Like most of today's young actors, Konstantin Khabensky was made famous by the series. In 2003, after the "Deadly Force", the saga of the life of cops, swept across the country, the artist of the St. Petersburg Theater named after Lensoviet, a student of the excellent theater teacher Veniamin Filshtinsky, moved to Moscow, to the Chekhov Moscow Art Theater. There, to Oleg Tabakov, who, it seems, is accepting into the troupe of his theater, everyone who was noted by people's love, Khabensky's comrades in the performances of director Yuri Butusov, Mikhail Porechenkov, and then Mikhail Trukhin, also rushed. There is an opinion that this move did not have the best effect on their acting fate - in St. Petersburg they played deeper, thinner, more concentrated. Probably so. However, theatrical companies, especially formed in the student years, are unstable communities, tending to disintegrate. Be that as it may, it is not easy to write about Konstantin Khabensky today: of the theatrical roles he played after moving to Moscow, one turned out to be interesting (Claudius in Yuri Butusov's Hamlet), and there is enough garbage among the screen ones. However, Khabensky is an artist with individuality, which means that his personal, special note can be heard even in passing works.
This note is a reflection, but specific. In terms of role, Khabensky is closest to the neurasthenic hero (he himself jokes in an interview that his role is “a comic old woman”). In the old St. Petersburg play “Waiting for Godot” by Yuri Butusov, the subtle spiritual organization of his Estragon was charmingly combined with endless travesty, mockery of everything and everything that reigned on the stage. He often plays real neurasthenics: either in a grotesque way (the unlucky courier Eduard from Dmitry Meskhiev’s comedy “Mechanical Suite” or the suicidal trembling like tsutsik in Renata Litvinova’s “Goddess”), then, pretending to be serious, say, in the role of Zilov from “ Duck hunting." Anton Gorodetsky from the Dozors, journalist Guryev from Philip Yankovsky's film On the Move are also no strangers to reflection.
However, one does not always sympathize with the throwing of Khabensky's characters. The neurasthenics of previous years were sometimes frankly unpleasant people, but on the whole certain: the emptiness in the souls of the heroes - say, Oleg Dal (when he played the same Zilov or Sergey in Anatoly Efros's film "On Thursday and Never Again") - could not help but terrify, but it was clear why they were suffering and with whom they were angry. A softened, smoothed version of Zilov - the hero of Oleg Yankovsky in Roman Balayan's "Flights in a Dream and Reality" - seemed to be a person, at least not empty. Khabensky's characters are often people without an internal structure. It is difficult to say anything about them for sure: neither what is good in them, nor what is bad, nor why they are experiencing, nor how deep these experiences are. These people are muddy, obscure, unmanifested: something seems to be dawning in them, but what is unknown. And does it creep?
In the center of the plot, these neurasthenics of troubled times, as a rule, turned out to be by accident: it was not easy to skid. Now they don't know how to get out. However, they do not particularly lay claim to the center position - they are too frivolous, irresponsible, debauched. One of their funny traits is a sort of slight insanity. After the release of the Dozorov screens, no one went over the fact that Anton Gorodetsky was constantly out of his mind there: he was either “hungover”, or suffering from a hangover, poisoned, generally transferred to another body. He staggers along the plot so inadequate, with perspiration on his forehead, stretching his lips in his floating, “sprawling” smile.
However, this blurred perception of the world is even attractive in its own way. Probably because it is unattainable for the viewer. After all, life around, if it has to relax, then only in the hours strictly allotted for this business. Allowing yourself to let the tightly twisted spring inside you weaken in a normal, that is, complete struggle for existence, life is difficult, and even at a dangerous moment it is completely unthinkable. The heroes of Khabensky are not only able to “let go” of themselves and the situation, they seem to be incapable of any other way. Getting between the Dark and the Light and closing their eyes is their way of surviving. Bite the bit, follow your own desires - like Claudius in the "Hamlet" of the Moscow Art Theater - and think: maybe it will blow over! This stake on "maybe", on the fact that it "forms on its own", of course, corresponds to the idea of the Russian national character. But it also testifies to a conscious choice: it can be said that Khabensky's characters thus express fatigue from the pressure of an “adult” existence - they flee from it into infantilism, into the perception of the world through a veil of altered consciousness.
But it is also just the intoxication of life. Because for all the under-manifestation, something is really given to the heroes of Khabensky: a sensual perception of the world, the ability to treat it with captivating trust. They are receptive: they perceive everyday life not as a quagmire, but as grace, that others will not even notice, they will be delighted as a gift of fate. Fatigue from life is not about them: even the journalist Guryev (“On the Move”), who is drawn headlong into a senseless secular whirlpool, manages to get some kind of pleasure from all this fuss.
