and collector Alfred Flechtheim. Dispute resolution has not yet been brought to its logical conclusion. The purpose of the article is to establish the problems of returning the lost cultural property that was illegally acquired by the Nazis during the Second World War and sold to museums, as well as to private collectors. Today, many of these works of art are owned by American collectors or museums. The descendants of repressed cultural figures who suffered from the Nazi regime demand the restoration of their rights, through the restitution of art artefacts or compensation for lost works of art.","PeriodicalId":115184,"journal":{"name":"The Issues of Museology","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127914300","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：