Lenin Prize
Lenin Prize- in one of higher forms rewarding citizens for the most significant achievements in the field of science, technology, literature, art and architecture.
The V.I. Lenin Prizes were established on June 23, 1925 by resolution of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks and the Council of People's Commissars. Initially they were awarded only for scientific works.
Not awarded from 1935 to 1957. On December 20, 1939, in commemoration of the 60th anniversary of J.V. Stalin, a resolution of the Council of People's Commissars was adopted “On the establishment of a prize and scholarship named after Stalin.” It said: “In commemoration of the sixtieth birthday of Comrade Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin, the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR decides: to establish 16 Stalin Prizes (in the amount of 100 thousand rubles each), awarded annually to scientists and artists for outstanding work in the field of: 1) physics and mathematics sciences, 2) technical sciences, 3) chemical sciences, 4) biological sciences, 5) agricultural sciences, 6) medical sciences, 7) philosophical sciences, 8) economic sciences, 9) historical and philological sciences, 10) legal sciences, 11) music, 12) painting, 13) sculpture, 14) architecture, 15) theatrical art, 16) cinematography.”
The number of prizes awarded and their size subsequently changed several times.
Stalin Prize
On August 15, 1956, the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR adopted a resolution to restore the V.I. Lenin Prizes and award them annually on V.I. Lenin’s birthday - April 22. In 1957, the awarding of Lenin Prizes for outstanding scientific works, architectural and technical structures, inventions introduced into National economy, technological processes and etc.; Lenin Prizes were also established for outstanding works of literature and art. In March 1960, the Lenin Prizes in the field of journalism and publicism were established.
Initially, 42 prizes were awarded. Since 1961, according to the regulations, up to 76 prizes could be awarded annually. Of these, up to 60 were awarded by the Committee for Lenin Prizes in the field of science and technology and up to 16 by the Committee for Lenin Prizes in the field of science and art under the Council of Ministers of the USSR. In 1967, this number of awards was reduced to 30. The laureates were awarded a diploma, a gold medal and a cash prize. Since 1961, the cash bonus amounted to 7,500 rubles each.
In the period 1956-1967, the Lenin Prize was the only state prize top level, so the number of its laureates was large. In 1967, the USSR State Prize was established, which began to be considered less prestigious, thereby increasing the level of the Lenin Prize.
According to the resolution of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR dated September 9, 1966, 30 Lenin Prizes were awarded once every 2 years (including 25 in science and technology, 5 in literature, art, architecture). Since 1966, Stalin Prize diplomas were replaced by corresponding State Prize diplomas. In 1970, an additional prize was established for works of literature and art for children. Since 1961, the cash bonus has been 10,000 rubles each.
Lenin Prizes- in the USSR, one of the highest forms of rewarding citizens for the most significant achievements in the field of science, technology, literature, art and architecture.
Consideration of works submitted for the Lenin Prize and decisions on awarding prizes were carried out by the committees for Lenin and State Prizes of the USSR under the Council of Ministers of the USSR. Resolutions of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Councils of Ministers of the USSR on the award of the Lenin Prize were published in the press on the birthday of V.I. Lenin. Persons who received the Lenin Prize were awarded the title “Lenin Prize Laureate”, were awarded a diploma, badge of honor and ID. Lenin Prizes were not awarded again
Laureates in the field of literature:
* Jalil, Musa Mustafovich (posthumously) - poet, for the cycle of poems “Moabit Notebook”.
* Leonov, Leonid Maksimovich - writer, for the novel “Russian Forest”.
* Auezov, Mukhtar Omarkhanovich - playwright, for the epic “Abai’s Path”.
1. Rylsky, Maxim Faddeevich - for the poetry collections “Distant Skies” (1959) and “Roses and Grapes” (1957)
2. Tursun-Zade, Mirzo - for the poems “Hasan-arbakesh” (1954), “Moonlight” (1957) and the cycle of poems “Voice of Asia” (1956)
3. Sholokhov, Mikhail Alexandrovich - for the novel “Virgin Soil Upturned” (1932-1960)
* Smuul, Juhan - writer, for the book “The Ice Book”.
* Stelmakh, Mikhail Afanasyevich - writer, for the novels “Human Blood is Not Water,” “Big Relatives,” “Bread and Salt.”
