Этери Окуджава
Давид Какабадзе в театре и кино
_Предисловие к книге «Давид Какабадзе в театре и кино»
Процесс развития изобразительных форм четко прослеживается на протяжении всей истории грузинского театра и кино. Творчество выдающегося грузинского художника Давида Какабадзе (1889-1952) содержит в себе богатейший материал для изучения и определения основных закономерностей, xарактерных черт и особенностей этого процесса.
Автор книги ставит целью определение места и значения творчества Давида Какабадзе в истории грузинского театра и кино на основе изучения обширного фактологического материала, а также анализа оформленных художником спектаклей и фильмов, выявление роли Д.Какабадзе в разработке исходных принципов т.н. конструктивно-живописного стиля в грузинском декорационном искусстве 20-30-х годов ХХ века, анализ специфики изобразительных решении Д.Какабадзе в театре и кино, отразивших эволюцию его идейно-творческих устремлении и художественных принципов.
В книге впервые поднят вопрос о необходимости комплексного изучения универсального наследия Д.Какабадзе _ художника театра и кино, изобретателя стереоскопического киноаппарата, кинодокументалиста и драматурга. Он представлен как один из зачинателей глубоких перемен в декорационном искусстве 20-30-х годов, как художник-новатор, способствующий утверждению на почве грузинского национального искусства лучших достижений мирового театра и кино.
Творчество Д. Какабадзе рассматривается в книге на фоне сложной общественно-политической ситуации 20-40-х годов, как один из красноречивых примеров драматической судьбы художника, эстетические искания которого находились в резком противоречии с требованиями и идейно-художественными установками официальной идеологии.
Автором книги изучены мемуарные и архивные материалы журнальные и газетные статьи, личный архив художника. Значительная часть этих материалов впервые вводятся в научный обиход. Вместе с тем автор отмечает. Что в изучении сценического наследия Д.Какабадзе в грузинском театроведении накоплен определенный опыт. Здесь имеются в виду публикации Н.А.Урушадзе («Давид Какабадзе», Тбилиси,1978., и «Давид Какабадзе в театре»,Тбилиси,1982). Однако до сих пор не существует исследования, в котором сценические поиски Д.Какабадзе рассматривались бы в тесной связи с его многогранным творчеством.
В своем исследовании автор опирался также на труды искусствоведов Г. Алибегашвили, В.Беридзе, Д.Туманишвили, Л.Рчеулишвили, П.Маргвелашвили, К.Кинцурашвили. И.Хеладзе и отдельные статьи опубликованные в сборниках и журналах.
В работе над книгой автору неоценимую помощь оказала госпожа Этери Андроникашвили-Какабадзе _ жена художника, которая всегда с любовью и большой добротой отвечала на интересы автора, за что автор благодарит особо.
Во введении книги дается общий обзор творчества художника. В изучении художественно-эстетической системы спектакля и фильма огромное значение приобретает проблема изобразительной формы, в создании которой активно участвует художник.
Работа художника над спектаклем и фильмом _ сложный творческий процесс. Роль художника театра и кино не ограничивается только оформлением сцены и кадра, художник один из активных участников идейного замысла спектакля или фильма несущий равную с режиссером ответственность за целостность их художественного решения.
Именно в этом смысле может идти речь о Д.Какабадзе, как одном из первых грузинских художников-постановщиков. С его именем связаны существенные преобразования в сценографии и кинодекорационном искусстве Грузии 20-30-х годов.
На протяжении 1928-1951 гг. Д.Какабадзе оформил двадцать шесть театральных постановок. В 20-е годы началась и его деятельность в кино. В 1923 году он изобрел стереоскопический кинопроекционный аппарат. Патенты на изобретение которого были выданы почти всеми ведущими кинематографистами страны Европы и США.
Д. Какабадзе был сценаристом и режиссером документального фильма «Памятники материальной культуры Грузии» (1931). Ему принадлежит создание литературного сценария для художественного фильма о жизни горцев (1950), который был внесен в постановочный план грузинской киностудии, однако съемки фильма из-за кончины художника не состоялись.
В первой главе «истоки» просматриваются главные этапы процесса становления грузинского театрального и кинодекорационного искусства и творчество Д.Какабадзе, обусловившие самобытность его деятельности в театре и кино.
Автор отмечает, что на всех этапах общественного развития, начиная с древнейших времен человек выражал свое отношение к окружающему миру: намного раньше, чем появились первые формы театрального искусства, в древнейших ритуальных обрядах создавались первые элементы синтеза хореографии, музыки и элементов театра. У кинематографа нет столь давней родословной. Он был порожден веком технизации. Следовательно, театральное и киноискусство, рожденные на разных этапах развития общества, в своей эстетической и художественной сущности, со специфическими особенностями каждого из жанров, несут в себе отпечаток известной общности, которая прежде всего определяется их синтетической природой.
Экскурс в историю грузинского театра помог автору более четко обозначить основные закономерности процесса развития театрально-декорационного творчества, обусловленного общим ходом исторического развития. Один из важнейших этапов этого процесса связан с деятельностью К.Марджанишвили и А.Ахметели. Именно в сотворчестве с этими мастерами выявились лучшие грани дарования П.Оцхели, Д.Какабадзе, И.Гамрекели и др.
В грузинском кино, как и в кинематографе вообще, профессия художника возникла вследствие определенного опыта мастеров кисти на театральных подмостках. В период зарождения грузинского кинематографа работа художника носила еще чисто «иллюстративный» характер. Но уже в 20-е годы художник кино становится одним из активных участников творческого процесса.
Велика заслуга Д. Какабадзе в развитии грузинского декорационного искусства. Автор отмечает, что творческие искания художника и в этой области отличались исключительно острым восприятием окружающего мира. Эффект многоплановости объекта, масштабности и рельефности изображения достигается изысканной графикой, чередования освещения, соотношением разных плоскостей в пространстве и, что особенно важно, точным и неожиданным ракурсом видения окружающего мира. Этим во многом объясняется оригинальность декорационного искусства Д.Какабадзе. В то же время автор считает, что полноценное исследование этого аспекта в творчестве Д.Какабадзе невозможно без соответствующих параллелей с его живописными произведениями. Достаточно вспомнить многочисленные картины пейзажей об Имеретии _ родном крае художника _ в них особенно ярко выражены художественные принципы живописца.
Автор анализирует своеобразие творческого почерка Д. Какабадзе. В частности, в работе отмечается, что в пейзажах Д.Какабадзе графичность никогда не была самоцелью. Она следствие особого мировосприятия. Его умения «видеть предмет изображения одновременно как бы с разных «смотровых точек» _ снизу, сверху, со стороны… Чисто декоративный живописный спектр пейзажей Д.Какабадзе словно сопротивляется стремлению художника к многомерным пространственным решением. Но это лишь на первый взгляд, и в этом своеобразие Д.Какабадзе. Он добивается поистине «голографического» эффекта искусным распределением свето-тени, четким рисунком. К примеру, разноосвещенные склоны гор в пейзажах свидетельствуют о стереоскопическом восприятии пространства. Поиски художника в этом направлении увенчались в 20-е годы серьезными достижениями в станковом искусстве и в области стереоскопического кино. Этот период совпадает с творческой командировкой мастера во Францию. Практическая деятельность Д.Какабадзе в этот период подкрепляется глубокими раздумьями о средствах передачи объема предметов, многомерности пространства на плоскости. Особый интерес в этом плане представляют теоретические труды художника _ «Д.Какабадзе 1920-1921-1922-1923-годы», «Искусство и пространство».
