モスクワ・コンセプチュアリズムにおけるキャラクター性について

抄録

This paper discusses the problem of characters in Moscow Conceptualism, a unique school of Soviet underground art in the 1970s and 1980s. With their tendency for narrative, artists called Conceptualists invented an original style of creating a character who plays a role as an imaginary author of works made by Conceptualists. In other words, there were some occasions on which Conceptualists thought of their own works as products of a character whom they themselves worked out. They called this figure of the author “An Artist-Character.” As art-critic Boris Groys pointed out by giving an example of characters made by Conceptualist Ilya Kabakov, this invention had a relationship with the problem of self-image in Moscow Conceptualism. How then has this strategy of the characters been developed in texts and works by Conceptualists?

There were lively discussions about the concept of “An Artist-Character” among Conceptualists. Therefore, the first half of this paper analyzes various descriptions of it. It was found that a range of meanings attached to this figure had been expanded as follows. In the beginning, “An Artist-Character” meant a relatively simple figure of the fictitious author; however, late examples show us a broader and more abstract conception. In the late 80s, Conceptualists such as Kabakov and Andrey Monastyrsky, started to express the function of detachment from themselves by this term. At the same time, a range in application of this effect also expanded; there appeared such new types of characters as “A Viewer-Character” and “A Critic-Character.” This expanded concept of “characterness” does not end within the bounds of the initial position of “An Artist-Character” as an imaginary author.

The second half of the paper seeks to find the expanded function of characters in their activities. Works of the Conceptualists of each generation (Viktor Pivovarov, Monastyrsky and the “Collective Actions” group, Vadim Zakharov) were investigated from the viewpoint of the characters’ theme. What is common to their works is that characters’ images are not standardized by means of reduction, distance, emptiness, and so on. Another aspect of these characters is linked to observation: they can, of course, play a role as outside observers, but the focus is now on the art of being seen and written about, observed and described, which means that the role of characters could be related to the problem of archiving. What matters is that the “Collective Actions” group and Zakharov are known for their archival activity. Zakharov even invented a character called “A Pastor,” which was also the name of a journal he had published from 1992 to 2001. As shown by the figure of the pastor as archivist, the observation of characters has a relationship with documentation in Moscow Conceptualism. In this way, through the figure of characters, the problem of archiving can also be understood as a strategy of images. Therefore, it can be said that the invention of characters in Moscow Conceptualism was the soil for developing the technique of self-description in this community.