* Tvardovsky, Alexander Trifonovich - poet, for the poem “Beyond the Distance - Distance.”
* Petrus Brovka - Belarusian writer, poet, for the collection “And the days go by...”.
* Chukovsky, Korney Ivanovich - writer, for the book “Nekrasov’s Mastery”.
* Marshak, Samuil Yakovlevich - poet, for the book of poems “Selected Lyrics”.
* Gonchar, Oles (Alexander Terentyevich) - writer, for the novel “Tronka”.
* Shabliovsky, Evgeniy Stepanovich - literary critic, for the book “T. G. Shevchenko and Russian revolutionary democrats. 1858—1861"
* Svetlov, Mikhail Arkadyevich (posthumously) - poet, playwright.
* Gafur Gulyam (posthumously) - poet.
* Mikhalkov, Sergei Vladimirovich - writer.
1. Melezh, Ivan Pavlovich - for the novels “People in the Swamp” (1961) and “Breath of a Thunderstorm” (1965)
2. Shaginyan, Marietta Sergeevna - for books about V.I. Lenin: “The Birth of a Son” (“The Ulyanov Family”) (1938, 1957), “The First All-Russian” (1965), “Ticket for History” (1937), “ Four lessons from Lenin" (1968)
3. Barto, Agnia Lvovna - for the book of poems “For flowers in winter forest"(1970). (Award for works of literature and art for children)
1. Simonov, Konstantin (Kirill) Mikhailovich - for the trilogy “The Living and the Dead” (“The Living and the Dead” (1955-1959), “They are not born soldiers” (1960-1964), “The Last Summer” (1965-1970))
1. Avijus, Jonas Kazys - for the novel “Lost Blood” (1970)
2. Markov, Georgy Mokeevich - for the novel “Siberia” (1969-1973)
Maxim Tank (Skurko Evgeniy Ivanovich) - for the book of poems “Narochansky Pines” (1977)
. Chakovsky, Alexander Borisovich - for the novel “Blockade” (1968-1975)
* Brezhnev, Leonid Ilyich, Secretary General Central Committee of the CPSU, - for the trilogy “Small Earth”, “Renaissance” and “Virgin Land”, “for the tireless struggle for peace”
1. Dumbadze, Nodar Vladimirovich - for the novel “The Law of Eternity” (1978)
2. Isaev, Egor Aleksandrovich - for the poetic duology “The Court of Memory” (1962), “The Distance of Memory” (1976-1977)
1. Bazhan Mikola (Nikolai Platonovich) - for the book of poems “Signs” (1979)
1. Karim, Mustai (Karimov Mustafa Safich) - for the story “A Long, Long Childhood” (1974-1978) and the tragedy “Don’t Throw Fire, Prometheus!” (1976)
1. Bykov, Vasily Vladimirovich - for the story “Sign of Trouble” (1982)
2. Vasiliev, Ivan Afanasyevich - for the book of essays “Admission to the Initiative” (1983), essays “Praise to your home”, “Return to the land” (1984), “Letters from the village”. (Award for works of artistic journalism)
1. Kuliev, Kaisyn Shuvaevich (posthumously) - for outstanding contribution to Soviet literature, artistic originality and development folk traditions in the spiritual life of socialist society
The V.I. Lenin Prizes were established on June 23, 1925 by resolution of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks and the Council of People's Commissars. Initially awarded only for scientific works “in order to encourage scientific activity in the direction closest to the ideas of V. I. Lenin, namely in the direction of the close connection between science and life”.
Lenin prize certificate inside.jpg
Lenin prize certificate outside.jpg
Lenin Prize laureate certificate, 1962
According to the publication “Lenin Prize Laureates. Sculptors." Text: Abolina R. Publishing house "Soviet Artist", Moscow, 1970
In 1925, the Lenin Prize Institute was established to reward outstanding work in the field of science and technology. In the 1956 resolution I found further development This wonderful tradition has established prizes for the most outstanding works of literature and art that have received wide public recognition.
IN AND. Lenin, with his characteristic insight, saw the enormous role of art in the life of the people, its remarkable ability to unite the feelings, thoughts and will of the masses. He put forward a plan for monumental propaganda, which was based on the idea of nationality and partisanship of art, and its promotion of the high ideals of the new society through its means. Naturally, the award of a prize bearing the name of Lenin to one or another artist is a high assessment of his personal talent, and the work he created is recognized as a high example of the art of communist society.