Парижский период имеет особое значение в творчестве Д.Какабадзе. Яркая художественная жизнь Франции расширила творческий кругозор художника, обогатила его представления о специфике театрального и киноискусства. С этим периодом связаны его первые опыты в области абстрактной живописи, здесь, в Париже создаются его первые «декоративные композиции».Отражение этих поисков автор находит в сценографии и в кинодекорационных работ художника 20-30-х годов.
Во второй главе книги «Давид Какабадзе и грузинский театр» анализируются основные работы художника в грузинском театре 20-30-40-х годов.
20-е годы _ время бурных перемен, как в жизни грузинского народа, так и, в грузинском искусстве. На страницах журналов «Пролетарское искусство», «Грузинские писатели», «Левизна» ведущие представители литературы публиковали статьи и манифесты, призывающие к радикальным преобразованиям во всех сферах социальной и культурной жизни Грузии. Это было время активного отрицания всего старого _ сложное время породившее новое художественное мышление, выявившее многих одаренных художников.
Автор отмечает, что Давид Какабадзе принес в грузинском искусстве сугубо личного, самобытного, во многом предопределив поиски новых изобразительных решений в грузинском театральном искусстве данного периода.
Встреча с Марджанишвили выявила все многообразие творческих устремлений художника. Их совместная работа имела особое значение как для Д.Какабадзе, так и для театральной труппы.
Первым спектаклем («Гопля, мы живем», 1928) Марджанишвили упрочил свою репутацию режиссера-новатора, и этому во многом способствовала сценография Д.Какабадзе. В спектакле была использована экранная техника, но новизна была не только в этом. В спектакле «Гопля мы живем» элементы кино и радио находились в одном синтезе с театральным искусством.
Известно, что в 20-30-е годы В.Мейерхольд в своих театральных постановках смело применял элементы живописи и кино. Творческие поиски великого режиссера основывались на глубоком ощущении им новой театральной эстетики. В.Мейерхольд был уверен, что «восприятие разных свето-ритмических приемов связано со временем, с умонастроением зрителей в данной исторической ситуации» (см. «Искусство кино», 1978, №4, с. 128) и что кинематограф являлся наисовременнейшей формой в решении сценического пространства. Идея «кинофикации театра» (термин Мейерхольда _ Э.О.) находит свое новое претворение в жизнь в творческом содружестве Марджанишвили-Какабадзе.
Кинокадры озвученные с помощью радио были «провозвестниками» звукового кино. Дерзания Д. Какабадзе полностью соответствовала смелым экспериментам» К. Марджанишвили. С помощью кинематографической динамичности» режиссер и художник добивались особой выразительности сценического действия, усиливали его смысловую значимость, эмоциональное звучание
На основе анализа сценографии спектакля «Гопля мы живем», в также существующей литературы (У. Чхеидзе «Воспоминания и письма», Тбилиси,1966). Д. Антадзе «Дни близкого прошлого», Тбилиси, 1966; Э. Гугушвили «Котэ Марджанишвили», Тбилиси,1972) автор определяет наиболее характерные особенности творчества Д. Какабадзе, отчетливо давшие о себе знать уже на этом раннем этапе его театральной деятельности. Это _ четкая линейность форм, богатая цветовая гамма, почти документальная достоверность в создании «образа времени».
После первой сценической работы Д.Какабадзе стало ясным, что перед ним и другими ведущими художниками грузинской сцены _ И.Гамрекели, В.Сидамон-Эристави, П.Оцхели _ стала задача правдивого отображения на сцене окружающей действительности. Однако, все они по разному осуществляли свои замыслы. Доказательство тому _ вертикальные, масштабные сценические конструкции В.Гамрекели; Утонченные жанровые композиции В.Сидамона-Эристави; Сценография П.Оцхели, сочетающая условность сценических форм с яркой зрелищностью.
В процессе изучения творческой лаборатории Какабадзе-сценографа важным подспорьем для автора книги стали эскизы к спектаклю «Баил» (1929). В цветовой гамме этих эскизов преобладают черный, желтый, горчичный, коричневый цвета, темно-серые тона, которые в своем рабочем варианте закладывают основу для будущей цветовой партитуры декорации. Здесь же аппликации, выполненные серебряной бумагой. По-видимому художник стремился создать иллюзию «игры» солнечного луча, В поисках цветовых и свето-теневых нюансов Д. Какабадзе параллельно уточняет размеры декорации, указывает точный масштаб всей сценической конструкции. Одним словом, проделывает сложную и кропотливую работу.
После удачного сотрудничества с К. Марджанишвили Д. Какабадзе продолжает работу в театре совместно с Д. Антадзе, В.Кушиташвили и другими режиссерами. Главными приметами какабадзевского театрального творчества остаются четкость и цветовая насыщенность рисунка, поиски эффектных освещений, глубинных композиций.
Развивая мысль об эволюционном характере творчества Д.Какабадзе _ театрального художника, автор отмечает тесную связь какабадзевской живописи с композиционным и цветовым решением декорации, в особенности в декорациях постановок национальной драматургии.
В книге особое место уделено теме «Имеретии», как одной из основных тем творчества Д.Какабадзе. В сценографии спектакля «Мачеха Саманишвили» (1937), «Вчерашние» (1939) автор отмечает удачное конструирование места действия в сценическом пространстве. На основе изучения эскизов сценических конструкций, а также зарисовок отдельных персонажей автор стремится по возможности полнее «восстановить» художественный образ спектакля, определить роль и значение работы Д. Какабадзе в сценическом «прочтении» авторского замысла.
В центре внимания автора находятся и те критические отзывы, в которых Д.Какабадзе представлен как «художник-формалист», а также статьи творческих деятелей, которые рискуя своим положением, выступали в защиту художника (М.Чиаурели, Б.Жгенти, Б.Гордезиани).
Исследуя работу Д. Какабадзе в грузинских постановках классического репертуара («Моцарт и Сальери»,1937, «Каменный гость», 1937, «Король лир», 1941), автор отмечает масштабность театрального мышления художника, его стремление к широким обобщениям, к глубокому раскрытию идейной сущности произведения.
Прослеживая творческий путь Д.Какабадзе-сценографа автор приходит к выводу, что сценические поиски художника расширили художественно-эстетические горизонты, грузинского театрального искусства. В частности, сценические композиции Д.Какабадзе, широко использованные им кино-эффекты существенным образом повлияли на дальнейшее развитие грузинского театрально-декорационного искусства, во многом определив его яркую национальную самобытность.
В третьей главе «Давид Какабадзе и кинематограф» автор исследует вклад художника в грузинском кинодекорационное искусство, а также его деятельность как режиссера-документалиста и кинодраматурга, изобретателя в области стeреокино _ съемочной и проекционной новой оптической системы, подразумевающий принцип получения
без очкового видения изображения на экране.
Кинематограф 20-х годов открыл перед художниками перспективу новых творческих поисков. В этот период в кино работают такие талантливые грузинские художники как Д.Шеварднадзе, В.Сидамон-Эристави, Д.Какабадзе, Л.Гудиашвили. Их привлекала не только возможность испытать себя на новом поприще… Решающим стимулом была необычайно активная творческая жизнь грузинской киностудии, объединяющая большое количество по настоящему талантливых людей, главной задачей которых было обновление национального кинематографа.