In this soft playful vitality, in this touch of undisguised sensuality, it seems to me, lies the secret of Konstantin Khabensky's popularity. This also puts him in the position of one of the main artists for the role of heroes-lovers: this type of charm is able to influence the female audience more than the outright brutality of, say, Vladimir Mashkov or Mikhail Porechenkov. So in the opera, the tenor is a more defiantly sexual voice than the bass, it is no coincidence that tenors in all eras have “raw” fans.
In the cinema, this actor's color of Khabensky today manifests itself more expressively than in the theater, perhaps because on the stage of the Moscow Art Theater. Chekhov, he has not yet been able to truly open up. Although the audience goes to the Moscow Art Theater in many respects "on Khabensky", but at the performances it does not leave the feeling that his neurotic charm is actually chamber, not too compatible with the position of the prime minister. Cinema, on the other hand, likes to emphasize, to enlarge the sensual side of his acting personality - the ability to bathe in life, to catch all its affection on his face. Do not make a choice and do not evaluate - respond to the proposal with consent.
A man who is ready to spontaneously and sincerely get carried away by any woman is a rather attractive version of the hero-lover. Especially in times when a man seems to be generally interested in a woman less and less. A spark of sincere interest, instantly lighting up in his eyes, flatters women's pride. This spark is also in the look of Claudius in “Hamlet” by Yuri Butusov, a hooligan young king who, only out of some kind of adventurous feeling, commits a terrible crime and looks at the large Gertrude, who is suitable for him as a mother, with a mixture of delight and horror: this is all mine!
There is this spark in the eyes of the journalist Sasha Guryev, who does not miss a single skirt. And certainly it is characteristic of Andrei Kalinin from Dmitry Meskhiev's film "Women's Property" - Khabensky's early, but still the best work in the cinema.
These charming hedonists have an uneasy relationship with the concept of "masculinity". Because of their irresponsibility, they are far from the “real man” stereotype. Sometimes, however, Khabensky is also offered the role of solid and strong personalities, but this is of little use: there is something parodic in Alexei Turbin in Sergei Zhenovach's play The White Guard at the Moscow Art Theater and in the terrorist Green in the film State Councilor. No matter how much you make a courageous face, a reflective neurasthenic still makes his way out.
A more organic and fruitful option for Khabensky is a kind of hidden masculinity. It is precisely this that is demonstrated by the hero of "Women's Property" - the same Andrei Kalinin, who was admitted to the theater institute solely due to an affair with the master of the course, a famous actress. Marina Tsvetaeva's well-known words about Yuri Zavadsky, which are the best suited to other heroes of the artist, cannot be attributed to this old character of Khabensky. Here is the quote: "Good? No. Laskov? Yes. For kindness is a primary feeling, and he lives exclusively secondary, reflected. So, instead of kindness - affection, love - disposition, hatred - evasion, delight - admiration, participation - sympathy. Instead of the presence of passion - the absence of dispassion ... But in everything secondary, he is very strong: a pearl, the first bow. Many of Khabensky's heroes seem to be secondary. But not Andrei Kalinin. The movie "Women's Property" talks about how much visibility differs
and the bottom line: so behind the unbearably tearful melodramatic plot (the heroine dies of cancer, the hero indulges in all serious grief, and then finds a new love), there is an accurate story about a relationship that from the outside looked like an ordinary affair, but was a real feeling. And so the masculinity of Andrei Kalinin must also be able to recognize it, it carefully and successfully camouflages itself. The hero of "Women's Property" in the eyes of others looks like a walker and a gigolo, a cynic and a slob. Masculinity is hidden by him as something personal, intimate, which cannot be flaunted, which is the very essence of a person, and therefore must be protected. Khabensky accurately plays this specific male bashfulness: when it is easier to seem cheeky than excited, petty than deep. He plays a person with an inner core, who does not condemn anyone and even follows the circumstances, but clearly makes a choice for himself and knows how to distinguish the real from the fake. So only wise women are able to understand him, in "Women's Property" there are two of them - the highly experienced Liza and the young Olya.
Such a subtlety of work and a variety of psychological nuances for Khabensky today is a rarity. Meanwhile, he is certainly inclined to this. But for the situation of simplification in which it exists today, the play Duck Hunt, staged in 2002 on the stage of the Moscow Art Theater by Alexander Marin, is typical. Spectators who come to see Vampilov's play (and Duck Hunt usually fills the hall) see a vulgar, fussy story about a guy who, of course, does not always behave comme il faut - he lies to his wife, gets confused with women, but on the whole is quite nice . Yes, he drinks a lot (Khabensky depicts a hangover for a considerable part of the stage time), but who is not without sin? A sort of soul of the company, charming - and why, in fact, is he drawn to pull the trigger? In the Moscow Art Theater version, Vampilov's play becomes a series of unpretentious gags on the theme of Soviet life, played out with a greater or lesser degree of taste: the audience laughs with pleasure, and the terrible component of this story disappears from the performance almost without a trace. And Zilov, performed by Khabensky, appears as a typical indistinct and secondary hero, for the sake of which it was not worth fencing the garden.
