Are you here: the beauty

Updated on 04/26/2016 By Admin

"Nikita Pustosvyat. The Dispute about Faith is a painting by the famous Russian artist Vasily Grigorievich Perov. The canvas was created between 1880 and 1881, but the story it tells took place on June 5, 1682.

In the center of the picture is a simple Orthodox priest Nikita Pustosvyat, who came to the Faceted Chamber of the Moscow Kremlin in order to take part in a dispute about faith. This dispute was started by him, but by the faces of the characters present in the picture - Princess Sophia, high-ranking priests and courtiers, it is clearly visible that they are not interested in claims to the church, as well as the church itself.

Nikita Pustosvyat accuses the priests of complete ignorance that the holy sayings they use are just words, the meanings of which they practically do not understand.

The priest is dressed in a simple cassock, girded with a piece of twine, he has a black headdress on his head, the position of the body is half-bent, in his hands is a scroll. Despite the fact that the man in the picture is in a servile pose, it is clearly visible that he is ready to fight for his beliefs to the very end.

The people surrounding the priest are turned with their backs to the viewer and are on their knees, with the exception of representatives of the higher clergy and the princess herself.

The picture is written in gloomy colors, it presents the final moment of heated discussions. The faces of the people are tired, detached, it is clear that everyone has his own opinion.

The completion of this story by the artist was not shown. The very same historical reality is depicted by the painter more than impartially, on the canvas it is not clear what the real feelings of the artist are, it is not known how he relates to what is happening.

It is known from historical sources that Nikita Pustosvyat emerged victorious from the dispute he started. But the very next day, after the events reflected on the canvas took place, the village priest was captured and executed by order of the royal family.

The arguments of reason turned out to be powerless before the use of physical force and ignorance, from which many priests of the described period of history really suffered, who were not literate and did not understand what they were saying, but who undertook to teach others.

description-kartin.com

Vasily Perov. Controversy about faith

Well, here we are again in the hall of the artist Vasily Perov. His paintings, known to us since childhood, look at us from everywhere in it. Well, who does not know the "Troika". "Hunters at rest", "Tea parties in Mytishchi", and not only. There is a huge painting on one of the walls. It is even larger than Vasnetsov's Three Bogatyrs, and not so much inferior to Ivanov's Appearance of Christ to the People. And yet, among the other paintings in this room, she is the least known. Marvelous. And it's not good.

But the artist painted this picture, as if summing up his creative path before his imminent death. He put his soul into it, like in no other picture. It was said, one might say, his last word. And according to him, this picture should have become the same social phenomenon that Ivanov's picture has become. And in the end, even today she is not so well known among us.

True, he did not finish it. In details. But the main idea is expressed more than clearly. Well, now ask yourself honestly, do you really know who this old man with a goat's beard was, with fury and frenzy, even with fanaticism in his eyes in the center of the picture, proving something in front of the entire assembly in the hall. His name is indicated in the very title of the picture, because its full name sounds like this: “Nikita Pustosvyat. Controversy about faith. And almost everyone, I'm sure, will ask themselves in bewilderment, who is this Pustosvyat? And who are these people gathered in this hall? And what do they all want? What is the dispute about?

And the controversy is very serious. This can be seen in the facial expressions of opponents and in all their postures. And this dispute will obviously not end well. for one of the parties. Because it is clear that the verbal battle is clearly going to be destroyed.

And at the bottom of the picture there is no annotation on this subject. And so the people somehow indifferently pass by, not even trying to delve into the essence of the manifested action. And you have to get in. Because the question is asked about the very thing that is essential for each of us. It goes back to the question of the meaning of life.

So the action takes place in the royal palaces, in the Faceted Chamber in the Kremlin, in the Throne Room. The woman who has risen from the throne is Princess Sophia. And she is opposed in a dispute by a group of archers of the Old Believers, led by one of the spokesmen for their aspirations, that is, the most eloquent and convinced leader of their movement - Nikita Pustosvyaty.

No, that's not his real name. His name was Nikita Konstantinovich Dobrynin. Pustosvyat is an offensive nickname given to him by the official church. He was a Suzdal priest. He accused the official church of ignorance and empty use of holy sayings. And besides, he was also a brilliant orator and polemicist. That is, the very "violent" about which Vysotsky sang. And the fact that he is violent - so who doubts this at one glance at this old man.

