Art

ART LIFE IN THE PERIOD OF THE SOVIET OCCUPATION

The Soviet authorities saw different objectives of the art life. First, the active art life had to prove that the Soviet society provides for the culture and so could advertise itself abroad. Secondly it was hoped that it would help the local people to calm down and to reconcile to the occupation . The main purpose of those two aims was the existence of art on the whole - and the question - what kind? -that was an off issue. The third aim was directly connected with the essence of art, as the powers wanted to connect it with the favourable educational and propagandistic functions. The relative importance of the aims changed during the occupation and variances might have occured between them, for example: as the active art life was favoured, the will to use art in illustrating the ideas of the party had to be inhibited. Quite often the artists could exploit such kind of variances to enlarge their opportunities to create works independent of the official ideology. This kind of art helped Estonians to preserve their national identity and sometimes acquired the meaning of intellectual opposition. Many artists gained their popularity among the people strictly with their non-communist works. At the same time it could happen that the less art served the third aim of the powers, the better it fulfilled the remaining two.

The general leadership of the art life was executed by the 3rd Secretary of the ECP (Estonian Communist Party), the so-called secretary of ideology. The functionaries of the CC (Central Committee) were subordinated directly to him. At first they belonged to the Department of Propaganda and Agitation, later on, from the 1960ies, to the Department of Culture. Olaf Utt was the long time leader of the latter, instructor of the figurative art was Vilma Roosipõld. At first the directions of the party were followed by the Arts Government of People’s Commissariat, later on by the Ministry of Culture of the Cabinet Council. It was typical of the Soviet power that when the party itself directed all fields of art, they were divided between several governmental establishments - literature as ideologically the most important was subordinated to Committee of Literature; architecture, which was not interpretated as art after the so-called disapproval of exaggerations in 1955, but rather considered the means of constructing buildings , was subordinated to the Committee of Construction. Even in the Central Committe architecture was in the competence of the Department of Industry, not of that of culture. Film was subordinated to the Committee of Cinema. The Ministry of Culture dealt then with theaters, music, figurative and applied arts.

It was taken into consideration that it was impossible to direct artist in the same way as soldiers and workers were, with the exception of, perhaps, the strictest period of Stalinism. The powers understood that for gaining creation, artists had to be given more freedom than the officials. In some respects, elements of the local authorities and self-regulation were applied to scientists as well as artists. At the same time the authorities wanted to have absolute overview of what was going on in the field of art to retain control. Additionally, it was characteristic of the Soviet system that every person should have been listed somewhere. The Union of Artists was organised to fulfill this purpos.

The groups and organizations of artists are also common in the democratic states. They are usually divided into two categories. The first is based on similar creative aims and convictions. This kind of groups are often weakly connected circles of friends but may be more determined in having constitutions, administrations etc. The organizations of the other category appear as trade unions and the bases of belonging there is the field of activities. In democratic societies this kind of organizations don’t make any restrictions in styles or trends to their members but it is a private matter as well as are the ideological and philosophical preferences. In the Republic of Estonia there were several groups of the first category organized by self-initative of the artists.The attempts of establishing the groups of the second type, a state professional association, were made, but those failed partly for artists’ incapability to overcome the different ideological views and interests and partly because of the attempts of the state authorities to intervene in the matter in the late 1930ies, but doing it in a somewhat authoritative and subjective manner ( en passant proceeding from the private taste of the brother of the President V. Päts).

In 1940 the occupational authorities made clever use of the discontent of some artists.The first steps of the Soviet power in organizing the art life, one of the leaders being J. Semper, seemed to meet the expectations of several artists. The Organizing Committee of the ENKL (Union of Artists of the Soviet Estonia) was elected quite democratically (J. Nõmmik - head of the board, E. Viiralt - deputy head, Adamson Eric - secretary etc.). However, it was clear from the beginning that it was not only a professional association but an ideological one - the aim of the established union was to take an active part in the Socialist “construction”, to propagate the Soviet art and to “develop all fields of art on the bases of the socialist realism”. Probably, artists didn’ t at once understand all the dangers covered with such strong expressions in the situation where all the other associations of the artists were dissoluted, essentially prohibited. The artists also might have been lulled of the quite generous financing by the new powers. During the whole half of the century the Soviet authorities used “whips as well as cookies” and during the first year they didn’t use the “whip” yet. Still, they couldn’t establish the ENKL, as the war began sooner.

During the period of the German occupation the artists of Estonia divided into two parts. Most of them had stayed in Estonia, but more than twenty artists left with the Soviet Army, partly voluntarily (afraid of Germans), partly mobilized. The German powers left the artists without supervision and didn’t force them to follow the Nazi ideology which in its form is similar to the socialist realism. Many artists were repressed because of the political accusations. However, the exhibiting was subsidized and the free market of art flourished. The Soviet powers intended and essentially succeeded in exploiting the Estonian artists assembled in Yaroslavl and other places of rear in propagandistic war against Germans. The bases of art was intended to be historical (St. George’s Night exhibition in Moscow, 1943), but mainly it was based on the system of privileges to the artists.

Simultaneously, the unfinished establishing work continued. 25. 04. 1942 the Organizing Bureau of the ENKL and on January 4, 1943 ENKL in Yaroslavl were founded. There were only 14 members who elected Adamson-Eric the Chairman and Aino Bach- Liimand the Secretary. The group of Yaroslavl was also treated ideologically and prepared for sovietizing the art life in reconquered Estonia.

