With the current censorship going on in Ukraine to try and stop the revolution, art has become such an influential way for members of the movement to communicate and move people behind the movement. By either ways of art galleries or social media, the art community has become a driving force in the movement against the government in Euromaidan. Due to this, militants are targeting and trying to stop the spread of their ideologies portrayed through such art exhibits and threatening many of the leaders of the movement.

One such instance occurred on Tuesday, September 23, 2014, when the instructor at a local university in Ukraine was attacked in Kontraktova Square outside of a metro stop by a group of men wearing camouflage uniforms. Vasyl Cherepanyn, PhD of Theory of Art, is a lecturer at the Cultural Studies Department at the National University ”Kyiv-Mohyla Academy” and is the predominant figure behind the art exhibit “The Ukrainian Body” in 2012. He was recently involved in helping organize the international conference “Ukraine: Thinking Together”. All this involvement with the art movement is believed to be the reasoning behind the attack.

“The Ukrainian Body” Art Exhibit

 

 

 

 

With all the censorship in Ukraine, especially porn and nudity, having an art exhibit portraying naked people was bound to stir up a lot of controversy. Many people viewed the exhibit as pornography, and promoting homosexuality, which led to it almost instantly being shut down by the government, though it was allowed to stay open for the press and private viewings, though it received constant protest from military and right wing activist. All of this ultimately led to Cherepanyn to issue a public appeal to the government asking for them to cease their military aggression and to support Ukrainian Democracy.

Obviously all this push by Cherepanyn has brought a lot of attention towards himself from the government and people opposed to the revolutionary movement. However, the attack on Tuesday comes as a total shock to those who back Cherepanyn in the movement. The men who attacked him have not been identified as either government sanctioned militants, or “Ukrainian Neo-Nazis”, though the claims have come through that he was attacked for being a “separatist”. Though no matter the cause, he was clearly targeted for his involvement in revolutionary acts in Ukraine.

With all the censorship inside the Ukraine it is essential that someone, such as Cherepanyn, takes a stand and goes to such extreme lengths to help the movement. Though with attacks like the one on Tuesday, many others fear to take such a stand on these issues, as they do not want to face the same fate as Cherepanyn. It is unlikely that the attackers will be caught or prosecuted for their attacks either. But without anyone willing to risk taking a stand and push revolutionary ideas out into society the revolution will move nowhere.

 

Works Cited

Mostovych, Anna. “University lecturer attacked in Kyiv.” 24 September 2014. Euromaidan Press. 25 September 2014 <http://euromaidanpress.com/2014/09/24/university-lecturer-attacked-in-kyiv/>.

Shekhovtsov, Anton. “Ukrainian intellectual was attacked by paramilitary right-wing thugs in Kyiv.” 24 September 2014. Anton Shekhovtsov’s Blog. 25 September 2014 <http://anton-shekhovtsov.blogspot.com/2014/09/ukrainian-intellectual-was-attacked-by.html>.

 

 

With a changing art scene in post soviet Russia many different artist began trying new forms of art, some of which were accepted, others highly rejected. A separation seemed to be emerging between eastern and western art, along with separate views from each on the art. What one person saw as revolutionary and groundbreaking another saw as trash, disrespectful, and vandalism.

But is this art truly vandalism? Or is it simply someone portraying a view and searching for others reactions. It is “Art for Arts Sake”. It represents something that makes you think outside of the box, what is the artist is trying to say to its viewers? Even though some of this art does not fit what society might classify as art because it is not astatically pleasing, it is still art. For art as defined by Merriam- Webster’s dictionary is something that is created with imagination and skill and that is beautiful or that expresses important ideas or feelings. So even if some say something is vandalism or trash that is nearly an opinion, for it conveys an idea through its expression. And that is exactly what Kulik did with his “Dog”, express an idea through his performance.

His “Dog” was seen in the east, where it was first presented, as “skinhead ideology” and rejected by most who saw it. A new category of art emerged classifying the “Dog” and other artistic acts like it as vandalism since it did not fit into any other art classification. Simply because there was a new radical form of art that wasn’t astatically pleasing or could have a value placed on and sold, it was rejected by the art community. It was as if they had lost track of what art actually was, a way to relay a message through ones ideas.

The “Dog” was a way of Kulik trying to reach out to the community, to get them to open their eyes to what was happening in their society. By living as a dog, Kulik represented how much of lower class Russians lived, how they are falling out of civilization and treated as dogs by the upper class ruling society. However, that’s just my perception of his piece. Art is made to make people think, for someone to present an idea through an image to society, to provide a different way of seeing an idea. So even if apiece is seen by some as an act of vandalism, or rejected by critics and those alike, it is still art, it is doing its purpose, and presenting an idea through imagery in order to get a reaction from its viewers.

 

http://volodymyrkuznetsov.com/cv/#VOLODYMYR%20KUZNETSOV

 

http://volodymyrkuznetsov.com/files/waiting-for-rise-6.jpg