Д.Какабадзе начал свою работу в кино в сотворчестве с Михаилом Калатозишвили. Их первой совместной работой был документальный фильм «Их царство» («18-28»), созданный в 1928 году. Фильм не сохранился. Остались лишь воспоминания современников большинство которых особо отмечало высокий изобразительный уровень фильма.
После фильма «Их царство» творческое сотрудничество Какабадзе-Калатозишвили еще больше укрепилось в связи с работой над документальной лентой «Джим Шванте» («Соль Сванетии», 1930), посвященной жизни горцев. Анализируя изобразительный строй фильма, автор отмечает, что здесь характерная для Д. Какабадзе графичность нашла свое новое образное воплощение. Композиционное решение кадров близко живописным полотнам художника. В эскизах к «Джим Шванте» Д.Какабадзе уделял особое внимание освещению _ здесь то же распределение свето-тени, что и в «имеретинской» серии художника. используя принципы своей живописи в области кино, Д.Какабадзе не забывает при этом о специфике киноискусства. Какабадзевское освещение, «оживленное» глазом кинообъектива, приобретает характер смыслового подтекста авторского раздумья.
Композиция созданная Д. Какабадзе и творчески развитая М. Калатозишвили. прозвучала в фильме своеобразным «голосом от автора». Художественный стиль Д.Какабадзе оказался родственным стилю режиссера: яркое освещение, подчеркнутая линейность форм, неожиданная смена планов _ все это помогало им передать напряженную экспрессию материала.
Участие Д.Какабадзе в создании фильма «Джим Шванте» нельзя оценить лишь как работу художника-оформителя, вести речь лишь о заслуге художника в создании материальной среды, колорита картины и т.д. Зрительно фильм почти полностью насыщен художественными образами Д.Какабадзе.
После «Джим Шванте» М. Калатозишвили прошел долгую и творчески насыщенную жизнь. Он пережил своего старшего соратника по работе. На многие годы его имя стало синонимом побед советского кино 50-х годов. Слава фильма «Летят журавли» разнеслась по всему миру. Позже изучая и определяя особенности поэтического кино, исследуя его родословную, критики заговорили и о фильме «Джим Шванте». Известный киновед С.И. Фрейлих особо отметил связь между фильмами «Джим Шванте» и «Летят журавли». По
его мнению стоит лишь посмотреть оба эти фильма подряд, как зритель сразу почувствует руку одного и того же мастера. Автор книги развивает мысль С.И.Фрейлиха о влиянии Д.Какабадзе на молодого М.Калатозишвили, считая это обстоятельство важным фактором для определения генезиса творчества М.Калатозишвили.
В творческом содружестве с Ладо Гудиашвили и режиссером Михаилом Чиаурели Д. Какабадзе создает изобразительное решение фильма «Саба» (1929). В книге отмечается роль искусства освещения в общем художественном строе фильма. Работая над освещением Д.Какабадзе, Л. Гудиашвили и оператор А.Поликевич решали важную изобразительную задачу: выявление объемно-пластических форм объекта. Эффект освещения действует в полном согласии с мизансценой, композицией кадра и монтажом. На плоскости киноэкрана, возникают картины, где объемно-пластические формы, глубина пространства, ракурсы освещения даются в движении.
Творческое содружество Д.Какабадзе и М.Чиаурели продолжилось в фильме «Хабарда» («Посторонись»,1931). И здесь Д.Какабадзе работает вместе с Л.Гудиашвили. Михаил Чиаурели, в прошлом ваятель, художник-карикатурист, тонко разбирался в изобразительной специфике фильма. Ему первому в истории грузинского кино принадлежит разработка режиссерского сценария рисования кадрами _ «расскадровка». В книге подчеркивается, что дарование Д.Какабадзе для М.Чиаурели раскрылось более всего в техническом аспекте, в использовании двойной экспозиции, внефокусных съемок, деформированный отражений предмета, в создании фантасмагорического экранного действа.
Особую творческую радость принес художнику фильм «Потерянный рай» (1937) _ первый звуковой фильм в творчестве Д.Какабадзе. Залогом успеха фильма был первоисточник _ проза, классика грузинской литературы Давида Клдиашвили. Режиссер и художник создавали правдивую картину жизни обедневшего имеретинского дворянства. Имеретия со своими конкретно- национальными и бытовыми чертами представляла авторам фильма богатый материал. Каждый эскиз к фильму _ следствие долгих раздумий художника, свидетельство напряженной совместной работы с режиссером.
Изучая особенности какабадзевского творческого видения, его художественного почерка в кино, автор высоко оценивает его работу и как режиссера документалиста в фильме «Памятники материальной культуры Грузии» (1931). К сожалению, фильм не сохранился. О режиссерской работе Д.Какабадзе свидетельствуют несколько ремарок, сделанных на полях сценария. Видимо, фильм был задуман с большим размахом. Судя по фото материалу, свободное владение объективом открывало перед Д.Какабадзе возможности обозрения широкого пространства. Д.Какабадзе лично работал над монтажом. В черновиках определены последовательность чередования планов, длина монтажных кусков, смысловая связь кадров.
В кинематографическом творчестве Д.Какабадзе есть еще один интересный момент _ либретто неосуществленного художественного фильма. В нем Д.Какабадзе рассказывает о жизни горцев. Автор книги стремится выявить уже на литературном поприще, эволюцию интересов Д.Какабадзе, особенности его творческой индивидуальности.
В заключении приводятся основные выводы исследования. Изобразительные решения спектаклей и фильмов с участием Д. Какабадзе рассмотрены в книге в связи с ведущими социально-культурными тенденции времени.
Многогранная творческая индивидуальность Д. Какабадзе, глубина осмысления им совместных форм искусства, яркие и выразительные средства изобразительных решений спектаклей и фильмов _ все это определило значение вклада художника в историю грузинского театрального и киноискусства.
Деятельность Д.Какабадзе в театре и кино во многом способствовала созданию новой поэтики декорационного искусства 20-30-х годов, способствовала образованию новых художественных форм, главной отличительной чертой которых был синтез живописного и конструктивного начал.
Своеобразие творчества Д.Какабадзе во многом определяется его близостью к самобытным корням грузинского национального искусства.
Исследование вклада Д.Какабадзе в развитие грузинского театрального и кинодекорационного искусства во многом дополняет и обогащает наше представление об истинном значении творчества этого художника в общем культурном процессе страны. Детальное изучение деятельности Д. Какабадзе свидетельствует о том, что декорационные решения художника отражали в себе самые передовые новаторские идеи времени. С этой точки зрения творчество Д. Какабадзе является органической частью мировой театральной и кинематографической культуры.
Этери Окуджава _ Профессор университета театра и кино Шота Руставели
Э.Окуджава о творчестве Д.Какабадзе:
1. Давид Какабадзе и кинематограф, «Сабчота хеловнеба»
(«Советское искусство»), 1977, №10.
2. Давид Какабадзе _ искусство и время, Тезисы доклада на научной
сессии Грузинского Гос.театрального института.1980.
3. Давид Какабадзе _ художник «Джим Шванте» и «Баил». Альманах
«Кино». 1988.№4.
4. Давид Какабадзе и творческий мир Михаила Чиаурели, альманах
«Кино». 1990, №3.
четверг, 13 августа 2009 г.