The schismatics - the Old Believers came to the Throne Hall of the Faceted Chamber to explain themselves to the princess and prove their case in a decisive and uncompromising dispute. And the dispute has obviously reached such a sharpness that there can be no talk of any reconciliation here.

How did it happen? How did they all come to such a life that they grappled so in complete hopelessness to find peace and tranquility in their hearts. And this happened after a split in our Orthodox Church. The most cruel in its entire history, the consequences of which have not been overcome to this day.

To tell the truth, it is even difficult for us, living today, to understand what the essence of this split is. Why did he reach such a high tragic intensity at that time. That is, from the time when Patriarch Nikon began to introduce his church reforms with a cruel and iron hand.

Well, the question arises, what kind of reforms were they? Yes, some kind of nonsense, someone will say today. Well, judge for yourself. Without going into small details, their essence was as follows:

1 - All books are religious, and there seemed to be no others then, they were copied by hand. Printing already existed, but not so highly developed. Well, of course, not all scribe monks were too literate, attentive, and diligent in copying. Errors and omissions crept into the texts. They had to be corrected. The question was, according to what patterns to rewrite? Byzantine or Greek? And it wasn't exactly the same. Byzantine examples were more ancient. And they rewrote them according to the reform from Greek samples.

2 - The word jesus was to be written from now on as jesus. That is, they added one letter.

3 - The double-fingered sign of the cross has been replaced with a three-fingered one. Let us recall the boyar Morozov, who, in Surikov's painting, raised her hand with two fingers as a sign of disagreement.

4 - Bows should be done not from the knees, but from the waist.

5 - Lead processions against the sun, and not along the sun.

6 - The exclamation of "Hallelujah" during the service should not be pronounced twice, but three times.

7 - Changed the number of prosphora and printing on them. Prosphora is a round loaf used for the sacrament of the Eucharist and commemoration of the living and the dead.

And that's basically all. And not God knows what. Well, what's the difference in how to fold your fingers, blessing or signing yourself with the sign of the cross, how many times to pronounce the word Alleluia, what is the spelling in writing the name of Christ, which way to go in procession and how many prosphora with a seal on them? In the eyes of a modern person, even a believer, but not too burdened with knowledge of religious rituals, all this is some kind of nonsense or even shamanism.

Where do such passions come from? Yes, and what. How many victims, tortured, executed, burned at the stake, or even killed themselves in the fire in terrible burns. Here, for example, Pustosvyat was beheaded at the Execution Ground on Red Square the very next day after the dispute presented in the picture!

What is the essence of the dispute? In short, Pustosvyat and his comrades wanted everything related to faith and its rites to remain in the old Byzantine style. That is, the way it remained until the fall of Byzantium and the arrival of the Turks. But after the Turks came, the Greek Church has undergone changes. Up to the point that the priests began to wear
kamilavka, the shape of which goes back to the Turkish fez.

Well, where does it fit. And why do we need this fez with all the other proposed changes, the Old Believers decided.

And in the 17th century, relations with the East and especially with the West became more and more intense. And in this trend, as they say today, we also set out to build a church according to Greek models, which were already departing from Byzantine traditions.

And Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich himself was a well-known Greekophile. He wanted to bring the Russian Church into complete unity with the Greek. It turns out that Patriarch Nikon acted in full accordance with the royal will. And that's where all the fuss comes from. And a split.

In our eyes, it seems that the matter is not worth a damn. Maybe yes, but only if it did not concern the most sacred that is in us. That is, souls. That is, faith. Every detail, even the smallest one, is important. Because if the smallest thing is removed or changed by a strong-willed decision, then the existence of the whole building of faith is called into question.

That is why the Old Believers came to the Faceted Chamber to meet with the most important person at that time - Tsarina Sophia, regent for her crowned brothers.

And they came to her not casually. They came to claim her debt. Thanks to the archers, Sophia remained in the Kremlin as a regent with two half-brothers, and did not go to the monastery. Without them, the Naryshkins would have remained in full power in the Kremlin.

They, the Old Believers, after their first performance, felt like heroes and masters of the situation. Sophia has already used archers once, one might say, in the dark. She was behind the first Streltsy rebellion. The same, merciless and meaningless.

And everything happened in front of little Peter. He is only 10 years old. Child. He, along with his half-moron brother Ivan, is taken out to the Red Porch. Here they are, no one touched them! And in front of them is a roaring, drunken and angry crowd of archers. She filled the entire Cathedral Square. Armed crowd. And she came to thirst for blood.

