DOI Heft:
Rozprawy
DOI Artikel:Bernatowicz, Piotr: Picasso w Polsce zaraz po wojnie
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.28179#0222
220
PIOTR BERNATOWICZ
astating critiąue of abstract and non-figurative art, in order to work and be recognized, the
artists of the Group had to play a complex gamę with the regime. The gamę was of major
importance, sińce - despite all the liberalism of the “gentle revolution” — without the sup-
port and fmancial assistance of the officials almost nothing was possible, in particular the
organization of exhibitions. One of the elements of the artists’ tactic were the essays of
Mieczysław Porębski, an accompanying critic. Picasso turned out to be the keystone of
Porębski’s conception of “augmented realism” which played the role of the group manifesto
and secured its ideological legitimation. Porębski referred to the Spanish artist as one of
the most significant models, both in the artistic and ideological sense, by the same token
accepting to the strategy of the regime, featuring Picasso as an exemplar of engagement.
References to the art of Picasso can be found in many paintings of the Group members,
particularly in the canvases by Tadeusz Kantor with the figures of sitting women. Picasso-
esąue inspirations can be also seen in the works of Maria Jarema, Jonasz Stern, Henryk
Stażewski, Teresa Tyszkiewicz, Alfred Lenica, Bogusław Szwacz and Jerzy Skarżyński.
The status of such references is debatable, yet they cannot be treated just as illustra-
tions of the strategy articulated by Porębski. The artists of the Group continued the tradi-
tion of the pre-war Cracow Group [Grupa Krakowska] which madę a distinction between
political commitment and aesthetics. In their view, the painting was endowed with auto-
nomy which guaranteed the primacy of purely aesthetic values over political propaganda.
Only after World War II, because of the ideological pressure of the regime such a situation
became, as it were, schizophrenic and uncontinuable in the long run. Referring to Picasso,
who functioned as a symbol of modern art but was also accepted by communists, must
have been - in my view - an attempt at overcoming schizophrenia. That strategy was dis-
continued after 1949, when the impact of the regime became much stronger, and the re-
commended models changed both in a geographic and aesthetic sense. In terms of popular-
ity, Soviet socialist reałists succeeded Picasso from Paris.
PIOTR BERNATOWICZ
astating critiąue of abstract and non-figurative art, in order to work and be recognized, the
artists of the Group had to play a complex gamę with the regime. The gamę was of major
importance, sińce - despite all the liberalism of the “gentle revolution” — without the sup-
port and fmancial assistance of the officials almost nothing was possible, in particular the
organization of exhibitions. One of the elements of the artists’ tactic were the essays of
Mieczysław Porębski, an accompanying critic. Picasso turned out to be the keystone of
Porębski’s conception of “augmented realism” which played the role of the group manifesto
and secured its ideological legitimation. Porębski referred to the Spanish artist as one of
the most significant models, both in the artistic and ideological sense, by the same token
accepting to the strategy of the regime, featuring Picasso as an exemplar of engagement.
References to the art of Picasso can be found in many paintings of the Group members,
particularly in the canvases by Tadeusz Kantor with the figures of sitting women. Picasso-
esąue inspirations can be also seen in the works of Maria Jarema, Jonasz Stern, Henryk
Stażewski, Teresa Tyszkiewicz, Alfred Lenica, Bogusław Szwacz and Jerzy Skarżyński.
The status of such references is debatable, yet they cannot be treated just as illustra-
tions of the strategy articulated by Porębski. The artists of the Group continued the tradi-
tion of the pre-war Cracow Group [Grupa Krakowska] which madę a distinction between
political commitment and aesthetics. In their view, the painting was endowed with auto-
nomy which guaranteed the primacy of purely aesthetic values over political propaganda.
Only after World War II, because of the ideological pressure of the regime such a situation
became, as it were, schizophrenic and uncontinuable in the long run. Referring to Picasso,
who functioned as a symbol of modern art but was also accepted by communists, must
have been - in my view - an attempt at overcoming schizophrenia. That strategy was dis-
continued after 1949, when the impact of the regime became much stronger, and the re-
commended models changed both in a geographic and aesthetic sense. In terms of popular-
ity, Soviet socialist reałists succeeded Picasso from Paris.