Грузинское кино от Этери Окуджава
David Kakabadze in Theatre and Film
Preface of the book `David Kakabadze in Theatre and Film~
The process of art form development can be traced with ease through an entire history of Georgian theatre and film. The art of famous Georgian artist David Kakabadze (1889-1952) contains rich material for studying and determination of basic characteristics and peculiarities of this process.
The task of the book’s author is to determine the place and importance of David Kakabadze’s art in Georgian theatre and film based on a study of wide non fictional material and analysis of performances and films illustrated by the artist. The task of the author also encompasses determination of Davit Kakabadze’s role in working out the basic principles of constructivist style in Georgian stage design of 20-30’s of twentieth century, analysis of David Kakabadze’s specific artistic solutions in theatre and film that have reflected his artistic inclinations and principles.
The book raises the question of the necessity of complex study of David Kakabadze’s universal heritage for the first time - a heritage of theatre and film designer, inventor of stereoscopic film device, director of film documentaries and playwright. David Kakabadze is depicted as one of the founders of in-depth changes in decorative art of 20-30s, as an artist-innovator, assisting in establishment of the best achievements of world theatre and film on basis of Georgian national art.
The book examines the art of David Kakabadze against the background of harsh socio-political situation of the 30s as one of the best examples of artist’s dramatic destiny, whose esthetical search was in deep conflict with requirements and artistic regulations of the official ideology.
The author of the book has studied memoirs and archive materials, magazine and newspaper articles as well as the personal archive of the artist. The vast part of these materials is being used for scientific study for the first time, although the author remarks about a certain amount of knowledge accumulated in Georgian theatre theory concerning David Kakabadze’s design heritage. With that the author means the publication by N.A. Urushadze (“David Kakabadze, Tbilisi, 1978., and “David Kakabadze in theatre”, Tbilisi, 1982). But still there has never been done a study, which would examine David Kakabadze’s search in stage design with close relation to his multifaceted work.
The author also based the study on works of art historians like G. Alibegashvili, V. Beridze, D. Tumanishvili, L. Rcheulishvili, P. Margvelashvili, K. Kintsurashvili, I. Kheladze and articles published in compilations and magazines.
In the working process over the book the widow of the artist Eteri Andronikashvili assisted the author a great deal, answering the interests of the author with kindness and eagerness every time. The author is especially grateful to her.
In the preface of the book the author gives a general overview of the artist’s work.
In the study of artistic-esthetical system of performance and film the problem of artistic form, which is worked out by the artist acquires special importance. A work of the artist done over a performance or a film is a difficult artistic process. The role of the stage or film designer is not limited to designing a set or a movie shot only. The artist is one of the active participants of the artistic idea behind the performance or a movie carrying the same level of responsibility as the director for the entity of artistic solution.
In this very sense we can talk about David Kakabadze as one of the first Georgian stage designers. His name is linked with in depth reformation of Georgian stage and film design of 20-30s.
From 1928-1951 D. Kakabadze has designed twenty six theatre performances. In the 20s he starts working in film. In 1923 he invented a stereoscopic device for film screenings. The patents for which have been issued to almost every leading film directors of Europe and the United States.
D. Kakabadze was a screen writer and director of the documentary “Monuments of material culture of Georgia” (1931). He is the author of the literary screenplay for a feature film about the life of people living in mountains (1950), which was due for production but was eventually canceled because of the death of the artist.
The first chapter “Origins” examines the main stages of development process of Georgian theatre and film design as well as the art of David Kakabadze and the facts that determined the peculiarities of his work in theatre and film.
The author states, that on every stage of social development, starting from ancient times a human being tried to express his attitude towards an outside world: much earlier then the first forms of theatre design emerged, the first elements of synthesis of choreography, music and theatre were created in ancient rituals. Cinematography is relatively young. It was born from the century of technical progress. Thus cinematography is theatrical in part. Born on various stages of development of the society. In their esthetical and artistic essence, with specific characteristics of each of the genres, carry a trace of certain entity, which is determined first of all by their synthetic nature.
Overview of the history of Georgian theatre helped the author state the basic characteristics of the development process of theatre design, predetermined by the common flow of historic development. One of the most important stages of this process is linked with work of K. Marjanishvili and A. Akhmeteli. In cooperation with these masters the best of P. Otskheli’s, D. Kakabadze’s and I. Gamrekelis talent emerged.
In Georgian film as in film in general, the role of film designer was created out of certain experience of artists working in theatre. In the period when Georgian film was beginning to emerge the work of the artist still carried a purely “illustrating” character. But in the 20s, a film designer already becomes one of the active participants of an artistic process.
Davit Kakabadze has greatly contributed to the development of Georgian stage design. The author states, that artistic search of the artist in this field were characterized by an exceptionally sharp perception of an outside world. The effect of massiveness and roundness of an object is reached by an exclusive graphic, the subsequence of lighting, correlation of various surfaces into space and what is most important an exact and unexpected angle of vision of an outside world. This explains the authenticity of D. Kakabadze’s stage design at large. At the same time the author thinks that the complex research of this aspect in D. Kakabadze’s art would be impossible without the corresponding analogies in his oil paintings. It would be just enough to bring to mind a vast number of landscapes of Imeretia – native place of the artist – artistic principles of the painter are most clearly seen in those paintings.
The author analyses the uniqueness of artistic signature of D. Kakabadze. The work states the fact that in D. Kakabadze’s landscapes graphicness was never an intension. It is caused by specific perception. The artist’s ability “to view an object of expression from different “viewpoints” at the same time – from below, from above and from the side...A purely decorative color spectrum of D. Kakabadze’s landscapes kind of comes in confrontation with the artist’s strive towards multiple space solutions. But this might seem at first glance and this is the peculiarity of D. Kakabadze. He reaches a “holographic” effect by means of masterly distributed light and shade, sharp linear drawing. For instance, variously illuminated slopes of the mountains talk about the stereoscopic perception of space. In the 20s artist’s search in this direction was accompanied by serious achievements in paining and in the field of stereoscopic film. This period coincides with his travel to France. The practical work of David Kakabadze of this period is backed up by deep reflections on means of expressing the dimensionality of an object and depicting space on surface. Here the theoretical works of the artist are of special interest – “D. Kakabadze 1920-1921-1922-1923”. “Art and space”.
The period spent in Paris is of special importance in the art of D. Kakabadze. Active artistic life of France has widened an artistic horizon of the painter, enriched his view on character of theatre and film design. His first tries in the field of abstract art are linked with this time period. Here in Paris he created his first “decorative compositions”. Reflection of these trials the author finds in stage and film design done by the artist in 20 and 30s.
The second chapter of the book “Davit Kakabadze and the Georgian theatre” analyses the main works of the artist in Georgian theatre of 20-30s.
1920s is a time of drastic changes both in the life of Georgian people and Georgian art. In magazines like “Proletarian Art”, “Georgian Writers” and “The leftists” the leading representatives of literature published articles and manifestos calling upon radical changes in all fields of social and cultural life of Georgia. This was the time when everything old was drastically pushed aside – harsh times which ultimately gave birth to new artistic thinking and many talented artists.
The author states, that David Kakabadze brought a deeply personal, authentic tough to Georgian art, which has greatly predetermined search for new artistic solutions in Georgian stage design of that time.
Meeting with Marjanishvili revealed artistic inclinations of the artist in its full variety. Their collaborative work was much meaningful for both D. Kakabadze and actors’ company.