This crowd saw both brothers and calmed down. Yes, here the fool Mikhail Dolgorukov crawled forward and began to yell at the archers with the most obscene words. And that's it! The spark exploded the powder keg. The fool himself was thrown down right on the spears of the archers. And then they burst into the palace and began to run around all its corners - back streets in search of the hated Naryshkins. Found and killed. Chopped on the spot. And all this in front of the ten-year-old child Petenka. These terrible pictures stood in his eyes all his life. And he hated the archers with the most fierce hatred. Look at him in the painting "Morning of the Streltsy Execution" This look will tell you everything, all his hatred for those who encroached on his power. He even chopped off their heads with his own hands. Not with a trembling hand.

Well, the archers rightly considered that it was only thanks to them that Sophia remained in power, remained in the Kremlin, and did not go to the monastery. Well, if so, it seemed to them that it was not enough to receive just a thank you, which, as you know, you can’t put in your pocket. There were many Old Believers among them, and they considered it possible to demand a return to the old faith, without Nikon's innovations.

And Sophia, understanding all this, could not allow it. Because neither the church, nor Sophia herself could no longer refuse the decisions adopted by the Council, which cursed the Old Believers. Because the Council has already recognized the Old Believers as heretics and anathematized them. And then, it would mean the recognition of the wrong and Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, her father. Well how to do it. And she more than clearly felt that the archers are a serious and wayward force, which still needs to be feared.

But in order to calm them down, she agreed to a religious dispute with the archers. Sagittarius strove for publicity and openness, speaking in today's language. Therefore, it was proposed to first hold it on Red Square.

The patriarch did not need such publicity with the common people. He insisted on holding the debate in a closer circle. The pretext was this - they say, to appear to the princess and the patriarch himself on the people's square in confrontation with the mob would be "shameful", that is, base.

Well, that's how it happened, what we see in the picture. The official church was represented by Patriarch Joachim, the Old Believer church was represented by Nikita Pustosvyat. Well, the whole dispute - the dispute came down to the quite expected. To the mutual accusation of heresy and ignorance. And then to swearing with the use of well-known words. In the heat of the argument, Nikita cracked his "opponent" Athanasius, the Archbishop of Kholmogory, with a cross on the head. Look how he crouched, holding his cheek.

And the dispute itself began with the humble words of the patriarch, in which, however, a threat was also felt:

- For what reason did you come to the royal chambers and what do you require from us.

- They came to beat the tsars-sovereigns with their brows, so that the service of God would be according to the old service books, - they answered him no less humbly

"It's none of your business," was the haughty reply. “It is not proper for commoners to judge bishops. You must obey your mother church. Our books have been corrected from Greek in grammar.

“We didn’t come to talk about grammar,” said Nikita, “but about church dogmas. Why do you take the cross in your left hand at the liturgy, and the triple candle in your right. Is fire more honest than the cross.

- What it is. He beats the bishop with us. Do you remember, Nikita, how of blessed memory you offered your confession to our father, His Holiness the Patriarch and the entire Council. Now he's back to doing the same thing. You are all heretics. We don't want to hear that kind of bullshit.

And then she said that they all dispersed, and that they would be decreed later.

And there was a decree. Pustosvyat was executed. The head of the old man, who proved the correctness of the old faith, flew off his shoulders at the Execution Ground the next day. Suffered for the faith. Yes, if there is only one.

And here I would like to speculate on one not very convenient topic. which is so disliked by today's clergy. They resent the Bolsheviks for their rough treatment during the revolution, for all the persecution and oppression they all endured. In Suzdal, I saw a modern icon depicting notorious, abominable apostates in Budyonovkas in the form of devils doing all sorts of outrages.

For a long time I considered all these outrages, marveling at the tough, inventive, picturesque imagination of an unknown artist. And while I was thinking about this. So a thought popped into my head. God-opposing thought: How about yourself? And what did they themselves do in those days with the same Old Believers?

Surikov's large painting "Boyarynya Morozova" is only a small episode from the repressive war that befell the adherents of the old faith. By the way, they not only brought the unfortunate noblewoman through the streets of Moscow in shackles for edification (in the picture near the walls of the Miracle Monastery), but also starved her to death in captivity.

