TY - JOUR

T1 - Was boris vipper mistaken?

AU - Evsevyev, Mikhail Iurievich

N1 - Copyright: Copyright 2018 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - In 1946, Boris Vipper wrote an article entitled Silvester Schedrin in Italy which was published in the Soviet Art History magazine only in 1975. In this paper he defined a Neapolitan artist Raffaele Carelli (1795–1864) to be Schedrin’s “teacher and inspirator”. We do not know why Vipper thought that Carelli died young in 1815. This wrong fact in the artist’s biography had a strong impact on Vipper’s implications. In the art historian’s opinion Carelli seems to be “a talented predecessor of Schedrin and the forerunner of En plein air in European painting of the 19th century”. In this case, Neapolitan landscapes by Carelli must have been created earlier than similar works of Schedrin, because Russian artist appeared in Naples only in 1819. This fact forced Vipper to decide that Carelli had great influence on Schedrin’s painting style. Nevertheless, the art historian noted artistic superiority of Schedrin’s landscapes in comparison with Carelli’s works. There are no authentic pieces of art by Carelli dated earlier than 1833. That is why it is clear that Carelli worked as an artist in the middle of the 19th century. Therefore, Carelli either could see some works of Schedrin or was a skillful follower of the Neapolitan landscapists’ manner of the 1830s. It is not surprising that details of Carelli’s biography were forgotten; after all, he was a second-rate artist even in comparison with other artists of the Neapolitan landscape school of the 19th century. Probably he realized that fact himself. Carelli was exhibited for the last time in 1835, after that he gave up art and got into teaching and antique-trade.

AB - In 1946, Boris Vipper wrote an article entitled Silvester Schedrin in Italy which was published in the Soviet Art History magazine only in 1975. In this paper he defined a Neapolitan artist Raffaele Carelli (1795–1864) to be Schedrin’s “teacher and inspirator”. We do not know why Vipper thought that Carelli died young in 1815. This wrong fact in the artist’s biography had a strong impact on Vipper’s implications. In the art historian’s opinion Carelli seems to be “a talented predecessor of Schedrin and the forerunner of En plein air in European painting of the 19th century”. In this case, Neapolitan landscapes by Carelli must have been created earlier than similar works of Schedrin, because Russian artist appeared in Naples only in 1819. This fact forced Vipper to decide that Carelli had great influence on Schedrin’s painting style. Nevertheless, the art historian noted artistic superiority of Schedrin’s landscapes in comparison with Carelli’s works. There are no authentic pieces of art by Carelli dated earlier than 1833. That is why it is clear that Carelli worked as an artist in the middle of the 19th century. Therefore, Carelli either could see some works of Schedrin or was a skillful follower of the Neapolitan landscapists’ manner of the 1830s. It is not surprising that details of Carelli’s biography were forgotten; after all, he was a second-rate artist even in comparison with other artists of the Neapolitan landscape school of the 19th century. Probably he realized that fact himself. Carelli was exhibited for the last time in 1835, after that he gave up art and got into teaching and antique-trade.

KW - 19 century

KW - B. R. Vipper

KW - Italian painting

KW - Italy

KW - Landscape painting

KW - R. Carelli

KW - Russia

KW - Russian art

KW - S. F. Shchedrin

KW - “School of Posillipo”

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85030157921&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.18688/aa166-7-60

DO - 10.18688/aa166-7-60

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:85030157921

VL - 6

SP - 561

EP - 568

JO - Актуальные проблемы теории и истории искусства

JF - Актуальные проблемы теории и истории искусства

SN - 2312-2129

ER -