Niche Khabensky today can be called specificity. It is interesting to watch him in the films of Dmitry Meskhiev, who clearly tries to use this artist in the most diverse way: after the downtrodden, purely comedic Eduard in The Mechanical Suite, the director offered him the role of political instructor Lifshitz in the film The Own. It is also a variant of hidden, not immediately manifesting masculinity: this closed, not very valiant-looking person turns out to be not only a brave fighter, but even sacrifices himself, covering the retreat of his own. In characteristic roles, both the good school of Khabensky, and his ability to feel the form, and the subtlety of nuances are fully manifested. But this, of course, is not enough. If only because the neurasthenic temperament is a valuable and rare gift.
The Project tracked down Konstantin Kilimnik, a mysterious Russian in the case of Russian interference in the American elections, in the Moscow region. It turned out that Kilimnik worked with Paul Manafort not only in Ukraine, but also in Kyrgyzstan. Both there and there they defended the foreign policy interests of Russia, and part of this work could be paid in the company of billionaire Oleg Deripaska.
“What if I really were a spy? I wouldn't be here. I would be in Russia,” said Konstantin Kilimnik, at that moment a 46-year-old Russian political strategist, who had just found himself in the very center of the scandal over Moscow’s alleged interference in the US presidential election, while sitting in a Kiev cafe in February 2017.
A year and a half later, in August 2018, the Project found Kilimnik in Russia, in an elite gated community in the north-west of the Moscow region, just outside the Moscow Ring Road. Homes there are worth about $2 million.
House of Konstantin Kilimnik in the Moscow region
He lives there with his wife and still avoids publicity. 
The former owner of the house told the Project that he had never seen Kilimnik and that he negotiated the sale with his wife. × When the correspondent of "Proekt" called him for the first time, Kilimnik, without delay, said that it was not him. True, he called back to a call from another number himself and did not deny it. When asked to talk about his work with Paul Manafort, Kilimnik replied, "I'm not interested in discussing it."
Could Kilimnik's move to Russia, as he himself once said, mean that he is a Russian spy? The Project found unique facts about the career of the main Russian in the Mueller investigation and realized that Kilimnik was much more connected to Russian state interests than it seemed.
Spy
“It was only after he was fired that everyone realized that he had obvious spy skills. He did not make it to any group photo, despite the fact that, as acting director, he opened many events - he delivered a very short opening speech and left the presidium. He didn’t even make it to informal photos of parties,” says Kilimnik’s former colleague, who worked closely with him at the International Republican Institute (IRI, an American NGO that declares its goal to “develop democracy” in the world. Now IRI in Russia is on the list of undesirable organizations , his site is blocked).
There are two rare photographs in the Paul Manafort evidence base. This was an official photo shoot, including Kilimnik's meetings with Viktor Yanukovych, the ex-president of Ukraine. However, in both official photos, Kilimnik turns his back to the camera. He was identified by two interlocutors of the Project. × The publication of these photos in the case angered Manafort - through his lawyers, he demanded that they be removed from the case).
Today, the Project publishes for the first time a large photograph of the Russian defendant in the Manafort case.
He quietly went about his work and did not strive for publicity, he listened more than he spoke. . . Two of Kilimnik's acquaintances describe him almost identically. × The miniature growth of Kilimnik, for which he was even given the nickname Dwarf in Russia (the Americans called him "Hand Luggage"), also did not make him a memorable character.
Now Kilimnik is possibly the main lead in the Mueller investigation. The charges against Manafort, which are being considered in court these days, so far relate only to financial crimes, despite the fact that the investigation of the special counsel was initiated by alleged Russian interference in the American elections. Kilimnik's testimony, or new facts about him, could be a breakthrough in this case.
So far, Mueller's team has not provided evidence of Kilimnik's connection with the Russian authorities, although it stated at the end of last year that he "keeps in touch with the Russian intelligence service."
The only proven fact of this kind is Kilimnik's studies at the Military University of the Ministry of Defense, where they train, among other things, translators for military intelligence. There, Kilimnik had the nickname "Cat", another graduate of this university told the "Project", but later refused any conversations, citing "a conversation with the management."
Kilimnik joined MRI in 1995. “Basically, it was a briefing on the conduct of election campaigns,” former colleague Marina Malysheva describes his duties. He was quickly promoted, eventually rising to the position of acting director of the Russian branch. It happened at the turn of 2004 and 2005, when the previous director of the IRI, Sam Patten, left Russia. He left the post hastily and in frustration - he was crushed by the catastrophically low result in the elections of the SPS party, which was headed by his friend Boris Nemtsov. Due to the haste, a new director was not found, and Kilimnik was made acting. It was during these few months that events took place that say a lot about our hero.
