[ad_1]
Dimensions, appearance, symbolism, artistic and non-artistic influences – there are open questions about everything, and even the classification of the public’s work.
Is the problem big? Or what is too big? Will it beautify or harm Belgrade? Did you fight between the first and second Serbia? And the two best Serbian directors? The problem is that Russia is in the Serbian capital? And why did sculptors, historians, architects and politicians comment on the monument to Stefan Nemanja?
Thus, President Aleksandar Vučić noted that critics of the “monument to the father of the Serbian state are upset by the size of Stefan Nemanja, but not by the size of Pobednik.”
Director Goran Markovic believes that the train station, which was an ugly place, “will look even uglier, like a place where a suspicious statue will look at small people from a great height who will feel like ants.”
For the academic Svetomir Arsić Basara, a sculptor and one of the members of the jury who chose the solution of the monument, critics do not understand the sculpture “and that if someone sees a lot of iron in it, it is because they do not see the sculpture.”
Historian Danilo Sharenac believes that the monument conveys the message “not about statehood, but about the cult of the rulers, not in principle about Nemanja but for any ruler”, and that the megalomaniac dimensions say “that the citizens of Serbia they must worship a ruler and that statehood is elsewhere. “
Katarina Maksimov, president of the Association of Conservatives of Serbia, says it is problematic how the height of the monument “will affect and put in the background the train station, which was declared a cultural monument of great importance in the 1980s.”
Sima Avramović, a professor at the Faculty of Law, another member of the jury, believes that today there are two objections, whether a monument to Stefan Nemanja should be erected and why now.
Avramović quotes critics: “That Nemanja is a bloodthirsty and a villain, that he was not in Belgrade, that he is a tombstone of modern Serbia, a pharaonic monument in preparation for a monument to the future chief …”, he lists ironically .
How it all started
The international competition for the construction of the monument was announced in 2017. Of some thirty solutions received, six were shortlisted. A year later, the Russian sculptor Alexander Rukavishnikov won.
The decision was made by a nine-member jury consisting of: Nikola Selaković, advisor to the President of the Republic of Serbia, Academician Svetomir Arsić Basara, sculptor, Emir Kusturica, Director, prof. Miodrag Zivkovic, sculptor, academic Vladimir Velickovic, painter, Nebojsa Djuranovic, painter, prof. Dr. Sima Avramović, Dean of the Faculty of Law of the University of Belgrade, Milutin Folić, architect, chief urban planner, Goran Vesić, city manager of the city of Belgrade.
It was known that a lot would be said about the monument as soon as the contest was announced, and confirmation came in 2018, when the late professor Miodrag Zivkovic, a famous Serbian sculptor, resigned from the jury because he considered the winning work inappropriate, and the decision was made under political pressure.
In an open letter to the chairman of the jury, Nikola Selaković, he wrote:
“At your insistence, Mr. President of the Jury, by vote, the first prize was awarded to the work under the code 02500, by a Russian author and associates. The representatives of the profession in the jury were defeated by 5: 4 … “
Academician Basara says today that the vote was democratic.
“The vote was democratic and everyone acted as they saw fit. No one held back or suggested anything else.”
Most often controversies
The fiercest controversy, however, began recently when the monument began to reach Sava Square in parts and after it was announced that it would be 23 meters high.
For the Society of Conservatives of Serbia, neither the idea of the monument nor the arrangement of Sava Square is wrong. However, they believe that not enough thought has been given to the whole idea, and that size is important because of the space in which the monument will be located.
Katarina Maksimov says that conservatives were involved in creating the conditions for how to erect the monument when the concept and idea were given.
“At that time, colleagues carefully wrote the conditions and assumed that it should be no larger than the train station, the most valuable building in that area, whose highest peak is 18 meters, and predicted that it should be no higher. “says Maksimov.
For the academic Basara, neither the dimensions nor the location are debatable. He is surprised that conservatives are protesting because, he says, they do not know the sculpture.
“It will look perfect next to each other, they will complement each other as two sizes, a building and a monument. As the size of the monument can be in danger, one sees the monument and the building separately,” emphasizes Basara.
For the Society of Conservatives, the decision that the old train station building loses its basic traffic purpose is also wrong.
The plan of the city of Belgrade was to house the Museum of Medieval Serbia, but there were not enough artifacts. Now the idea is to move the Nikola Tesla Museum from the Krunska Street building, which could be returned to the pre-war owners.
Katarina Maksimov says that today we do not know how the future purpose of the station will affect its preservation.
“We do not know how its future purpose will affect the use of that square and if we will put the history of the state of Serbia, which introduced rail traffic at the end of the 19th century and thus ordered economically and socially, in the background with this monument.” Maximov points out.
Sima Avramović explains that the Nikola Tesla Museum needs space.
“It has full tanks, and a building of 300 square meters. And it is the most visited. And when you have room in such a building, it will assert itself and you will enter. This monument is so skinny, sorry for the quote, that nothing will disturb the impression of buildings, “says Avramović.
Historian Danilo Sharenac believes that Stefan Nemanja played an important role in Serbian statehood, but that the Middle Ages should be separated from modern times.
“These colossal dimensions give an inappropriate measure to the Serbian Middle Ages and its role for the Serbian state. We have here an almost romantic conception of the Middle Ages by the ruling political elite and which has been outgrown. It belongs more to the 19th century than to the modern monument “.
According to Sima Avramović, Rukavišnjikov constantly said that he wanted Slavija to see the monument, as the Victor of Branko’s Bridge.
“It represents a spiritual ascent to the temple of Saint Sava, the vertical from the ruler to the saint. He tried to show Nemanja as a Serbian ruler and I give him credit for how much he studied the frescoes, he didn’t see the one in his old age, he wanted to show it when it was in full force, when it symbolizes the ruler, “says Avramović.
Symbolism and author
The next point of discussion is the symbols that will be found on the monument. In the first solution, Stefan Nemanja was holding a scepter in his hand with a cross on top, which was under fire from critics because the cross resembled the so-called Russian Cross, which according to experts from the Middle Ages is not in the spirit of Serbian tradition.
However, in more recent details, which we saw in the recordings in late August SputnikWhen visiting the sculptor’s studio, Nemanja holds a sword in her hand as a symbol of statehood.
A part of the pedestal now grows into the square, which some cynically called an egg or an acorn. The pedestal itself is the largest part of the sculpture, which should display most of the symbols related to Nemanja and his descendants.
“The scepter of Saint Sava emerges from the ground, the only safe artifact that Sava had in his hands. It is not an egg, as they call it in cartoon, it represents the birth of spirituality and the Serbian state. The idea is that the Byzantine empire it was cracked in the time of Nemanja, or a shield resting on four points creates an umbrella-space under the monument that was formed in relief to tell the history of Serbia ”, explains Sima Avramović.
Questions were also asked about the author himself, Alexander Rukavishnikov. Information has emerged that a monument to John Lennon was allegedly built in New York.
That is not true, but it is true that he cast John Lennon in bronze, as an artistic sculpture, for which he received a silver medal from the French Academy of Arts in 1984.
Rukavishnikov is undoubtedly a household name in Russia.
Some say that he is the greatest living Russian sculptor, others that he is quite a controversial artist. For example, they don’t like their Dostoevsky monument.
“Okay, a Russian author was chosen,” says Katarina Maksimov, “but we are satisfied with the symbolism of a man from another region, a country. In Russia, they represent characters and space differently. Are we satisfied with how he presented the history of the Middle Ages? ” Serbia?
“It seems to me that we are not and that this attempt to show the size of the person with the size of the monument is professionally out of date and completely out of context,” says Maksimov.
Svetomir Arsić Basara, on the other hand, believes that “no monument contains so much content about a name that is being erected.”
“There are accompanying elements, Studenica and Zica, everything Nemanja created. He does not need a monument, we do it with debts according to his name and merit. He erected a monument to himself,” added Basara.
How the monument controversy arose
Recently, two great Serbian film directors, Goran Markovic and Emir Kusturica, entered the controversy.
In the text titled “Letter to a Serbian Friend”, Markovic called on Kusturica, as a member of the jury that chose the winner of the contest, to distance himself from the monument erected in Belgrade, comparing its appearance to the center of Skopje and calling it a monstrous scam and a lot of nonsense. Cast iron at a height of 23 meters.
Kusturica titled his response “Concrete Soul.” He turns to Markovic from Gorana Srbina and recalls that the sculpture of the Serbian ancestor has not been made in the last 800 years.
He says that Markovic asks him to distance himself not only from the monument but also morally, from the sculptor whose works are scattered around the world.
There were many more phrases in the controversy between Markovic and Kusturica that cannot be recounted, but the whole controversy over the monument seems to have peaked after this.
The result was public support for one or the other director, even a comparison whose cinematographic biography is more significant, so that the controversy about the monument was far removed from the monument itself.
Since then, many historians, architects, art historians, connoisseurs of the Middle Ages, do not want to make public statements until the monument is erected. Some declined to speak for Eye magazine.
And the monument should be erected in the next two months. So finally, we will all be sure what the monument to the great prefect really is like. And if the debates will stop or the controversy of the 23 meters will open.