Already awarded the first prizes in the field visual arts showed with what great demands the public approached the artist, honoring him high rank laureate of the Lenin Prize, how deep and multifaceted the work he created should be, revealing the most essential aspects of life, exciting the minds and hearts of millions. These works of socialist realism, which received wide national recognition, became true milestones in development Soviet art. Since 1957, the Lenin Prize began to be awarded for works of all types and genres of our art.
The Lenin Prize in 1957, in the first year after its establishment, was awarded to S.T. Konenkov for “Self-Portrait”. In 1958 - M.K. Anikushin for the monument to Pushkin in Leningrad; in 1959 - A.P. Kibalnikov for the monument to Mayakovsky in Moscow; in 1962 - L.E. Kerbel for the monument to Karl Marx in Moscow; in 1963 - G. Iokubonis for the monument to the “Victims of Fascism in Pirčupis.” All these works, distinguished by high artistic merit, carry within themselves the main defining quality. They reveal the advanced ideas of our time, affirm the power of the human mind, and the activity of revolutionary thought.
The authors of these works are artists of bright creative individuality, with their own style, their own artistic style, their own plastic language. Each of them managed to say not only the most important and greatest of their thoughts about life and man, but also to express the people’s idea of their heroes, people of powerful will and unfading talent.
The first works of the oldest sculptor S.T. Konenkov (born 1874) were created at the turn of two centuries. This is a deeply original master, Russian and at the same time belonging to all humanity. Creator of generally heroic, even symbolic images (“Peasant”, “Slav”, “Nike”, 1906J; inspired by folklore, “Old Fieldmen” and “Prophetic Old Women”, 1910), who embodied the beauty of the naked female body in highly polished marble statues and wood - the sculptor was always fond of portraiture, able to reveal human character in a unique plastic form. Usually the sculptor's models are people of bright creative individuality, powerful intellect, bright original talent - thinkers, pioneers, artists.
The strength of the human mind and feelings, an active, effective attitude towards the world is the favorite leitmotif of Konenkov’s portraits, each time uniquely refracted in an individual image (“Paganini”, 1910 and 1916; “Dostoevsky”, 1933; “Mussorgsky” and “Socrates”, 1953) . Many best qualities Konenkov as a portrait painter concentrated in “Self-Portrait”, created by the sculptor in 1954. This is not the first time this theme appears in his work. The “Self-Portrait” of 1914 and the “Self-Portrait” of 1916 are interesting, which reflect the ebullient temperament and vigilance of the inquisitive artist.
But this theme takes on a truly epic sound now that the master’s rich experience is combined with the sophistication of thought, the fruits of philosophical reflection on life.
Particular inspiration illuminates the artist’s face. Great interest to the world, wise insight, admiration for the beauty of the environment determine his state; one feels that this inquisitive mind, thirsting for truth and beauty, is in constant movement and development.
The inner grandeur of the image determined the clarity and beauty of the plastic form. The portrait conveys the subtly noticed individual originality of the artist’s appearance, his manner of holding himself, listening, peering into the world. But there is no trace of genre or intimacy in the portrait. Its form is generalized, majestic, one might say, monumental.
The composition of the portrait, with all its dynamics, is strictly balanced, its rhythm is clearly revealed. A silhouette line runs up elastically, covering the hand embedded in the marble, the left shoulder, the “eagle” profile, the high forehead, then the lines begin to decline in the heavy strands of thrown back hair, the flow of the beard. The main volumes are directed upwards and slightly diagonally, while the base of the portrait, spread horizontally, creates a solid base for this sculpture. Changing points of view gives the development of sculpture in space. In a strong angle, the face is perceived from the side on the right. Here the rises of the lines are steeper, the volumes are more massive, there is no longer a calm, balancing horizontal line. This is not only a state of thought, contemplation; an effective active principle clearly sounds.
Konenkov’s “Self-Portrait” is perceived in a broadly general sense. “When in the silence of my studio I was working on the “Self-Portrait,” says the sculptor, “treating this as a deep thought, I thought not only about portrait resemblance, but first of all I wanted to express my attitude to work and art, my aspiration for the future , into the kingdom of constant truth and justice. How joyful it is for me to realize that this conversation of mine with myself, this look into a bright future, is understood by my contemporaries.”
