Page 435 [435]
The Psychoanalytical Aspects of the Deconstruction of Images of Socialist Ideals
Lenin at work, where the artist depicts the leader’s bent head, high forehead and
the bridge of his nose crossed by a deep line. Once again, he is talking to some¬
one and smiling. This is an amazingly precise, genuine and lyrical drawing that
reveals, in its full splendour, Andreev’s skill as a graphic artist (Zimenko 1962).
Emphasising the role of the unconscious in the grotesque and in caricature,
it is important to point out that the functioning of the iconic signs in different
historical contexts is an expression of a certain kind of sensitivity. Deconstructions
of ritual meanings of visual semiotic codes reflect the changes of emotional expres¬
siveness. For example, the image of Lenin in the art of the 1930s—1950s had a set
of traditional facial expressions and gestures: his smile with a squint symbolising
kindness and intelligence, and his pose, in which his right hand is raised and the left
is touching his heart symbolising this leader’s sincere call for the fight for the right¬
ful cause of the proletariat. Good examples of such an approach to this image are
the Portrait of Lenin on a Rostrum, painted in 1930 by artist A. Gerasimov (State
Historical Museum, Moscow, Fig. 190) and the aforementioned Leniniana, a se¬
ries of sculptural and graphic portraits of Lenin by N. Andreev. This included
portraits from life executed during the years 1920-1930, nearly 100 sculptural
and 200 graphic works displayed at the State Historical Museum and the State
Tretyakov Gallery in Moscow (Fig. 191).
Cultural figures and politicians of the ‘bourgeois’ West served as embodiments
of images of the Other in communist ideology—they were criticised using
grotesque and caricature. The leading artists of Soviet political caricature were
Kukryniksy, a team made up of Mikhail Kupriyanov (1903-1991), Porfiriy Krylov
(1902-1990) and Nikolai Sokolov (1903-2000) (see also Kozintsev, this volume).
The creative spirit of this trio viewed caricature as a weapon in the struggle against
political enemies. The grotesque images of the political opponents of communism
in the works of Kukryniksy were regulated by the existing ideological conditions.
The collision of two ideologies—the bourgeois and the communist—was portrayed
following the rule of stylistic opposition. The images of the fighters for the rightful
communist cause were idealised, while the images of their political opponents
were depicted grotesquely. The mimicry and gestures of communists symbolised
heroism, courage, wisdom and a belief in the bright ideals of communism.
In contrast, bourgeois images suggested fear, anger and aggression. Their facial
expressions were distorted, proportions were deformed and allegorical comparisons
with animals were used (Goebbels the Monkey, 1944-45) (Fig. 192); the human body
was made to resemble objects and paradoxical details (Political Geography, 1944—
45) (Fig. 193); and mythological characters (Deathly Care, 1944-45) (Fig. 194)
were employed. The ridiculed characters were placed in absurd situations stressing
the meaninglessness of the military and political events and the grotesqueness of
situations (We Shall Mercilessly Defeat and Wipe out the Enemy! 1941) (Fig. 195).
433