The City of Universal Welfare (; inventory KP-21) is a painting by Russian and Soviet artist Efim Chestnyakov (pseudonym of Yevfimiy Vasilyevich Samuilov). The painting is his largest known pictorial work, which survived in isolated fragments and was reconstructed through the efforts of restorers V. M. Tanaev and S. S. Golushkin. Various researchers of Chestnyakov's work date the canvas somewhere between the end of the 19th and the middle of the 20th century. After the death of the artist, the inhabitants of his native village, Shablovo, took away everything that remained at that time in his house. Fragments of the painting ended up with different people but survived and were subsequently given by the owners to the staff of the . Currently, The City of Universal Welfare is part of its collection and is exhibited in the Romanov Museum of Kostroma at the permanent exhibition My Forgotten, Native... (about the work of Efim Vasilyevich Chestnyakov). The main theme of this multidimensional canvas, according to the director of the Kostroma Museum-Reserve, Victor Ignatiev, is "the unity of all living on earth for the common good". The City of Universal Welfare is evaluated by art historians as one of the most significant works of the artist.
Researchers compared the canvas to "a grand choral action, in which the most ordinary actions, poses, and positions receive almost ritual meaning". In the absence of any particular plot in the painting, it can not only be viewed but also narrated, as Efim Chestnyakov himself did, "each time fantasising in a new way". According to Igor Shavarinsky, a candidate of cultural studies, "the dominant value of his [the artist's] hierarchy was the idea of Universal Welfare — the creation of a man-made paradise on earth, spiritualised by love for one's neighbour".
History
Date and title Efim Chestnyakov did not sign or date his works. The future researcher of Chestnyakov's work and biographer, I. A. Serov, who visited the artist at home after World War II, saw the painting on the wall of the studio. He noted that the colours were then fresh and much brighter than they are at present.
The exact time of the painting is not documented. The catalog of the exhibition of paintings and graphics by Efim Chestnyakov in Riga in 1983 cautiously indicated that the artist's works presented there, including The City of Universal Welfare, were probably painted in the 1910s–1930s. It is generally believed that by the late 1930s, Chestnyakov had stopped painting and focused on literature and working with children. Igor Shavarinsky, kandidat of cultural studies, attributed the origination of the idea for this painting to the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, when the artist lived in St. Petersburg (December 1899–spring 1903). There, he studied at the sculpture museum of the Imperial Academy of Arts, attended the St. Petersburg Drawing School of Princess M. K. Tenisheva for two years, and was influenced by the , with its inherent syncretism and symbolism. Chestnyakov's second stay in the capital, from May 1904 to the fall of 1905, is only documented by his participation in a demonstration and subsequent police supervision. Essayist and writer Vasily Golovanov attributed the "mythological motifs" and "images-symbols" characteristic of the painting to the years 1905–1913, when the artist lived in the village of Shablovo after leaving St. Petersburg and before his third and final trip to the capital. During 1913–1914, Chestnyakov studied in the academic workshop of Dmitry Kardovsky, experienced significant material difficulties, and managed to achieve relative success. For instance, he published a book, The Artist's Art, through the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Svetlana Katkova, a senior researcher in the storage department of the Kostroma Museum-Reserve, suggested that if we consider the images she identified on the canvas —such as churches destroyed or adapted into a penal ostrog or a penal colony— the painting could be dated to a time after the second arrest of the artist's sister Alexandra, in 1948. For instance, Katkova interpreted an ostrog in the painting as a building with a canopy resembling a watchtower, featuring a small window through which people look out, with an exit possible only through a pipe. Other elements she highlighted include a scarecrow holding a "rustling brooms", people in blue, and other imagery supporting this later dating. Katkova also argued that the painting's limited color palette supports a post-1948 date. She attributed this to the cheap paints the artist was forced to use due to financial difficulties, likely diluted with kerosene, which later darkened the colors. Chestnyakov's financial struggles began in 1937, following the first arrest of his sister Alexandra. According to Katkova, the painting reflects the aftermath of the active phase of the anti-church campaign. The temples depicted on the canvas had already been supplemented with household outbuildings and repurposed for domestic functions. In Katkova's opinion, further arguments supporting the idea that the painting was created after World War II include the almost complete absence of adult men and young men among its characters, as well as the themes characteristic of Soviet painting from the 1930s to the 1950s—such as collective farm holidays and mass processions with gifts of nature.
The original title of the painting The City of Universal Welfare is unknown. One theory suggests it might have been titled The Future, or the City of Universal Welfare. According to I. A. Serov, who knew Chestnyakov well, the artist himself referred to the canvas as The World of Sunshine and Happiness. The staff of the Kostroma Museum-Reserve attempted unsuccessfully to find the painting's title in the artist's notes or archival sources. The title The City of Universal Welfare, now widely accepted in art history, was assigned to the painting by Vladimir Makarov, an employee of the Kostroma Museum-Reserve. Svetlana Katkova noted that in the last years of his life, Chestnyakov worked on an unfinished canvas entitled Past - Present - Future, which cannot be identified with any of the artist's surviving works. In her view, the three horizontal tiers visible in The City of Universal Welfare suggest a possible connection to this title.