Ukrainian connection
Kilimnik, according to him, was born in Krivoy Rog, Dnepropetrovsk region. Until very recently, his parents and brother remained in Ukraine, whom Konstantin helped with money because of his addiction to alcohol. . , says the interlocutor of the “Project”, who is well acquainted with Kilimnik ×
In 2004-2005, the IRI found itself deeply immersed in the tumultuous Ukrainian events that came to be known as the Orange Revolution.
IRI in Ukraine worked with representatives of the "democratic coalition", that is, with the leaders of the "orange" Viktor Yushchenko and Yulia Tymoshenko . , says a senior IRI official. ×
The Moscow office was not on the sidelines. Kilimnik often traveled to Kyiv and sent hired political technologists there . , says a former MRI employee. × However, in the spring of 2005, it turned out that in Ukraine Kilimnik did not work for his employer at all.
“In March or April 2005, it turned out that Kilimnik was providing services to Viktor Yanukovych (then the leader of the pro-Russian Party of Regions - Project) and he was ordered to quit immediately, his last working day was April 30,” Kilimnik’s former colleague recalls. "Kilimnik was fired in April 2005 after I became aware of extremely credible information about his violation of our code of ethics," confirms Steve Nix, director of IRI programs in Eurasia.
Konstantin Kilimnik shakes hands with Viktor Yanukovych; with his back against Yanukovych - Nikolai Zlochevsky, at that time the Minister of Natural Resources; second right - Anna German, then deputy head of the presidential administration. Photo from the Paul Manafort evidence base.
After the inglorious dismissal of Kilimnik, much became clear. He wrote all instructions to the staff on separate stickers. . , says his former colleague. × He often gave assignments to employees, which he asked not to tell anyone else at the institute. At first, everyone thought that this was for security reasons: “But it turned out that we all worked on the instructions of Kilimnik not for one, but for two organizations” . , says Kilimnik's former subordinate. ×
Kilimnik left, leaving nothing behind in his office. The work computer he handed in was absolutely clean. Kilimnik led the organization's accounting, and this became a big problem: even the Quick Books program, an analogue of 1C for American accounting, was demolished. Lina Markova, financial director of MRI and the then wife of political scientist Sergei Markov, worked only with 1C, MRI tried to find Kilimnik, but he ignored former employees . , says his former subordinate. ×
“Yes, he was hiding from them,” Kilimnik's friend confirms. “But because he thought he was insulted there.”
Several acquaintances of Kilimnik and Ukrainian politicians confirm that he started working in Ukraine back in 2004. One of the political strategists sent by Kilimnik to a neighboring country said that he was invited to “hold elections in the Donbass” (the presidential elections of 2004, when Yanukovych’s dubious victory in the second round led to the “orange revolution”, and as a result the country was headed by Viktor Yushchenko) .
Perhaps Kilimnik ended up in Ukraine even before Manafort . , according to one of the interlocutors of the "Project". × In 2004, when Kilimnik had already started working in Ukraine, Manafort did not actively participate in the elections, recalls Vasily Stoyakin, who was then an adviser to the head of the Ukrainian presidential administration and led the regional analytics group at the Yanukovych campaign headquarters.
Be that as it may, in the spring of 2005, Kilimnik and Manafort were already openly working together in Ukraine. “They looked funny together with Paul - Tarapunka and Shtepsel,” the former member of the Yanukovych team laughs, recalling the images of Soviet pop heroes, who were strikingly different in height and complexion.
Election poster of Viktor Yanukovych with a slogan created by Paul Manafort's team
As a result, Kilimnik and Manafort settled in Ukraine for a long time: under their supervision, Yanukovych was rehabilitated, the Party of Regions won the parliamentary elections, its chairman became prime minister, and then president. Even after the victory of the Euromaidan, Manafort did not stop working with the Yanukovych team.
However, the American political strategist was not Kilimnik's only partner in his work in Ukraine.
aluminum tie
Kilimnik's administrative work for Yanukovych in 2004–2005 could have been built through Basic Element, the Russian company of billionaire Oleg Deripaska . , said a Project source who worked at MRI at the time. × In April 2018, Deripaska came under personal US sanctions as an oligarch close to Vladimir Putin.
During the period of late 2004 and early 2005, Kilimnik sent MRI employees to the Bazel office on Rochdelskaya Street in Moscow at least 20 times, says one of the people who directly carried out such instructions from Kilimnik. There, Kilimnik's messengers were given envelopes with cash, air tickets for him and the political consultants he attracted. Kilimnik did not explain to the employees why the money for the Ukrainian assignments is obtained at Basel.
The IRI manager says that the institute never sent Kilimnik or his political consultants on business trips to other CIS countries, all work there was done through local offices.