With the first performance (“Hop-la, we live” 1928) Marjanishvili firmly established his reputation of the director-innovator and this was greatly due to the stage design made by D. Kakabadze. The screen technique was used in the performance, but it was not an only innovation. In the performance “Hop-la, we live” film and radio elements were in synthesis with theatrical art.
It is well known, that in 20s and 30s V. Meyerhold boldly used elements of recording and film in his theatrical performances. Artistic search of the great director was based on his deep perception of new theatre esthetics. V. Meyerhold was sure, that “perception of various light-rhythmic techniques in linked with time, with sentiment of the audience in a given historic state” (see: “Film art.“ 1978, #4. p. 128). and that cinematography was the most contemporary form for solution of stage space. The idea of “cinemafication” of theatre (Meyerhold’s term – E. O.) finds its full realization in artistic collaboration of Marjanishvili and Kakabadze.
Film shots dubbed with the help of the radio were the “predecessors” of the sound film. D. Kakabadze’s bold solutions corresponded fully with brave experiments of K. Marjanishvili. With the help of “cinematographic dynamism” the director and stage designer reached a special expressionism of the stage action, enhancing importance of its content and emotional side.
Based on the analysis of the stage design “Hop-la we live”, as well as the existing literature (U. Chkheidze “Memories and Letters”, Tbilisi, 1966..D. Antadze “Days of the Near Past”, Tbilisi, 1966, E. Gugushvili “Kote Marjanishvili”, Tbilisi, 1972) the author determines more or less characteristic peculiarities of D. Kakabadze’s art, which was already revealed on this early stage of his theatre work. These are sharp linear forms, rich color scheme and authenticity in creation by “the image of time”.
After the first theatre work by D. Kakabadze it was clear that in front of him just as in front of other leading artists of Georgian stage – I. Gamrekeli, V. Sidamon-Eristavi, P. Otskheli stood a task of precise reflection of surrounding reality on stage. Although each of them had solutions to this task all of their own. The proof of it can be found in vertical, massive stage construction of V. Gamrekeli; sophisticated genre composition of V. Sidamon-Eristavi; stage design of P. Otskheli which was a combination of conventional stage forms with elements of a vivid spectacle.
In the process of study of artistic laboratory of Kakabadze as a stage designer a great help to the author were sketches for the performance “Bail” (1929) found in personal archive of the artist. The color scheme of these sketches is dominated by black, yellow, brown, deep-gray hues that create a basis for the future color range of the stage design. Here are the paper-maches done in silver paper. Seams like the artist tried to reach an illusion of “the play” of the sun light. Searching for color and nuances of light and shade D. Kakabadze makes sure of the size of the decorations and indicates the exact mass of the whole stage construction. Shortly, he goes through a hard working process.
Developing an idea about the evolutionary character of D. Kakabadze’s art as a stage designer, the author refers to the close link between Kakabadze’s painting and color and compositional solution of stage decorations in particular stage designs of performances of national dramaturgy.
The book largely deals with the theme “Imeretia” as one of the leading themes in the art of D. Kakabadze. In the stage design of the performance “Step mother of Samanishvili” (1937) “From Yesterday” (1939) the author refers to the lucky construction of the place of action on stage. Based on the sketches of stage constructions as well as sketches of certain characters the author strives towards a more precise “restoration” of the artistic image of the performance; determine the role and importance of D. Kakabadze’s work in stage solution of the author’s idea.
The author also focuses greatly on critical remarks that depict Kakabadze as “a formalist painter” as well as articles of artists, who defended the artist at their own risk (M. Chiaureli, B. Jgenti, B.Gordeziani).
After luckily corporation with K. Mardjanishvili D. Kakabadze continued job in the theatre together D. Antadze,V. Kushitashvili and with other directors. Mainly mark for Kakabadze stayed right and coloring light of the picture, looking for effect light, deep compositions.
While researching D. Kakabadze’s work in Georgian stage production of classical program (Mozart and Saliery”, 1937, “The Stone Guest” 1937, “King Lear”, 1941) the author remarks on the vast scope of artist’s thinking, his strive towards wide exaggerations and in depth analysis of the play.
Following artistic path of stage decorator D. Kakabadze the author comes to the conclusion, that the artist’s search in the field of stage design has broadened artistic-esthetical horizons of Georgian theatre art. In particular, the stage compositions of D. Kakabadze and widely used film effects have influenced the future development of Georgian stage design in a major way having greatly determined its vivid national authenticity.
In the third chapter “D. Kakabadze and film” the author examines artist’s contribution in Georgian film as well as his work as a film director of documentaries and a screen writer.
Film of 1920s opened up a perspective of new artistic search for the artists. Such talented Georgian artists as D. Shevardnadze, V. Sidamon-Eristavi, D. Kakabadze, and L. Gudiashvili are working in film of that time. They were not only attracted by the idea of trying themselves out in a new occupation, but the leading motivation for it was an extraordinarily active artistic life of Georgian film studio, which was a unity of a large number of really talented people, main task of who was restoration of national cinematography.
D. Kakabadze started working in film in collaboration with M. Kalatozishvili. Their first collaborative work was a documentary called “Their Kingdom” (“18-28”) shot in 1928. The film does not exist today. There are only memories of the contemporaries left, majority of which remarked about the high quality level of the movie.
After the movie “Their Kingdom” artistic collaboration between Kakabadze and Kalatozishvili was even more firm in connection with the documentary called “Jim Shvante” (“Sault of Svanetia”, 1930) dedicated to the lives of people living in the mountains. While analyzing expressive side of the movie, the author states, that characteristic graphicness of D. Kakabadze found its new imagery realization here. Compositional solutions of the shots are close to the paintings of the artist. In the sketches for “Jim Shvante” D. Kakabadze especially focused on the light – here there is the same distribution of light and shade as in the series called “Imeretia”, when the artists uses the elements of his painting in film. D. Kakabadze does not forget about the peculiarity of film. His way of lighting, which comes to life via the eye of the camera, acquires the character of author’s reflection.
Composition created by D. Kakabadze and artistic development of M. Kalatozishvili was heard in the movie as “voice of the author”. Artistic style of D. Kakabadze appeared to be close to the style of the movie director: sharp lighting, underlined linear character of forms, unexpected shift of the range – all of it helped them both depict the tense expressionism of the material.
Participation of D. Kakabadze in creation of the movie “Jim Shvante” cannot be only evaluated as a work of film designer, who has contributed to creation of material world, color scheme of the movie and etc. The movie is completely loaded with artistic imagery created by D. Kakabadze.
After “Jim Shvante” M. Kalatozishvili lived a long and artistically full life. He came to live longer than his senior artistic collaborator. For many years his name was synonymous with the victories of the Soviet film of the 1950s. The fame of the movie “Storks are flying“spread worldwide. Later studying and determining characteristics of poetical film, researching its origins, the critics started talking about the movie “Jim Shvante”. Famous film scholar S. I. Freilich was the first to indicate the link between “Jim Shvante” and “Storks are flying“. In his opinion, it is enough to view these two movies one after the other and the handwriting of one and the same artist becomes clearly visible. The book’s author develops the idea of S. I. Freilich about D. Kakabadze’s influence on young M. Kalatozishvili, viewing this aspect as an important factor in determining the origins of M. Kalatozishvili’s work.