Provenance
Journalist Larisa Golushkina, author of numerous articles on Chestniakov's biography and work, believed that The City of Universal Welfare, like many other paintings by the artist, was connected to the trinity of his creative process: first, he wrote a fairy tale; then, he illustrated it (or painted a canvas inspired by it); and finally, he staged a performance based on its plot. According to Igor Shavarinsky, the painting could have been used as a backdrop for a performance based on the artist's literary works, such as the fairy tales Shablovskiy Tarantas, or The Tale of the Winged Men. Shavarinsky suggested that during Chestniakov's lifetime, the painting was kept in a space the artist referred to as the "barn". This dwelling, where Chestniakov began living in the 1930s following the exile of one sister and the death of the other, was also called the "shalashka", the "universal collegium", and the Collegium of Sciences and Arts. The artist envisioned it as a place to teach fellow villagers painting, sculpture, music, architecture, engineering, occult sciences, linguistics, astronomy, theater, and film theory. The house consisted of two old log cabins, a bathhouse, and a barn. The canvas was located on the first floor, where the artist hosted theatrical performances for his fellow villagers. Children participated in these performances, molding clay masks and sewing costumes. Chestniakov referred to these performances as "festivals".
After the artist's death in 1961, his niece, Galina Smirnova, appealed to the district department of culture with a proposal to transfer his paintings, sculptures, and manuscripts to the museum for preservation, but her request was denied. At the time, Efim Chestniakov's works were dismissed as primitive pictures of no art historical value, and they were left in his empty house in Shablovo. The paintings and sculptures began to be taken by village children and later by their parents. Some villagers considered Chestniakov a saint and a prophet, believing that his possessions could bring healing from illness.
In the summer of 1968, the staff of the Kostroma Museum-Reserve —chief curator Vladimir Makarov, senior researcher Vera Lebedeva, and artist-restorer Gennady Korff— embarked on a research expedition to the Makaryevsky, Manturovsky, and Kologrivsky districts of the Kostroma region. Their goal was to search for folk art objects, works of Old Russian art, and pieces by amateur craftsmen. By chance, a fellow traveler who had boarded the museum bus mentioned that paintings and clay sculptures had been left behind in the village of Shablovo after the death of a local artist. Art historians were surprised by the high quality of the works they discovered. The creator of the artist's museum and his biographer, Ruslan Obukhov, wrote that Vladimir Makarov went into one of the houses to ask for water. As he crossed the threshold, he stumbled, and his gaze fell on a doormat, under which he recognized an oil painting hidden beneath a layer of dirt. It turned out to be the first fragment of The City of Universal Welfare. Having collected all the fragments and spread them out in a meadow among other paintings, the researchers did not yet realize that these five fragments formed a single composition. Later, it was Makarov who suggested that some paintings might be parts of one large work by the artist.
By the time The City of Universal Welfare was presented to the researchers, the painting had been cut into five parts (Vasily Golovanov mistakenly wrote that it had been cut into seven parts). The date and circumstances of this event remain unknown. D. V. Gromov and A. D. Sokolova openly wrote that The City of Universal Welfare was "torn into shreds-amulets" by the villagers.
Katkova noted that the cuts of the canvas were made on the background and did not get on the figures. Only the artist himself could have done that. She suggested that since he took the paintings to his "festivals", it may have been easier to transport such a large canvas in pieces. If the painting was not intended for festivals, the canvas was thus hidden from "undue attention" and dangerous interpretation for the author.
The painting was in good condition when it came into the hands of the museum staff, and there were no losses even along the edges of the cuts. The restorers only needed to fit the pieces together and duplicate them so that the seams were invisible. Moscow restorers V. Tanaev and S. Golushkin selected these five fragments from the poorly preserved canvases that made up the artist's heritage, suggesting that they had been united by the artist into a single composition. The painting became the first restored work by Efim Chestnyakov.
Preparation and technique
The technique of the painting is oil on canvas. Its dimensions are 198 by 335 cm (or, according to other sources, 195 x 330 cm). It belongs to the collection of the Kostroma State Historical-Architectural and Art Museum-Reserve (inventory number KP-21). It has been presented at numerous exhibitions. In particular, the canvas is mentioned in the catalog of the 1977 exhibition in Moscow in the "Painting" section. Currently, it is on display at the Romanov Museum as part of the permanent exhibition My Forgotten, Native... (the work of Efim Vasilievich Chestnyakov)".