Deripaska's representative told the Project that neither he nor Bazel ever funded Kilimnik, and "the private investment relationship between Deripaska and Manafort, the existence of which is not disputed, was never aimed at achieving political goals."
Oleg Deripaska
Deripaska's connections with Manafort were indeed no secret. According to political consultant Philip Griffin, at the end of 2004, Manafort's partner, Rick Davis, sent him to Ukraine "to help Deripaska."
Cooperation between Manafort and Deripaska could continue at least until 2016. In the summer of 2016, according to the Washington Post, Manafort and Kilimnik repeatedly discussed the possibility of meeting, allegedly with Deripaska, in their correspondence; On August 3, 2016, Deripaska's plane landed at Newark Airport, according to the ADS-B Exchange website. . . This was first noticed by freelance journalist Scott Steadman. Deripaska's representative, when asked by The Project about whether that meeting really took place, replied that "the relationship between Manafort and Deripaska was terminated many years ago." × Three days later, as is known from Anti-Corruption Foundation investigations, Deripaska had a meeting with the then Russian Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Prikhodko - on a yacht off the Scandinavian coast and in the company of escort girls. Prikhodko then oversaw international relations in the government. According to the memoirs of the escort girl Nastya Rybka, Prikhodko and Deripaska discussed Russian-American relations on the yacht.
As The Project found out, Kilimnik and Manafort worked not only in Ukraine, but also in Central Asia. And Kilimnik again received money for this at Rochdelskaya, 30, according to the interlocutor of the "Project".
Kyrgyz messenger
The work of Manafort in Kyrgyzstan, since at least 2005, has not been previously reported. That year, mass protests began in the former Soviet republic - they were attended by supporters of the oppositionists who lost the parliamentary elections. The "Tulip Revolution" led to a change of power. The pro-Russian president Askar Akaev fled the country, and his place was soon taken by the no less pro-Russian oppositionist Kurmanbek Bakiyev.
"Tulip revolution" in Kyrgyzstan, 2005.
Korovin is called the first Russian impressionist. His work amazed his contemporaries: some were shocked by the negligence and seeming clumsy strokes, others caught the main thing - the play of light and shadow, the colorist's innovation. The first called the works of Konstantin Korovin decadence and daub, the second, looking at the amazing landscapes and still lifes of the artist, saw the features of genius.
One of the few contemporaries who recognized signs of talent in the painter's works was. The singer called the artist "in painting." At that time, few agreed with Chaliapin, but 3-4 decades after Korovin's death, his juicy, light-filled and life-filled paintings were recognized as the works of a real master.
Childhood and youth
The future painter was born into a wealthy merchant family. Grandfather, an Old Believer and a merchant of the first guild, was called the Moscow “king of drivers”. Mikhail Korovin kept the postal route and disposed of hundreds of coachmen. The son of a merchant and the future father of the artist - Alexei Korovin - received a university education and was a very gifted person. Talent for drawing from the sons of Kostya and from his father.
Alexei Korovin married a noble bride - a noblewoman Apollinaria Volkova, an educated girl with progressive views. But family happiness did not last long. The country was rapidly developing railway communication, the coachmen, plying the postal routes, became a thing of the past. The business built by Korovin Sr. did not bring profit, a rich merchant's house in Moscow went under the hammer. The Korovins moved to Mytishchi.
Little Kostya liked the rural expanse, but his father, who got a job as a factory accountant, plunged into a severe depression that ended in suicide. Despite poverty, the mother gave her children an education.
Konstantin's older brother for 3 years - Sergey Korovin - became a student at the Moscow School of Painting. Korovin Jr. soon joined him: 14-year-old Kostya chose architecture, but a year later he transferred to the faculty of painting, which was led by a landscape painter.
Kostya idolized his mentor, but Alexei Kondratievich, who was rapidly drinking heavily, was fired. For the young artist, parting with his beloved teacher was the first life disappointment: Kostya left the school and went to St. Petersburg to the Art Academy. Withstood 3 months: study seemed dead and boring.
Konstantin Korovin returned to the capital and to his native school, where he took the position of Savrasov. Soon Vasily Dmitrievich filled in the heart of the young painter the empty place of his beloved teacher.
The mentor introduced the talented student to the philanthropist, and he invited Kostya to the Abramtsevo estate, which became the center of the cultural life of the capital. In the hospitable estate of Mamontov, the cultural elite of Russia gathered, there were,.
Painting
The creative biography of the modernist opens with "Portrait of a chorus girl", written in the early 1880s. The picture amazed contemporaries, who called it the "first sign" of a new direction - impressionism. Repin, who saw the Korovinskaya chorus girl, was so amazed by the color scheme, the boldness of the technique and the idea that he demanded to immediately show the creator of the work.