The members of the Yaroslavl group arrived in Estonia just behind the Soviet Army in 1944. It seems that during the first after-war years the most important was to ensure the loyalty of the artists. There was not much talk about the socialist realism and the artists who had stayed in Estonia during the war were complaisantly accepted to be the members of the ENKL. At the same time, it became clear that working as an artist out of the union was rather impossible. For example, the materials were distributed only for the members of the union, also were the state purchases and orders. Soon the freelance creation by the non-member of the union became impossible because of the danger of being called a parasite. Efforts were made to liquidate the free market of art. Limiting the rights of the members of the union of selling their works began. ENKL started to change into a closed guild.

The Soviet system permitted the incomes of the members of the union mainly from the three sources. Firstly, the state purchases and orders. These were delivered through the Government of Arts, later by the Ministry of Culture. The decisions were made by the special council usually presided by the Minister and taken part by the nominated officials (always an official from the Central Commitee) and some invited artists (generally honoured with high titles) having authority in the eyes of the powers. Sometimes contests of sketches were carried out in the case of the orders. Often the council discussed and criticized the sketches and decided the ordering of the complete work and determined the price. The same council bought art at the exhibitions. The second source was the purchases and orders of the Art Fund. The Art Fund was an original, not a state but a co-operative economic organization, belonging to the ENKL. The Co-operative of Artists of the ESSR was founded already in 1940. In 1944 its activities were proceeded by the department of the Republic of Estonia (EVO) of the Art Fund of the USSR and from 1957 by the Art Fund of the ESSR. The main income source of the latter were its workshops of applied and decorative art from which later the plant “ARS” was integrated. Their profit was at the disposal of the board of the ENKL. It formed its own council of art (elected from the members of the ENKL, usually for the period of two years) which also bought and ordered works for the exhibitions. The economical pressure of the named sources incited the artists to exhibit their works. Still, they had a third opportunity of making money. Artists could sell their work to the people, but not themselves, but officially only through the shops (so-called salon) of the Art Fund. The decision to sell was again made by the council of art, elected specially for that purpose and it also determined the prices. Although it was prohibited, artists sold their works directly, for example through acquaintances.

Infrequently, works were also bought by Moscow - the Ministry of Culture and the Art Fund. There the royalties were much bigger than in Estonia. Naturally the orders and purchases of Moscow were distributed between the artists who had good reputation in the eyes of the authorities. Altogether, the soviet system guaranteed the artists with the relatively sufficient income and standard of life, a very high one to some of them. Yet it must be mentioned that if at the beginning of the 1960ies the average income of the members of the ENKL exceeded the payment of most of the workers, notwithstandid this of the collective farmers, then later on, with the growing number of artists and due to the deepening economic crises, the average income of the artists began to fall behind in comparison with many other layers of the society.

In the end of the 1940ies the authorities also began to use the so-called “whip” in addition to the “cookies”. At first the ideological pressure deepened and became more dangerous and concrete. Soon it was followed by direct repressions. In 1949 and 1950 many “cleansings” of the bourgeois nationalists and formalists took place in the ENKL. Those were carried out under the leadership of the members of the Union belonging to the Communist Party, whereby typical to this time the repressors could be the repressitatives soon. Continuing to work was made impossible to many of the artists, many didn’t want to take part in the art life of stalinism themselves. More severely, the powers treated the students of art - many were prisonered or deported.

Until the atmosphere of terrorism prevailed in the society, the self government fixed in the constitution of ENKL was only a fiction, but already at the congress in 1957 it started to become a reality. The one task of the congress was to elect the new board by secret vote and it resulted unexpectedly for the authorities - all the candidates belonging to the Communist Party lost more than a half of the votes and there were no members of the CP in the new board. The election of the board was relatively democratic at the following congresses also. The previous leaders proposed the list of the new ones to which the names might be added by the members of the congress. When the possibility arose that any of the candidates named by the members of the congress might exclude the listed one, the previous board could have saved the situation by proposing to rise the number of the members of the board and so elect everybody who would get more than a half of the votes. That was mostly agreed upon, but it was impossible to elect a candidate who didn’t get the support of the majority. The chairman of the ENKL, the secretaries and the presidium could be elected from the members of the board. Their election was less democratic - the voting was open and as the main feature of the election, the Secretary of the CC of the ECP himself interfered. He proposed the candidate of the chairman who received the affirmative votes of the majority of the board. Few had the courage to abstain from voting and negative votes were rare. (Obviously, always the question was not only in the lack of courage but, as mentioned, all the members of the board were supported by the majority of the ENKL).

The role of the leadership of the ENKL was two-faced. Certainly it was tried and in some ways achieved to bring into life the aims of the CP. On the other hand, the leaders of the ENKL had to try to protect the interests of the artists and art, otherwise they wouldn’t have been elected again. They had to intercommunicate with Moscow, especially with the leaders of the Union of Artists of the USSR which demanded steering a middle course. There were also conservative and liberal forces. In general, they could succsessfully avoid the direct interference into the Estonian art life, but all the new members of the ENKL were appointed in Moscow and with this aim, a critically examined selection of reproductions of the future member had to be sent forward. As in the other fields of life it was tried to procure goods in short supply from the “center”. It seems that Moscow agreed to overlook the autonomy and a relative pluralism on three conditions: the members of the Union of Artists of the ESSR had to avoid exhibiting the most courageous works in Moscow, to communicate abroad without the approval of Moscow and to have any connections with the underground artists of Moscow. The ENKL tried to avoid it all, but many artists had private contacts.