Trys autoportreto veidai

LTStraipsnyje analizuojamas Sovietų Lietuvos (1940-1990) dailininkų autoportretas. Jo raida skirstoma į tris tarpsnius: degradavimo, pakaitalo išradimo ir atsinaujinimo. Kiekvienas interpretuojamas per sąsajas su dailininko socialiniu statusu, profesine savivoka ir santykio su sistema požiūriu. Išskirti autoreprezentacijos tipai analizuojami pasitelkus istorinę perspektyvą ir gretinami su klasikiniais renesanso, akademizmo ir modernizmo epochų dailininko įvaizdžiais. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Autoportretas; Dailininko socialinis statusas; Savivertė; Tapatybė; Autoreprezentacija; Self-portrait; Artist’s status; Self-esteem; Identity; Auto-representation.

ENThe Soviet self-portrait in Lithuania moved through three phases: decay, replacement and renewal. Each phase is interpreted through the connection with the historical narrative of the artist’s status (Renaissance figure, Academic and Modernist) and in relation to social elite and category of reaction in ideological situations (when choices reveal positions). In the totalitarian regime, the genre’s natural development was disturbed. The Soviet system brought not only many orders and better material conditions of living and working, but also a significant risk and control. The status of the artist became paradoxical: in words he had a special mission, but in reality he had no free choice. Controlled from the outside, the self-image had a broken logic, and for two decades artists avoided portraying themselves. However, in the 6th-9th decade of the 20th c. the self-portrait crisis provoked a compensatory mechanism – artists began to depict one another in an idealized way more often. This kind of portraits can be named para-self-portraits. With the weakening of the Soviet regime, when the artists could express dissatisfaction and critique, the self-portrait became popular again. Self-portrayal can be assumed as an indication of the social liberality status. [From the publication]