Mamontov, confident that the portrait was painted by a Spaniard (Russian masters did not differ in such courage and freedom), was surprised to learn that a 22-year-old compatriot painted the chorus girl. The philanthropist invited Konstantin Korovin to the estate. It is noteworthy that Korovin discovered the innovative direction himself, not knowing about its appearance in France. The artist visited Paris 4 years after painting "Portrait of a Chorus Girl".
At the time of the creation of the canvas in Russia, at the peak of popularity were the Wanderers, committed to realism, vitality and the educational mission of art. The portrait of an ugly girl sitting in an unnatural pose, painted in rough strokes, did not teach anything. The work was perceived as a challenge, a mockery of the beautiful. But Konstantin Korovin accepted criticism philosophically and did not depart from the chosen style.
The painter created the first works in an innovative manner in the village of Zhukovka, at the dacha of the teacher Polenov. These first impressionistic works were united as "Zhukov's cycle".
The main goal of Konstantin Korovin was the transmission of light and air on the canvas. The painting "At the Tea Table" is a clear proof of the achievement of the task. The composition of the canvas is built in accordance with the artistic direction of impressionism - like a random frame. The characters are relaxed, the center of the composition is displaced, the right edge of the canvas seems to be cut off.
The paintings of modernists are difficult to fit into the framework of one genre: they have the features of a portrait, landscape, still life. This can be seen in Korovin's early impressionist works In the Boat and Moskvoretsky Bridge.
At Mamontov, the painter met Serov. Colleagues set off to travel around the North, where the works "Arctic Ocean" and "Village in the North" appeared. The painting "Winter in Lapland" was purchased by a gallery owner.
A trip to the Crimea and Gurzuf with Mamontov inspired the paintings “Crimea. Gurzuf" and "Pier in Gurzuf". Korovin made sketches while traveling around the Black Sea by car: he stopped in places he liked and sketched landscapes.
In 1888, the philanthropist financed the trip of Konstantin Korovin to France. The famous canvases “Paris. Boulevard des Capucines”, “Paris Cafe”, “After the Rain”, which the artist was inspired by the ancient city on the banks of the Seine. In Paris, so beloved by the painter, he met the Impressionists, who impressed him with the technique of color reproduction. After returning, the master taught at the Moscow School of Painting and after a couple of years became an academician.
Konstantin Alekseevich is known as a talented creator of still lifes with flowers, of which there are dozens in his legacy. Lilacs and roses were especially fond of the master. Like all modernist works, Korovin's still lifes and landscapes are best viewed from a distant perspective. The artist paid tribute to all the seasons of the year: his gallery presents autumn, winter, spring and summer.
The outbreak of the First World War forced Korovin to go to the front, where he advised the military on camouflage. Konstantin Korovin escaped repression after the October Revolution: after the decline of business, the family moved from the merchant class to the bourgeois class.
The new government entrusted the artist with the organization of auctions and exhibitions, accounting and preservation of art monuments. Korovin taught at state workshops, collaborated with theaters and willingly painted scenery. Having accepted the changes in the system, Konstantin Alekseevich eschewed politics, running either to the Crimea or to a dacha in Okhotino near Yaroslavl.
In the 1920s, politics came close to the master: the dacha was taken away, the metropolitan apartment was “compacted”. In 1923, at the insistence of the modernist, he immigrated to France, explaining his departure by the need to treat his son.
Life in the once beloved Paris proved difficult. Modernists went out of fashion, lack of money was exhausting, friends remained in Russia. Konstantin Korovin yearned for his homeland, for Abramtsevo and Okhotino. To all the misfortunes was added the loss of vision. To occupy himself, the artist took up his memoirs, discovering the gift of a writer in himself. He wrote stories and memoirs, filling the longing for working with paints.
Leaving Russia, the painter left the work of the gallery owner Kreitor. He turned out to be a swindler and, taking the canvases, disappeared. Today, paintings by the first Russian impressionist can be seen in the Russian Museum in the city on the Neva.
Personal life
The painter met his future wife Anna Fidler in his youth. Constantine depicted his beloved girl in the painting "Paper Lanterns". He met secretly with the chorus girl Anna Korovin, and the couple went down the aisle after the birth of their first child. Soon the boy died, for which Konstantin Korovin blamed himself: poverty reigned in the house, there was no money for doctors and medicine for his sick son.
Romance evaporated from the relationship of the spouses, but Korovin could not leave his wife and son. An outlet for him was a relationship with Nadezhda Komarovskaya. The actress is called the common-law wife of Konstantin Alekseevich.
Konstantin Korovin broke up with his beloved woman, having immigrated to Paris with Anna and his second son Alyosha, an invalid. At 16, Alexei was hit by a tram and was left without legs. The boy took over from his father a talent for drawing and became an artist.
The son's depression and his wife's illness (angina pectoris) became a constant source of suffering for Konstantin Korovin. He was torn in search of money, exhausted, looking for a part-time job. An irritated wife and a gloomy son were waiting for him at home, the artist did not find support and understanding from his relatives.