Yes, and not just one. Here we see her sister, Evdokia Urusova, in the same picture. She walks to the right of the sleigh, her hands folded mournfully. And the same fate awaits her too. And she will die of exhaustion. And earlier they also tortured them on the rack, thus trying to “reason” and convert them to the “true” faith. And 14 more of their servants were completely burned alive in a log house.

I want to draw attention to another episode of the suppression of the rebellion of the Old Believers. Namely, the history of the Solovetsky Monastery. What do we know about him? And we know about him, first of all, only that Solovki became the first camp of political prisoners who did not want to accept the new faith proposed by the Bolsheviks. That is the communist faith. We were told a lot of horrors about the life of the unfortunate on this island in the White Sea. Even a huge stone was brought from this island and installed on the Lubyanka in front of the famous building. For edification. And there, from time to time, they gather at this stone to read out the lists of those who were repressed in certain years.

And I ask myself, where should I put another stone from the same island, like the tombstone of the victims of the persecution of the Old Believers.

In this regard, let us recall the story, which is also connected with the same monastery, which the clergy do not like to remember and those for whom Solovki is only the Gulag and nothing more.

For the sake of completeness, let us recall how “tolerant” the official church itself treated its dissidents on issues of mere cult rituals.

In 1657, new service books were sent to the monastery, but the monks and inhabitants of the monastery refused them, and continued to conduct worship according to the old books. Moreover, they began to write petitions in defense of the old liturgical ranks. And it was already serious.

And then in 1667 the Great Moscow Cathedral took place. He anathematized not even the apostates, but the Old Believers. And they sent a new abbot, Joseph, to the monastery, so that he would put things in order there. And the stubborn monks not only did not accept him, but drove him away like a heretic. And they chose their archimandrite Nicanor. And this is very serious. This action already fell under the definition of rebellion.

And as a result, a reciprocal and predictable step on the part of the ruling power. An army was sent to pacify the disobedient monks. The monastery was besieged. At first, the siege was conducted somehow weakly and indecisively. Everyone hoped that the obstinate monks would come to their senses. But over time, the situation became more and more aggravated. The guns went into action.

The siege went on long and hard. For several years. Finally the monastery was taken. And then... And then the executions began. Fierce and creepy. The very next day. The monks were cut off their heads, they were burned, they were hung on trees, and they were also drowned in holes. And they also hung them with iron hooks under the ribs. And so they died. For what? But only because they wanted, as before, to be baptized with two fingers and walk in procession in the sun.

And then the Solovetsky Monastery also became a prison. Long before the Bolsheviks. A fortress on an island in a very cold sea. You won't run away.

And who was sent there? Who was in the infamous prison?

And there they imprisoned everyone who was objectionable to the authorities, for "religious criminal" Imagine! Even the hegumen of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, the non-possessor Silvan, was there. For what? For standing up for a poor church. And then, after the year 17, the priests of the money-grubbers, that is, the Josephites, began to be exiled there to the Solovki. For what? But for this very money-grubbing that they showed during the seizure of material values from churches for the needs of the starving Volga region.

They were exiled to the monastery for the "eternal settlement" and much later after the fire of the schism. Now by the decision of the Synod and the Secret Office. Who was sent? The same schismatics, and even eunuchs, he was dissected, drunkards, freethinkers. Thus, the monastery acquired the glory of a hard prison long before the SLON (Salovetsky Special Purpose Camp).

I dare say that the question in the title of the picture is posed incorrectly. Dispute about faith. And it should be noted that all the characters in the picture are believers. Deep believers. They could not even conceive of themselves without faith in God. After all, they are not arguing about whether God exists or not. They argue about what movements to make and where and how to walk during religious worship.

And the Bolshevik materialists generally rejected faith in God, whatever he may be and whatever guise he may take. And immediately erected the building of a new faith. Faith in a bright future, that is, faith in equality and brotherhood, faith in a society of social justice, faith in the existence of a new community, much like what we are promised by any religion on earth. The only difference is that all these religions and the darkness of all sects promise a heavenly life only after our earthly term, and the adherents of the new faith during it. That's all.

And in the eyes of the Bolsheviks, adherents of all other religions and sects were the same heretics. Religion is the opium of the people. Drug And what to do with these drug addicts? Fight them. And exile, relatively speaking, to the same Solovki.

*****
In conclusion, I want to ask the main question. Actually, this article was conceived only for his sake. He, this question, has already been asked in the title of the picture.