This work reflected a special stage in the artist’s work, characteristic in general for the development of the art of socialist realism.
The feelings expressed in it deeply concern his contemporaries. A creative attitude to life, to work, active work for the present and future, the desire to transform the world - all this is so characteristic of the builder of a communist society. Thanks to his deep ideological richness and breadth of concept, Konenkov managed to express great feelings and thoughts of his era in an easel portrait.
Monumental sculpture solves these problems in an even more versatile way, and it is no coincidence that the majority of Lenin Prizes are awarded to monuments standing on streets and squares. One of the great, honorable tasks of Soviet sculptors is the creation of a monument to A.S. Pushkin. Its construction was provided for by Lenin’s plan for monumental propaganda. The image of the beloved poet worried many Soviet sculptors. The competition for the monument in 1937, timed to coincide with the centenary of the death of Pushkin, focused significant creative forces on solving this problem. It was then that interesting busts and statues were created that contributed to the iconography about Pushkin.
However, the monument for Leningrad, which was designed in these competitions, was never created for the reason that none of the submitted projects fully met the specific requirements that were presented to this monument. In addition, work on the monument was suspended due to the outbreak of the Great Patriotic War.
The city in which Pushkin’s genius flourished, glorified in his immortal poems, as if preserving living memories of him, required a special solution to this topic.
And as soon as the volleys of war died down, the artists continued the interrupted work - the creation of a monument to Pushkin, the image of which now, in the light of the patriotic feat of the people, seemed to be enriched with new features.
After the war, young forces came into art, and among them was the Leningrad sculptor M.K. Anikushin is the same age as October. He graduated from the Academy of Arts in 1947. Behind him was the front, the impressions of which were reflected in his first works (“Winner”, “Soldier’s Friendship”).
The artist takes part in the competition for the monument to Pushkin (1949). And immediately new wonderful aspects of the young sculptor’s talent emerged. The statue of Pushkin, presented for the project, captivated with its noble simplicity, special spirituality and grace, which was so consistent with the idea of Pushkin.
Anikushin was instructed to continue working on the project. In the second round of the competition (1950), he was the only winner; his model was adopted for the construction of the monument. And here the sculptor’s enormous demands on himself were revealed.
Studying the work of Pushkin, visiting places associated with his name, imbued with the mood of unfading poetry, Anikushin puts more and more of the unique Pushkin into his creations.
This theme completely captured the sculptor. He created a number of sketches and finished statues of Pushkin, corresponding to various periods of his life, conveying the subtle shades of his poetic thoughts and creative inspiration. All this, of course, enriched the monument project, on which he never stopped working.
And yet, having sculpted a model of the monument in clay, which was approved by all authorities, the sculptor creates a new, more advanced version, according to which the monument was built, unveiled in June 1957.
The main thing that attracts about him is the crystal clarity and internal harmony of the image, so corresponding to the very Spirit of Pushkin’s poetry. Pushkin’s face is inspired and somehow sternly enlightened. It seems that his poems have just been heard, you can even feel their character, freedom-loving, free, civic-minded. Pushkin's gesture is broad, full of not only appeal, but conveying the poet's inspiration, the heat of the soul, and inner conviction. A proud aspiration upward is felt in the entire figure, all of it is turned towards the wide open space.
The sculpting of the figure is clear and complete. The clarity of the form reveals that classical severity and at the same time romantic emotion, in the unity of which the inner content of the image is revealed.
The pedestal for the monument was successfully designed (architect V.A. Petrov). Small, correctly proportioned, it perfectly emphasizes the slimness and lightness of the figure itself.
Both in its figurative structure and in its architectonics, the monument corresponds to the ensemble of the Square of Arts, the center of which it has now become.
Imbued with the spirit of Pushkin’s poetry, the new monument worthily decorated Leningrad, sounding in unison with its wonderful ancient ensembles, many of which were created in Pushkin’s times.
An equally important and difficult task of Soviet art was the creation of a monument to Mayakovsky in Moscow. If Pushkin is separated from us by a century, then Mayakovsky is almost a contemporary; memories of meetings with him are still preserved. It would seem that it is much easier to embody its features in a monument. However, this poses its own specific difficulties. This monument to the best poet of the Soviet era required a very unconventional, bold decision. Its design took many years. Most of the projects, while possessing a certain impressive power, seemed one-sided - they did not reveal in a single synthesis the qualities of Mayakovsky - a person, a poet, a citizen. Therefore, the project of the sculptor A.P. attracted special attention. Kibalnikov (born 1912), presented at one of the last rounds of the competition (1955). It showed a serious attempt to recreate the image in its complex dialectical unity, incorporating different sides Mayakovsky's amazingly original personality.
Despite the fact that Kibalnikov’s project was accepted for implementation, the main work for the sculptor was still ahead. By this time he already had considerable experience in the field of monumental sculpture. His many years of work on the image of N.G. Chernyshevsky ended with the creation of a monument in Saratov (1953).
It is from the transfer of internal state that the sculptor comes to work on a new monument. Inner excitement, an attentive, penetrating look, an active attitude towards life determine the image of the poet. Placed on a low pedestal made of red granite, the bronze figure seems to be closer to the viewer. Mayakovsky belongs entirely to the vibrant life that unfolds around him. “Speaking as living to living,” he seems to have stepped towards the future. Strength, youth, revolutionary energy - that unique thing that is associated with our idea of Mayakovsky’s poetry is expressed in the composition of the monument: in the energetic plasticity of the volumes, the strong turn of the body, the elastic, clear line of the silhouette. Despite all the strength and tangible weight of the figure, it is distinguished by its comparative lightness and slender proportions.
Developing the best traditions of Soviet monumental sculpture, Kibalnikov in the monument to Mayakovsky managed to achieve a special depth and versatility of the image, which previously were mainly considered the property of easel sculpture. Cleared of everything random, but without losing the complexity and versatility of the individual character, the image finds a clear, concise and expressive form.
This line is especially important for the development of our monumental sculpture, since sometimes the desire for laconicism leads to one-sidedness of content, and at the same time to simplification and schematism of form.
Kibalnikov completed both the sculptural and architectural parts of the monument, which fits so organically into the ensemble of the square.
In July 1958, a monument was unveiled in Moscow that convincingly recreates the image of the poet of the Revolution.
The development of Soviet monumental sculpture follows the broad mainstream of realistic art, and an artist can achieve expressiveness by many means, if, of course, he preserves the main thing - a living figurative principle. As the practice of our art shows, a deep idea can be expressed in an image that combines specific forms with generalized monumental ones. This is exactly the path that the sculptor L. E. Kerbel followed, creating in collaboration with architects (R. A. Begunts, N. A. Kovalchuk, V. G. Makarevich and V. M. Margulis) a monument to Karl Marx. The lists of the monumental propaganda plan provided for the construction “primarily of monuments to the outstanding figures of the revolution, Marx and Engels.”
On November 7, 1918, a temporary monument to Marx and Engels by sculptor S. Mezentsev was unveiled in Moscow.
On May 1, 1920, at the laying of the new, long-lasting monument to Karl Marx on Theater Square, V. I. Lenin delivered an exciting speech. The sculptor S.S. worked hard to create the monumental image of K. Marx. Aleshin, but the monument was never realized.
In 1957, the Presidium of the CPSU Central Committee decided to build a monument to Karl Marx in Moscow. An open competition was announced for his project. Many sculptors took part in it, fervently wanting to create a monument worthy of the brilliant teacher of the world proletariat. Among the proposals, one project stood out - under the motto “Red Hammer and Sickle”, which provided a laconic, concise and expressive solution.
The author of the sculptural part of the monument was L. E. Kerbel (b. 1917), belonging to the middle generation of Soviet sculptors, who had already created several portrait monuments, including the monument to General F. I. Tolbukhin.
But in the work on the monument to Karl Marx, everything was much more complicated. By accurately conveying the portrait features, while maintaining the specificity of the image, it was necessary to convey the greatness of Marx’s cause, which lives and triumphs across most of the globe.
The presented project made a serious request for such a solution.
L.E. Kerbel, understanding the responsibility and honor of the task, together with a team of architects gets to work. In a very short time (approximately within a year) he creates a model in the size of a monument, in which he refines and brings to the utmost clarity the plastic solution.
Together with the architects, the layout, the connection of the monument with the territory of the park, and additional architectural forms are being developed.
The sculptor envisioned only one material for the implementation of the monument - granite. Only in a monolithic solid block could the intended composition be realized. Delivered from the Kudashevsky quarry, near Dnepropetrovsk, a block of coarse-grained gray granite was processed by granite masters under the direction of L. E. Kerbel. When converting the model to granite, additional changes arose, dictated by the specifics of the material.
It was especially important to find the correct ratio of processed and unprocessed parts of the block so that the figure would grow organically and naturally from the stone.
This is exactly what we feel in the erected monument. The figure of Marx, rising from a block of granite, seems fused with it. The movement expressed in the sculptural part of the composition is more strongly perceived in contrast to the unshakable granite mass. Only the front of the granite base projects as a clear edge; Marx’s right hand, bent at the elbow, rests on it as if on a pulpit; the whole figure leans forward with his left hand held back. The head is especially expressive, where not only an exact portrait likeness is conveyed, but great spirituality and the passionate conviction of the thinker. The face is processed in wide planes, with a clear, but at the same time soft distribution of light and shadow on the surface. Marx's gaze, distinguished by its special vigilance and sharpness, is directed into the distance. As if growing straight out of the ground, the monument required a special architectural design of the surrounding area. The whole of it is somewhat raised and bordered by a strip of polished granite, which, together with the surrounding greenery, creates a kind of frame for the monument. Two gray granite pylons behind the monument with the words of Lenin and Engels carved on them enrich the monument both semantically and compositionally.
Opened on October 29, 1961, during the XXII Party Congress, the monument acquired enormous international and political significance.
It was a matter of honor for Soviet sculpture to create monuments and entire ensembles dedicated to the heroes and events of the Second World War. Many of these works are symbolic in nature, and this symbolism arises from a broad philosophical understanding of the feat of the people.
In 1957, the Lithuanian government decided to build a monument on the site of the village of Pirčupis, destroyed by the Nazis on July 28, 1944, whose residents were burned alive. Having penetrated deeply into this tragedy, the young Lithuanian sculptor Gediminas Iokubonis (b. 1927) embodied the heroic theme in a laconic, severe and expressive form.
The memory of the event in Pirčupis resonated with a living pain in the hearts of the Lithuanian people, and therefore the competition for the monument attracted Special attention public. A lot was shown interesting projects, almost all of them were resolved in symbolic terms, many gave a complex allegorical interpretation of the event. Iokubonis presented the project in two versions. In one of them, the main architectural form was an obelisk with a broken top, against which a statue of a woman with a child was installed, in the other - a purely sculptural solution: the figure of an elderly woman frozen in silent grief. The second option seemed more innovative, its symbolism was completely natural and at the same time significant; the presented version of the monument was truly exciting, although it did not yet contain everything that I would like to see in this work.
In 1958, Iokubonis began developing the project together with the architect V. Gabrūnas. It is characteristic that Iokubonis, when creating the monument, rose to a qualitatively new level of creativity. Having invested in this image his thoughts about the fate of the people, about the bright ideals that communist society affirms, he widely and soulfully embodied this idea that excited him in a monumental monument.
The final version of the monument successfully combined traditional features of Lithuanian folk art with a new modern visual design.
Located on the territory of the village of Pirčupis, not far from the highway leading from Vilnius to the southeast, the monument was designed as a roadside monument.
Rising on a flat area bordered in the distance by forests, so characteristic of the Lithuanian Dzukija, this monument, small in size but well found in scale, immediately attracts attention.
On a low pedestal stands the figure of a woman-mother, as if frozen in deep sorrow. She seems fused with her native land, protecting her.
The outwardly static composition is full of internal dynamics. Everything random and superfluous is discarded in it, and attention is focused on the main thing. A shawl thrown over the head and a long dress falling to the ground help create a simple and very expressive silhouette, emphasizing the solidity of the sculpture, made of large blocks of gray granite. The facial expression is amazing. Deeply sunken eyes, sadly knitted eyebrows, mournfully and sternly compressed mouth. But experience does not distort the face. Generally modeled forms, lines distinguished by accuracy and purity - all this brings special epic clarity to the tragic image, making it majestic and noble. The strength of the expressed feeling is emphasized by a restrained gesture - right hand holding the shawl to his chin, he convulsively squeezes the scarf, his left hand is lowered.
The expressiveness of the sculpture is enhanced by the general architectural solution the monument, its organic connection with the surrounding nature. The contrast between the verticality of the monument and the flat terrain is somewhat softened by the low memorial wall located behind it, on which the text is carved: “The tragedy of Pirchupis will never happen again,” below are the names of all the victims and a relief is cut in, very tactfully, as if subtly developing the theme of the monument. Outlined by a laconic and expressive silhouette, the relief figures express the tragedy of the last minutes of people doomed to death. Specially planted trees near the monument, paths made of crushed granite stones are finely found touches of the overall semantic and compositional solution of the ensemble.
Among the memorial monuments in Soviet and foreign sculpture, the monument in Pirchupis, opened in July 1960, took pride of place.
Most of the works of sculpture awarded the Lenin Prize belong to monumental art. It is in it that great exciting themes find their expression, and images dear to the people are embodied.
Naturally, when creating an image that carries within itself big idea broadly generalizing the phenomena of reality, the artist seems to constantly feel the invisible support of the people, their ardent participation.
For many sculptors, especially young ones, working on such monuments was a new stage in their work, real life and art school, in which they reached not only the pinnacle of skill, but also learned the great social role of art.
And therefore, their works, embodying the idea of monumental propaganda at its new, highest stage, are rightly crowned with a prize bearing the name of the great Lenin, who brilliantly foresaw the prospects for the development of the art of the future, the art of communism.
At the time this publication was already being printed, the Lenin Prizes in the field of literature, art and architecture of 1970 were awarded.
The prize was awarded to outstanding works of monumental art, architectural and sculptural ensembles: the memorial ensemble in memory of the victims of fascist terror in Salaspils (authors G.K. Asaris, architect, L.V. Bukovsky, sculptor, O.N. Zakamenny, architect, J.P. Zarin, sculptor, O. I. Ostenberg, architect, O. Y. Skarain, sculptor, I. A. Strautman, architect), monument-ensemble to heroes Battle of Stalingrad in Volgograd (author of the project, head of the team of authors E.V. Vuchetich, sculptor, author of the project Ya.B. Belopolsky, architect, co-authors: V.A. Demin, architect, V.E. Matrosov, sculptor, A.S. Novikov , sculptor, A.A. Tyurenkov, sculptor) and the memorial complex “Khatyn” (authors: Y.M. Gradov, architect, V.P. Zankovich, architect, L.L. Mendelevich, architect, S.I. Selikhanov, sculptor ).
Eight sculptors became new laureates of the Lenin Prize.
The Lenin Prizes were restored, and in fact re-established. Until the appearance of the State ones, they will replace the Stalinist ones, and then they will become the highest awards, the “Soviet Nobel Prizes”
After Lenin's death, the prize named after him did not exist for long as an academic one and was awarded to major scientists: Vavilov, Obruchev, Fersman, Chichibabin. In the 1930s, they tried to turn the Lenin Prize into a super award, awarded every five years with a gold medal and honorary membership in the Academy of Sciences, but it did not work out. But on Stalin’s 60th birthday (1939), Stalin Prizes began to be generously given. The award had three degrees, so the awards varied, and there were multiple winners.
Condemning the personality cult of Stalin, the current government cannot continue to award Stalin Prizes. The Central Committee of the CPSU and the government decide: annually on April 22 to award 42 Lenin Prizes, without degrees. This is much less than the almost countless Stalin awards, but the habit of awarding is great, and the number of awards will increase to 76 per year. They don’t remember the previous laureates at all - as if they never happened, they are not indicated in the lists of regalia. Only in 1966 will they find a way out: they will introduce State Prizes, and all those issued by Stalin will be recognized by them, exchanging diplomas and badges. “The Empress” will become relatively accessible, and from now on there are only 30 Leninsky ones, and they are given every two years, in even-numbered years.
A rarer award than the title of Hero of Socialist Labor should be given to great discoveries and masterpieces. The general public understands little about science and technology, but in culture such a laureate means the status of a living Soviet classic. The reputation of the Lenin Prize will be significantly spoiled by its award in literature to the books of Leonid Brezhnev, moreover, made in the odd year of 1979.
At a closed meeting of the next congress of the CPSU, First Secretary of the Central Committee Nikita Khrushchev makes a report “On the cult of personality and its consequences.” They don’t dare publish the text, but they read it aloud all over the country. The semi-secret report determines the content of the entire 10-year Khrushchev rule - it will go down in history as anti-Stalin