Death
The artist died unexpectedly: he died in September 1939 due to a heart attack on a Parisian street. Matt was 77 years old. They buried Konstantin Korovin in the cemetery of Sainte-Genevieve-des-Bois. Two years before his death, he confessed to a friend that he felt terrible loneliness.
The funeral of Russia's first modernist was like seeing a beggar off his last journey: there were no people willing to give money for a worthy farewell to Korovin.
In 1950, 11 years after the death of his father, Alexei Korovin took his own life.
Artworks
- 1883 - "Portrait of a chorus girl"
- 1888 - "In the boat"
- 1888 - "At the tea table"
- 1890 - "Paris cafe"
- 1894 - "Winter in Lapland"
- 1896 - "Paper Lanterns"
- 1906 - Boulevard des Capucines
- 1913 - "Arctic Ocean"
- 1914 - "Pier in Gurzuf"
- 1914 - "Moskvoretsky Bridge"
- 1915 - "Lilac"
- 1916 - "Bazaar"
- 1917 - "Crimea. Gurzuf
- 1921 - "Portrait of F. I. Chaliapin"
- 1922 - "Still life with a blue vase"
- 1923 - "Roses"
- 1930 - "Winter Landscape"
- 1938 - "Self-portrait"
A wonderful fresco from St. Sophia Cathedral in Novgorod depicting St. Constantine and Helena revived memories of Roman monuments.
Who among the visitors of the Capitoline Museums did not pay attention to the images of Constantine! Moreover, parts of two colossal statues of the emperor are now on display. The remains of a marble statue are located in the courtyard of the Palazzo Conservatori:
Head height: 2 m 60 cm. A hand with a pointing finger has been preserved:
And the emperor's leg:
This acrolithic statue was once located in the huge basilica of Maxentius. The remains of this building on the forums look like this today:
Constantine ruled the empire at the beginning of the 4th century. He lived briefly in Rome. His temporary residences were Trier, Milan, Aquileia, Sirmium, Ness, Thessaloniki. He founded the New Rome - Constantinople, for the decoration of which numerous statues of Rome and Greek cities were used. Constantine was written about by Christian authors and adherents of the traditional cults of the Roman Empire. For the Orthodox, he is a saint. The Western Church was more cautious about his canonization. When we see images of Constantine in his lifetime, his image becomes even more complex. A frozen face, huge eyes - before us is not so much a person as the very embodiment of power and inhuman greatness:
The Christian image of Constantine was left to posterity by Eusebius Pamphilus, Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine. However, he honestly admitted in Chapter 11 of Book 1 that he would only tell about the charitable deeds of Constantine. Because “others, guided by a feeling of favor or hatred, and often instigated simply by the desire to show their learning, pompously and pompously, although completely without need, set out stories about shameful deeds, describe the life of husbands who do not deserve respect, and actions that are useless to improve morals ... »
The book of Eusebius glorifies Basileus, who, on the eve of the decisive battle with Maxentius, had a vision of the Cross, which Constantine made his symbol and defeated. We learn about the participation of Constantine in the life of the church, about the establishment of Christianity in the vastness of the Roman Empire, about the destruction of pagan sanctuaries and his baptism on the verge of death.
In ch. 19 of Book 2 paints a picture of the general prosperity of his subjects: “So now, after the deposition of the wicked people, the rays of the sun no longer illuminated the tyrannical dominion: all parts of the Roman Empire united into one, all the peoples of the East merged with the other half of the state, and the whole was adorned with autocracy, as if by a single head, and everything began to live under the dominion of the monarchy. The luminous radiance of piety to those who previously sat in darkness and the shadow of death brought days of joy, there was no more memory of past disasters; everyone and everywhere glorified the conqueror and agreed to recognize as God only the One who brought him salvation<…>All fear of disasters, which before that had depressed everyone, disappeared, and people, until that time with drooping eyes, now looked at each other with bright eyes and smiles on their faces.<…>They forgot about the past disasters, about all wickedness, and, enjoying the present blessings, expected the future ones.