In collaboration with Lado Gudiashvili and movie director Mikhail Chiaureli D. Kakabadze creates artistic solution for the movie “Saba” (1929). The book remarks on the role of the lighting in the overall built-up of the movie. Upon working on the lighting D. Kakabadze, L. Gudiashvili and director of photography A. Polikevich were solving an important expressionistic task: revelation of dimensionality and volume of objects. The lighting effect works in total agreement with the scene, composition of the shot and editing. On the surface of the movie screen we see the scenes where three dimensional forms, deep space and views of lighting are given in action.
Artistic collaboration between D. Kakabadze and M. Chiaureli continued in the movie called “Khabarda” (“Get away”, 1931). Here D. Kakabadze once again works together with L. Gudiashvili. M. Chiaureli a former sculptor, artistic – caricaturist was quite proficient in the artistic peculiarity of film. He is the first in Georgian film to establish a practice of drawing scene sequences. The book underlines that D. Kakabadze’s talent opened up for M. Chiaureli more in a technical aspect, in usage of a double exposition, out of focus shooting, deformed reflection of an object and in creation of fictional screen action.
The artist was especially delighted with the movie “Paradise Lost” (1937) which was the first sound film for D. Kakabadze. The success of the movie was first of all determined by its literary source – prose, classical work of Georgian literature written by Davit Kldiashvili. The director together with the artist created a true reflection of the life of poor nobility from Imeretia. Imeretia with its national and characteristic peculiarities represented a rich material for the authors of the film. Every sketch for the movie – is a result of long reflections of the artist, a proof of tense collaborative work with the director.
When studying peculiarities of Kakabadze’s artistic vision, his artistic signature in film, the author gives a high evaluation of his work as a director of documentaries in the movie called ”Monuments of Georgia’s material culture (1931). Unfortunately the film does not exist today. Several remarks written on the sides of the screenplay tell us about D. Kakabadze’s work as a director. It seams that the movie was planned to be of vast production. Judging from the photo material, ability to freely operate with camera, gave Kakabadze opportunities to view wider space. D. Kakabadze edited the movie himself. The blueprints determine succession of movie shots, length of editing pieces and link between them.
In cinematographic work of D. Kakabadze there is one interesting moment – libretto of the movie which was never produced. It talks about the life of the people living in the mountains. The author tries to determine the evolution of D. Kakabadze’s interests and peculiarities of his artistic individuality.
At the end the author gives main conclusions of the study. Artistic solutions of performances and films designed by D. Kakabadze are examined in the book in connection with the leading socio-cultural tendencies of the time.
Multifaceted artistic individuality of D. Kakabadze, his way of deeply analyzing common art forms, vivid and expressive means of artistic solutions of performances and films – all of this determined the importance of the artist’s contribution in the history of Georgian film design.
D. Kakabadze’s work in theatre and film greatly assisted to creation of new poetics of decorative arts of 20s and 30s. It helped establish new art forms, the main exceptional character of which was the synthesis of painting and constructive origin.
Authenticity of D. Kakabadze’s work is greatly determined by him being close to indigenous roots of Georgian national art.
Research of D. Kakabadze’s contribution in the development of Georgian theatre and film design adds to and enriches our view on true value of the art of this painter in the common cultural process. A detailed knowledge of this aspect of D. Kakabadze’s work is an organic part of world theatre and film culture.
Eter Okujava ---- Full professor of Shota Rustaveli University of Theatre and Cinema
E. Okudjava on art of D. Kakabadze:
1. David Kakabadze and film. “Soviet Art” (“Soviet Art”), 1977, N10.
2. David Kakabadze – Art and times, thesis of reports on science session
of Georgian State Theatre Institute. 1980.
3. David Kakabadze – artist “Jim Shvante” and “Bail”. Almanac “Film”.
1988. N4.
4. David Kakabadze and artistic world of Mikhail Chiaureli, Almanac
“Film”. 1990. N3.
Preface of the book `David Kakabadze in Theatre and Film~
The process of art form development can be traced with ease through an entire history of Georgian theatre and film. The art of famous Georgian artist David Kakabadze (1889-1952) contains rich material for studying and determination of basic characteristics and peculiarities of this process.
The task of the book’s author is to determine the place and importance of David Kakabadze’s art in Georgian theatre and film based on a study of wide non fictional material and analysis of performances and films illustrated by the artist. The task of the author also encompasses determination of Davit Kakabadze’s role in working out the basic principles of constructivist style in Georgian stage design of 20-30’s of twentieth century, analysis of David Kakabadze’s specific artistic solutions in theatre and film that have reflected his artistic inclinations and principles.
The book raises the question of the necessity of complex study of David Kakabadze’s universal heritage for the first time - a heritage of theatre and film designer, inventor of stereoscopic film device, director of film documentaries and playwright. David Kakabadze is depicted as one of the founders of in-depth changes in decorative art of 20-30s, as an artist-innovator, assisting in establishment of the best achievements of world theatre and film on basis of Georgian national art.
The book examines the art of David Kakabadze against the background of harsh socio-political situation of the 30s as one of the best examples of artist’s dramatic destiny, whose esthetical search was in deep conflict with requirements and artistic regulations of the official ideology.
The author of the book has studied memoirs and archive materials, magazine and newspaper articles as well as the personal archive of the artist. The vast part of these materials is being used for scientific study for the first time, although the author remarks about a certain amount of knowledge accumulated in Georgian theatre theory concerning David Kakabadze’s design heritage. With that the author means the publication by N.A. Urushadze (“David Kakabadze, Tbilisi, 1978., and “David Kakabadze in theatre”, Tbilisi, 1982). But still there has never been done a study, which would examine David Kakabadze’s search in stage design with close relation to his multifaceted work.
The author also based the study on works of art historians like G. Alibegashvili, V. Beridze, D. Tumanishvili, L. Rcheulishvili, P. Margvelashvili, K. Kintsurashvili, I. Kheladze and articles published in compilations and magazines.
In the working process over the book the widow of the artist Eteri Andronikashvili assisted the author a great deal, answering the interests of the author with kindness and eagerness every time. The author is especially grateful to her.
In the preface of the book the author gives a general overview of the artist’s work.
In the study of artistic-esthetical system of performance and film the problem of artistic form, which is worked out by the artist acquires special importance. A work of the artist done over a performance or a film is a difficult artistic process. The role of the stage or film designer is not limited to designing a set or a movie shot only. The artist is one of the active participants of the artistic idea behind the performance or a movie carrying the same level of responsibility as the director for the entity of artistic solution.
In this very sense we can talk about David Kakabadze as one of the first Georgian stage designers. His name is linked with in depth reformation of Georgian stage and film design of 20-30s.
From 1928-1951 D. Kakabadze has designed twenty six theatre performances. In the 20s he starts working in film. In 1923 he invented a stereoscopic device for film screenings. The patents for which have been issued to almost every leading film directors of Europe and the United States.
D. Kakabadze was a screen writer and director of the documentary “Monuments of material culture of Georgia” (1931). He is the author of the literary screenplay for a feature film about the life of people living in mountains (1950), which was due for production but was eventually canceled because of the death of the artist.
The first chapter “Origins” examines the main stages of development process of Georgian theatre and film design as well as the art of David Kakabadze and the facts that determined the peculiarities of his work in theatre and film.
The author states, that on every stage of social development, starting from ancient times a human being tried to express his attitude towards an outside world: much earlier then the first forms of theatre design emerged, the first elements of synthesis of choreography, music and theatre were created in ancient rituals. Cinematography is relatively young. It was born from the century of technical progress. Thus cinematography is theatrical in part. Born on various stages of development of the society. In their esthetical and artistic essence, with specific characteristics of each of the genres, carry a trace of certain entity, which is determined first of all by their synthetic nature.
Overview of the history of Georgian theatre helped the author state the basic characteristics of the development process of theatre design, predetermined by the common flow of historic development. One of the most important stages of this process is linked with work of K. Marjanishvili and A. Akhmeteli. In cooperation with these masters the best of P. Otskheli’s, D. Kakabadze’s and I. Gamrekelis talent emerged.
In Georgian film as in film in general, the role of film designer was created out of certain experience of artists working in theatre. In the period when Georgian film was beginning to emerge the work of the artist still carried a purely “illustrating” character. But in the 20s, a film designer already becomes one of the active participants of an artistic process.
Davit Kakabadze has greatly contributed to the development of Georgian stage design. The author states, that artistic search of the artist in this field were characterized by an exceptionally sharp perception of an outside world. The effect of massiveness and roundness of an object is reached by an exclusive graphic, the subsequence of lighting, correlation of various surfaces into space and what is most important an exact and unexpected angle of vision of an outside world. This explains the authenticity of D. Kakabadze’s stage design at large. At the same time the author thinks that the complex research of this aspect in D. Kakabadze’s art would be impossible without the corresponding analogies in his oil paintings. It would be just enough to bring to mind a vast number of landscapes of Imeretia – native place of the artist – artistic principles of the painter are most clearly seen in those paintings.
The author analyses the uniqueness of artistic signature of D. Kakabadze. The work states the fact that in D. Kakabadze’s landscapes graphicness was never an intension. It is caused by specific perception. The artist’s ability “to view an object of expression from different “viewpoints” at the same time – from below, from above and from the side...A purely decorative color spectrum of D. Kakabadze’s landscapes kind of comes in confrontation with the artist’s strive towards multiple space solutions. But this might seem at first glance and this is the peculiarity of D. Kakabadze. He reaches a “holographic” effect by means of masterly distributed light and shade, sharp linear drawing. For instance, variously illuminated slopes of the mountains talk about the stereoscopic perception of space. In the 20s artist’s search in this direction was accompanied by serious achievements in paining and in the field of stereoscopic film. This period coincides with his travel to France. The practical work of David Kakabadze of this period is backed up by deep reflections on means of expressing the dimensionality of an object and depicting space on surface. Here the theoretical works of the artist are of special interest – “D. Kakabadze 1920-1921-1922-1923”. “Art and space”.
The period spent in Paris is of special importance in the art of D. Kakabadze. Active artistic life of France has widened an artistic horizon of the painter, enriched his view on character of theatre and film design. His first tries in the field of abstract art are linked with this time period. Here in Paris he created his first “decorative compositions”. Reflection of these trials the author finds in stage and film design done by the artist in 20 and 30s.
The second chapter of the book “Davit Kakabadze and the Georgian theatre” analyses the main works of the artist in Georgian theatre of 20-30s.
1920s is a time of drastic changes both in the life of Georgian people and Georgian art. In magazines like “Proletarian Art”, “Georgian Writers” and “The leftists” the leading representatives of literature published articles and manifestos calling upon radical changes in all fields of social and cultural life of Georgia. This was the time when everything old was drastically pushed aside – harsh times which ultimately gave birth to new artistic thinking and many talented artists.
The author states, that David Kakabadze brought a deeply personal, authentic tough to Georgian art, which has greatly predetermined search for new artistic solutions in Georgian stage design of that time.
Meeting with Marjanishvili revealed artistic inclinations of the artist in its full variety. Their collaborative work was much meaningful for both D. Kakabadze and actors’ company.
With the first performance (“Hop-la, we live” 1928) Marjanishvili firmly established his reputation of the director-innovator and this was greatly due to the stage design made by D. Kakabadze. The screen technique was used in the performance, but it was not an only innovation. In the performance “Hop-la, we live” film and radio elements were in synthesis with theatrical art.
It is well known, that in 20s and 30s V. Meyerhold boldly used elements of recording and film in his theatrical performances. Artistic search of the great director was based on his deep perception of new theatre esthetics. V. Meyerhold was sure, that “perception of various light-rhythmic techniques in linked with time, with sentiment of the audience in a given historic state” (see: “Film art.“ 1978, #4. p. 128). and that cinematography was the most contemporary form for solution of stage space. The idea of “cinemafication” of theatre (Meyerhold’s term – E. O.) finds its full realization in artistic collaboration of Marjanishvili and Kakabadze.
Film shots dubbed with the help of the radio were the “predecessors” of the sound film. D. Kakabadze’s bold solutions corresponded fully with brave experiments of K. Marjanishvili. With the help of “cinematographic dynamism” the director and stage designer reached a special expressionism of the stage action, enhancing importance of its content and emotional side.
Based on the analysis of the stage design “Hop-la we live”, as well as the existing literature (U. Chkheidze “Memories and Letters”, Tbilisi, 1966..D. Antadze “Days of the Near Past”, Tbilisi, 1966, E. Gugushvili “Kote Marjanishvili”, Tbilisi, 1972) the author determines more or less characteristic peculiarities of D. Kakabadze’s art, which was already revealed on this early stage of his theatre work. These are sharp linear forms, rich color scheme and authenticity in creation by “the image of time”.
After the first theatre work by D. Kakabadze it was clear that in front of him just as in front of other leading artists of Georgian stage – I. Gamrekeli, V. Sidamon-Eristavi, P. Otskheli stood a task of precise reflection of surrounding reality on stage. Although each of them had solutions to this task all of their own. The proof of it can be found in vertical, massive stage construction of V. Gamrekeli; sophisticated genre composition of V. Sidamon-Eristavi; stage design of P. Otskheli which was a combination of conventional stage forms with elements of a vivid spectacle.
In the process of study of artistic laboratory of Kakabadze as a stage designer a great help to the author were sketches for the performance “Bail” (1929) found in personal archive of the artist. The color scheme of these sketches is dominated by black, yellow, brown, deep-gray hues that create a basis for the future color range of the stage design. Here are the paper-maches done in silver paper. Seams like the artist tried to reach an illusion of “the play” of the sun light. Searching for color and nuances of light and shade D. Kakabadze makes sure of the size of the decorations and indicates the exact mass of the whole stage construction. Shortly, he goes through a hard working process.
Developing an idea about the evolutionary character of D. Kakabadze’s art as a stage designer, the author refers to the close link between Kakabadze’s painting and color and compositional solution of stage decorations in particular stage designs of performances of national dramaturgy.
The book largely deals with the theme “Imeretia” as one of the leading themes in the art of D. Kakabadze. In the stage design of the performance “Step mother of Samanishvili” (1937) “From Yesterday” (1939) the author refers to the lucky construction of the place of action on stage. Based on the sketches of stage constructions as well as sketches of certain characters the author strives towards a more precise “restoration” of the artistic image of the performance; determine the role and importance of D. Kakabadze’s work in stage solution of the author’s idea.
The author also focuses greatly on critical remarks that depict Kakabadze as “a formalist painter” as well as articles of artists, who defended the artist at their own risk (M. Chiaureli, B. Jgenti, B.Gordeziani).
After luckily corporation with K. Mardjanishvili D. Kakabadze continued job in the theatre together D. Antadze,V. Kushitashvili and with other directors. Mainly mark for Kakabadze stayed right and coloring light of the picture, looking for effect light, deep compositions.
While researching D. Kakabadze’s work in Georgian stage production of classical program (Mozart and Saliery”, 1937, “The Stone Guest” 1937, “King Lear”, 1941) the author remarks on the vast scope of artist’s thinking, his strive towards wide exaggerations and in depth analysis of the play.
Following artistic path of stage decorator D. Kakabadze the author comes to the conclusion, that the artist’s search in the field of stage design has broadened artistic-esthetical horizons of Georgian theatre art. In particular, the stage compositions of D. Kakabadze and widely used film effects have influenced the future development of Georgian stage design in a major way having greatly determined its vivid national authenticity.
In the third chapter “D. Kakabadze and film” the author examines artist’s contribution in Georgian film as well as his work as a film director of documentaries and a screen writer.
Film of 1920s opened up a perspective of new artistic search for the artists. Such talented Georgian artists as D. Shevardnadze, V. Sidamon-Eristavi, D. Kakabadze, and L. Gudiashvili are working in film of that time. They were not only attracted by the idea of trying themselves out in a new occupation, but the leading motivation for it was an extraordinarily active artistic life of Georgian film studio, which was a unity of a large number of really talented people, main task of who was restoration of national cinematography.
D. Kakabadze started working in film in collaboration with M. Kalatozishvili. Their first collaborative work was a documentary called “Their Kingdom” (“18-28”) shot in 1928. The film does not exist today. There are only memories of the contemporaries left, majority of which remarked about the high quality level of the movie.
After the movie “Their Kingdom” artistic collaboration between Kakabadze and Kalatozishvili was even more firm in connection with the documentary called “Jim Shvante” (“Sault of Svanetia”, 1930) dedicated to the lives of people living in the mountains. While analyzing expressive side of the movie, the author states, that characteristic graphicness of D. Kakabadze found its new imagery realization here. Compositional solutions of the shots are close to the paintings of the artist. In the sketches for “Jim Shvante” D. Kakabadze especially focused on the light – here there is the same distribution of light and shade as in the series called “Imeretia”, when the artists uses the elements of his painting in film. D. Kakabadze does not forget about the peculiarity of film. His way of lighting, which comes to life via the eye of the camera, acquires the character of author’s reflection.
Composition created by D. Kakabadze and artistic development of M. Kalatozishvili was heard in the movie as “voice of the author”. Artistic style of D. Kakabadze appeared to be close to the style of the movie director: sharp lighting, underlined linear character of forms, unexpected shift of the range – all of it helped them both depict the tense expressionism of the material.
Participation of D. Kakabadze in creation of the movie “Jim Shvante” cannot be only evaluated as a work of film designer, who has contributed to creation of material world, color scheme of the movie and etc. The movie is completely loaded with artistic imagery created by D. Kakabadze.
After “Jim Shvante” M. Kalatozishvili lived a long and artistically full life. He came to live longer than his senior artistic collaborator. For many years his name was synonymous with the victories of the Soviet film of the 1950s. The fame of the movie “Storks are flying“spread worldwide. Later studying and determining characteristics of poetical film, researching its origins, the critics started talking about the movie “Jim Shvante”. Famous film scholar S. I. Freilich was the first to indicate the link between “Jim Shvante” and “Storks are flying“. In his opinion, it is enough to view these two movies one after the other and the handwriting of one and the same artist becomes clearly visible. The book’s author develops the idea of S. I. Freilich about D. Kakabadze’s influence on young M. Kalatozishvili, viewing this aspect as an important factor in determining the origins of M. Kalatozishvili’s work.
In collaboration with Lado Gudiashvili and movie director Mikhail Chiaureli D. Kakabadze creates artistic solution for the movie “Saba” (1929). The book remarks on the role of the lighting in the overall built-up of the movie. Upon working on the lighting D. Kakabadze, L. Gudiashvili and director of photography A. Polikevich were solving an important expressionistic task: revelation of dimensionality and volume of objects. The lighting effect works in total agreement with the scene, composition of the shot and editing. On the surface of the movie screen we see the scenes where three dimensional forms, deep space and views of lighting are given in action.
Artistic collaboration between D. Kakabadze and M. Chiaureli continued in the movie called “Khabarda” (“Get away”, 1931). Here D. Kakabadze once again works together with L. Gudiashvili. M. Chiaureli a former sculptor, artistic – caricaturist was quite proficient in the artistic peculiarity of film. He is the first in Georgian film to establish a practice of drawing scene sequences. The book underlines that D. Kakabadze’s talent opened up for M. Chiaureli more in a technical aspect, in usage of a double exposition, out of focus shooting, deformed reflection of an object and in creation of fictional screen action.
The artist was especially delighted with the movie “Paradise Lost” (1937) which was the first sound film for D. Kakabadze. The success of the movie was first of all determined by its literary source – prose, classical work of Georgian literature written by Davit Kldiashvili. The director together with the artist created a true reflection of the life of poor nobility from Imeretia. Imeretia with its national and characteristic peculiarities represented a rich material for the authors of the film. Every sketch for the movie – is a result of long reflections of the artist, a proof of tense collaborative work with the director.
When studying peculiarities of Kakabadze’s artistic vision, his artistic signature in film, the author gives a high evaluation of his work as a director of documentaries in the movie called ”Monuments of Georgia’s material culture (1931). Unfortunately the film does not exist today. Several remarks written on the sides of the screenplay tell us about D. Kakabadze’s work as a director. It seams that the movie was planned to be of vast production. Judging from the photo material, ability to freely operate with camera, gave Kakabadze opportunities to view wider space. D. Kakabadze edited the movie himself. The blueprints determine succession of movie shots, length of editing pieces and link between them.
In cinematographic work of D. Kakabadze there is one interesting moment – libretto of the movie which was never produced. It talks about the life of the people living in the mountains. The author tries to determine the evolution of D. Kakabadze’s interests and peculiarities of his artistic individuality.
At the end the author gives main conclusions of the study. Artistic solutions of performances and films designed by D. Kakabadze are examined in the book in connection with the leading socio-cultural tendencies of the time.
Multifaceted artistic individuality of D. Kakabadze, his way of deeply analyzing common art forms, vivid and expressive means of artistic solutions of performances and films – all of this determined the importance of the artist’s contribution in the history of Georgian film design.
D. Kakabadze’s work in theatre and film greatly assisted to creation of new poetics of decorative arts of 20s and 30s. It helped establish new art forms, the main exceptional character of which was the synthesis of painting and constructive origin.
Authenticity of D. Kakabadze’s work is greatly determined by him being close to indigenous roots of Georgian national art.
Research of D. Kakabadze’s contribution in the development of Georgian theatre and film design adds to and enriches our view on true value of the art of this painter in the common cultural process. A detailed knowledge of this aspect of D. Kakabadze’s work is an organic part of world theatre and film culture.
Eter Okujava ---- Full professor of Shota Rustaveli University of Theatre and Cinema
E. Okudjava on art of D. Kakabadze:
1. David Kakabadze and film. “Soviet Art” (“Soviet Art”), 1977, N10.
2. David Kakabadze – Art and times, thesis of reports on science session
of Georgian State Theatre Institute. 1980.
3. David Kakabadze – artist “Jim Shvante” and “Bail”. Almanac “Film”.
1988. N4.
4. David Kakabadze and artistic world of Mikhail Chiaureli, Almanac
“Film”. 1990. N3.
Подписаться на:
Сообщения (Atom)