Faith - what is it? I think this is the most important question in life. And a person endowed with a conscience cannot but ask himself. Because it is faith that makes a person a person.

Faith is such a system of spiritual and moral values that fills our lives with meaning. Which gives the answer to the eternal question, what is the meaning of life. Faith is not just about God. For example, I don't believe in God. But that doesn't mean I don't believe in anything at all. No, I believe. I believe in conscience. And conscience is something that will be more severe than God. God can forgive, But conscience almost never.

And conscience also forces us to build our life in accordance with what can be done in life and what cannot. Conscience is also God. And in this sense, Dostoevsky is absolutely right when he said that "There is no God (the same conscience) - and everything is allowed."

Faith. Capitalized. And where did she come from. And from the moment when a person realized and understood that he was mortal. And if so, then immediately he will have another question, no less important. And in the name of what it is necessary to live this period of our stay on Earth. This is a long or not very long period. Doesn't matter. It's up to anyone how lucky.

But you really don’t want to think that the term has ended - and that’s all. And then nothing. Eternity and emptiness. We crumbled into atoms in an infinite universe. Irrevocably. These atoms will not gather again. Well, I don't want to believe it.

And that's when the belief began to be born that the end of life is not the end at all. Because there is also a soul. And she is immortal. And it will have a sequel. There, beyond the invisible limit. And there beyond this limit, there will be eternal life. Much better than the one that was in this world, which is all filled with suffering, struggle and pain.

And so everywhere. On all continents. Wherever the person who comes to this idea lives. And among all peoples, separated for the time being by seas and oceans. Well, just everywhere. And everywhere it was believed that the world and each of us is ruled by an unknown, eternal, higher power. That is God. And everywhere he took on different guises. Yes, and it was also called differently. And each had its own story. Very different stories.

And how differently people believe in different parts of the world.. Here, for example, the Sikhs believe in a god who has no name at all. And there is an absolute God and a god within each of us. They don't believe in reincarnation. But they believe that the soul simply returns to the creator.

And look what religion the ancient Greeks came up with. And the ancient Egyptians. What was the religion of the Aztecs? And how many more stories can be remembered! Yes, just creepy. And if you believe in another god, it means that you are wrong and unfaithful. You are a heretic. Well, to the fire you, like Joan of Arc.

Even within one religion there are those who believe in one God, but not like everyone else. And if so, then you are a sectarian. And fuck you. And also on the fire. And how can people live throughout our not so vast land.

Well, all this, of course, is such a joke. Maybe not appropriate. And if in a serious way, then there is such an idea that tries on everyone. It consists in the fact that if you believe in God, then it means that he exists, whatever he may be. And if you don't believe it, then it doesn't exist.

I think it doesn't exist. So what should I do. And here's what. I believe though. I believe in life itself. I am her heir. From the very first living unicellular organisms that appeared on Earth. And my faith and duty is to keep it going, so that its ascending spiral never ends, even when I leave it at an unknown time.

And I can't agree with one French king who once said "Apres moi le deluge". That is, after me at least a flood. No, our common goal is to prevent this flood from happening. But how to do it, and what needs to be done for this, which way to go for this - this is a completely different story.
.

Faith in life? And you know, you and I, it turns out, fellow believers.
Thank you very much for a very interesting and informative story.
P.S. By the way, I have a little material about the Solovetsky seat. True, he is not here. At the "School of Life", about which I once told you.

Yes, faith in life. This is the only excuse, and the meaning of life. Faith in God, whatever he may be, means not believing in yourself. Do not believe, do not be afraid, do not ask - this seems to be a covenant born in a criminal environment. And in fact, it contains the whole truth of life. And trust your conscience. She will strengthen and direct. And punish so painfully, like no god. But, it is true, one must remember that conscience either exists or it does not exist. If you believe, then you are human. If you don't believe it, everything is allowed, as Dostoevsky said. But then it is also difficult to call you a person in the full sense.

The Proza.ru portal provides authors with the opportunity to freely publish their literary works on the Internet on the basis of a user agreement. All copyrights to works belong to the authors and are protected by law. Reprinting of works is possible only with the consent of its author, which you can refer to on its author page. The authors bear responsibility for the texts of works independently on the basis of the publication rules and Russian legislation. You can also see more detailed information about the portal and contact the administration.

The daily audience of the Proza.ru portal is about 100 thousand visitors, who in total view more than half a million pages according to the traffic counter, which is located to the right of this text. Each column contains two numbers: the number of views and the number of visitors.

Composition based on the painting by V.G. Perov "Nikita Pustosvyat. Controversy about Faith

So the event of the end of the 17th century received publicity throughout the world. The plot described by the painter shows the unwillingness of society to change its established views, and there is not even a hint of the ability to conduct a dialogue. It seems that the interests that are affected by the two sides threaten the tranquility of the whole society. Therefore, it is worth defending them so zealously. Who did the artist paint? And what meaning he put into the poses of the main characters, and those who surround them.

I liked the picture of V.G. Perov for the fact that it can be considered for a long time and carefully. Many different characters are depicted here, they met in the battle for their beliefs. It can be seen how the author puts forward the two main characters of this scene, thanks to a simple technique - lighting. Princess Sophia and Nikita Pustosvyat are the brightest figures on the canvas. And in life they turned out to be those whom history remembers to this day. The picture prompted me to look into various encyclopedias in order to get better acquainted with the event that is captured. It was curious to know what happened in the year when the young, twenty-five-year-old princess came to power. And although Sophia's posture speaks of confidence and arrogance, what followed after this meeting showed all her fear. Pustosvyat was executed the next day.

Perov tried not to convey his sympathies, this is noticeable from how carefully and accurately the portrait of everyone who is depicted in the picture is written out. One can easily read the character of any of them. But, at the same time, the canvas pours out such emotional energy that I couldn’t just look, move away and forget it indifferently. An elderly preacher is already standing in front of his eyes, who stirred up people with his own words. The incredible strength of his conviction brought some of his students with him, despite the fear of death. And those who are trying to resist him, feeling the support of the imperious queen behind them, behave proudly, with disdain.

The strength of the picture is in the accurate description of events and in how subtly the painter felt the moment. It was at that time that none of the characters shown in the picture could behave in any other way. Why is this piece so impressive?

Description of the painting by V. G. Perov “Nikita Pustosvyat. Controversy about Faith

Painting by Vasily Grigorievich Perov “Nikita Pustosvyat. Dispute about Faith, written in 1880-1881, is an illustration of the famous historical event of the 17th century - the so-called "dispute about faith", which took place on June 5, 1682 in the Faceted Chamber of the Moscow Kremlin in the presence of Princess Sophia.

The main character of the work is a real historical figure - a former Suzdal priest named Nikita. He accused the representatives of the clergy of ignorance and empty use of holy sayings. Nikita was distinguished by his special skill as a speaker, and after the end of the “debate about faith”, he emerged victorious, but, despite this, Princess Sophia ordered the rebel to be seized and executed, which was executed the next day.

The multi-figured composition of the painting is distinguished by its high complexity and the incredible depth of thought invested in it. It depicts the climax of an argument where solid arguments no longer matter in the face of brute force. That is why in the center of the canvas you can see confusion on people's faces.

The captured Nikita Pustosvyat in a rage steps on the Gospel lying on the floor. Anger is visible on his face, intertwined with a sense of hopelessness and injustice.

Modern critics of Perov note that among the characters of this picture the master portrayed several excellent types. The artist depicted the historical scene so impartially that among the harmonious heaping of images of objects and people it is impossible to notice his own attitude to what is happening. Does the author of the work sympathize with Nikita or not? The artist did not indicate this on the canvas.

The contrast of moods can be traced by looking at the amazing calmness of Princess Sophia and her retinue. Perhaps by this Perov wanted to point out the indifference of those in power to the problems of the true faith, to describe the senselessness and impotence of any protests against state power.

In addition to describing the painting by V. G. Perov “Nikita Pustosvyat. Dispute about Faith", our website contains many other descriptions of paintings by various artists, which can be used both in preparation for writing an essay on a painting, and simply for a more complete acquaintance with the work of famous masters of the past.

Children's portfolio - free download templates. Tips for compiling a portfolio for kindergarten. Portfolio templates for kindergarten 3-5 years. The structure of the children's portfolio 3-5 years for kindergarten. […]

Description of the painting by Perov “Nikita Pustosvyat. Controversy about Faith

So the event of the end of the 17th century received publicity throughout the world.
The plot described by the painter shows the unwillingness of society to change its established views, and there is not even a hint of the ability to conduct a dialogue.
It seems that the interests that are affected by the two sides threaten the tranquility of the whole society.
Therefore, it is worth defending them so zealously.
Who did the artist paint? And what meaning he put into the poses of the main characters, and those who surround them.

I liked Perov's painting because it can be looked at for a long time and carefully.
Many different characters are depicted here, they met in the battle for their beliefs.
It can be seen how the author puts forward the two main characters of this scene, thanks to a simple technique - lighting.
Princess Sophia and Nikita Pustosvyat are the brightest figures on the canvas.
And in life they turned out to be those whom history remembers to this day.
The picture prompted me to look into various encyclopedias in order to get better acquainted with the event that is captured.
It was curious to know what happened in the year when the young, twenty-five-year-old princess came to power.
And although Sophia's posture speaks of confidence and arrogance, what followed after this meeting showed all her fear.
Pustosvyat was executed the next day.

Perov tried not to convey his sympathies, this is noticeable from how carefully and accurately the portrait of everyone who is depicted in the picture is written out.
One can easily read the character of any of them.
But, at the same time, the canvas pours out such emotional energy that I couldn’t just look, move away and forget it indifferently.
An elderly preacher is already standing in front of his eyes, who stirred up people with his own words.
The incredible strength of his conviction brought some of his students with him, despite the fear of death.
And those who are trying to resist him, feeling the support of the imperious queen behind them, behave proudly, with disdain.

The strength of the picture is in the accurate description of events and in how subtly the painter felt the moment.
It was at that time that none of the characters shown in the picture could behave in any other way.
Why is this piece so impressive?

Updated on 04/26/2016 By Admin

Nikita Pustosvyat accuses the priests of complete ignorance that the holy sayings they use are just words, the meanings of which they practically do not understand.

The people surrounding the priest are turned with their backs to the viewer and are on their knees, with the exception of representatives of the higher clergy and the princess herself.

The picture is written in gloomy colors, it presents the final moment of heated discussions. The faces of the people are tired, detached, it is clear that everyone has his own opinion.

description-kartin.com

Description of the painting by V. G. Perov “Nikita Pustosvyat. Controversy about Faith

The captured Nikita Pustosvyat in a rage steps on the Gospel lying on the floor. Anger is visible on his face, intertwined with a sense of hopelessness and injustice.

www.detskiysad.ru

Perov V.G. "Nikita Pustosvyat. Controversy about Faith

In the last years of his life, Vasily Perov turned to historical and religious themes. The painting “Nikita Pustosvyat. Dispute about Faith, written in 1881, is dedicated to an event that happened in 1682.

In 1650-1660, Patriarch Nikon carried out a church reform, which resulted in a split in the Russian Orthodox Church. The Suzdal priest Nikita Dobrynin (Old Believer) was opposed to reforms. In 1682, he secured a "debate on the faith." The Old Believers asked for a debate on Red Square. Knowing that there was a crowd of like-minded people behind Nikita Dobrynin, Patriarch Joachim was afraid of public discussions and transferred them to the Faceted Chamber of the Moscow Kremlin. As a result, not all adherents of the old faith were able to get to the debate held on July 5.

Nikita made a vivid speech, but his words did not convince those present. Having no arguments to object to the priest, Patriarch Joachim (to the right of Sophia) interrupted the dispute, declaring his opponent "Void Saint". At the same time, Nikita and other Old Believers considered themselves the winners of the dispute. However, the next morning, by order of the queen, the priest was accused of treason and executed, and his associates were sent to the monasteries.

The composition of the picture is based on the opposition of the left side of the canvas, which depicts representatives of the higher clergy and the reigning persons, headed by Queen Sophia, with the right side, where we see the schismatic Old Believers. Nikita Pustosvyat is holding a cross, next to him is the monk Sergius, dressed in a cassock and a black cap, in his hands is a petition demanding to restore the old faith. On the floor, shocked by the speech of the priest, Archbishop Athanasius (Lubimov) of Kholmogory, an opponent of the Old Believers, sits (he put his hand to his cheek and moves away from the angry Nikita).

Large-scale painting by Vasily Perov “Nikita Pustosvyat. Dispute about Faith "was the last work of the brilliant master. The picture is written impartially and does not convey the attitude of the painter to what is happening. At the same time, the dispute about faith, begun by the sword in 1682, continued for several more centuries. In the persecution of the Old Believers, the official clergy surpassed the state in perseverance, bitterness and intransigence.

www.msk-guide.ru