The remains of the second, bronze, colossus of Constantine are now in the same room where the equestrian statue of Marcus Aurelius is exhibited, which, as you know, was saved only by the fact that in the Middle Ages it was considered the image of Constantine. The height of this head is 1m 70cm:
Continue reading Eusebius. He describes Constantine shortly before his death: “Thirty-two years of his reign have already passed, without several months and days, and the time of his life was twice as long. Despite his age, his body did not know diseases and weaknesses, did not have any ulcers and was stronger than youthful, beautiful in appearance and capable of increased activity, so that he could do gymnastics, ride a horse, walk on foot, participate in battles, erect trophies in honor of the victory over the enemies and to gain the upper hand in the bloodless struggle with opponents. / Book. 4, ch. 53/
And only in ch. 54 the biographer allows himself to mention the “improper”: “He was distinguished by all his excellent qualities, and especially by his philanthropy, which, however, they condemned me, calling it carelessness in relation to the villains, who considered the undemandingness of the basileus to be the reason for their malevolence. And indeed, at the time described, I myself noticed the dominion of two grave vices: the destructive power of insatiable and crafty people who plundered other people's property, and the inexpressible pretense of deceivers who hypocritically joined the Church and falsely bore the name of Christians. Humanity and kindness, sincerity of faith and straightforwardness disposed the basileus to trust people who, apparently, were Christians and, under the guise of pretense, tried to win his true location. Trusting them, he sometimes did wrong. /http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/books/eusebius/vc/index.html/
And here is a description of Constantine from the lips of the pagan Zosimus. It is reproduced in his article by N.N. Rosenthal: “Konstantin in Zosima is, first of all, an ambitious careerist, an invader, a monstrous killer and a traitor. The illegitimate son of Constantius from a woman of ignoble origin, he violently removed the legitimate heirs of his father from power. The corrupt praetorians proclaimed him emperor not for any fundamental reasons, but only "in the expectation of a generous reward." The usurpation of Constantine served as an example for Maxentius, the son of the former western August Maximian Herculius, who in any case could consider himself more worthy of the imperial crown. The Roman Empire was on the verge of bloody internecine wars. In vain appealed to the conscience of the young ambitious old Diocletian, who voluntarily resigned the supreme power after twenty years of valiant government.<…>But nothing could stop the selfish intrigues of Constantine. He managed to destroy Maxentius, using the barbarian Germans as a hired fighting force. After this, Constantine, "acting according to his habits," treacherously attacked the eastern August Licinius, his son-in-law and honest ally, who did not give the slightest reason to break. Taken by surprise, Licinius was defeated and surrendered on the condition that his life be spared. But Konstantin, again “according to his custom,” shamefully broke his oath and ruthlessly killed the captive relative, by the way, along with his young son, his nephew.<…>In addition to his son-in-law Licinius, he also killed his father-in-law Maximian, his wife Fausta, and his eldest son Crispus. After the execution of the latter, says Zosimus, Constantine demanded from the state pagan priests that they cleanse him of the blood he had shed. But the servants of the ancient domestic altars, in horror, declared that there were no expiatory means for such atrocities. However, one Christian bishop who arrived from Spain managed to inspire the emperor with faith in the all-healing and all-cleansing power of the new religion, which allegedly led to the subsequent conversion of Constantine to Christianity. /http://ancientrome.ru/publik/rozent/rozent01.htm/
The establishment of the fundamental principles for Byzantium and Russia of the relationship between church and state is connected with the personality of Constantine. I will refer to the book of A.D. Rudokvas: “The birth of that complex of legal views, which can conditionally be called “Byzantism”, dates back to the reign of the first Christian emperor of the Roman Empire - Constantine the Great (IV century). Their theoretical formulation was first given by a contemporary of Constantine, Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea in his "Biography of Constantine". It was he who outlined the main contours of that system of interaction between the factors of state life in the Christian empire, which later became known as the "symphony". The essence of this concept is likening the earthly empire to the "Kingdom of God". The implementation of Christian principles must be ensured in earthly life by state power - the emperor, together with the church. The Church legitimizes state power, authorizes state coercion, and the state provides the church with its power to protect and implement the norms of church teaching. /http://www.centant.pu.ru/aristeas/monogr/rudokvas/rud010.htm/
In the Vatican Museums there is a porphyry sarcophagus of St. Helena, the mother of Constantine. How strange it looks for a Christian! Roman legionnaires, defeated barbarians... However, there is an assumption that this sarcophagus was created for Constantine: http://www.pravenc.ru/text/189737.html#part_2
Elena was the daughter of an innkeeper. She lived for 80 years. To her we owe the acquisition of Christian shrines in Palestine. As Eusebius writes, “this old woman of extraordinary mind, with the speed of a youth, hurried to the east and, with royal care, surveyed the wondrous land, eastern anarchies, cities and villages, with the aim of making due worship at the feet of the Savior,<…>and left the fruit of her own piety to future posterity.
Reliable images of Elena have not come down to us.
It is very difficult now to realize the scale of the construction activity of that era. But there are several places in Rome where you can touch the 4th century. One of them is in the Vatican. In the middle of the 20th century, secret excavations were carried out under St. Peter's Cathedral. Their goal was to search for the tomb of the Apostle Peter. The 16th-century cathedral was built on the site of a huge basilica built at the behest of Constantine. The results of the excavations are now mothballed. If you take care in advance and book a special tour, you can get into the territory of the Vatican, go down into deep dungeons, learn the amazing history of the temple and see the ancient tombs.
P.S. Images of Helena on coins:
