Záludnosti stylu u Podobenství Evangelia Růženy Zátkové

The cycle Parables of the Gospel by Růžena Zátková was considered missing. Still, it appeared in scholarly literature, and in the 1990s even at an exhibition, but always as the work of the much more famous painter Natalia Gončarová. What were the reasons for this? Was it intention, ignorance, or was the confusion caused by the primitive “Russian” style chosen? Zátková’s unorthodox alternations between different stylistic principles; her returns to the past and at the same time the avant-garde solutions she often mixed interchangeably led not only to erroneous attributions but also to erroneous dating. The parable is from 1920 and formally returns to Russian neoprimitivism. What about his “retrospective” stylistic level? Is it closer to the tradition of conscious returns as we know them from the 19th century, or does it foreshadow a future open relationship to originality and the question of appropriations? From this point of view, how can we place the Parable of the Gospel in the context of European, or even Czech, art?

1. Eganbiuri Eli, Natalia Gončarova, Michail Larionov, Moskva 1913.

2. Nešlehová Mahulena, Impulses of Futurism and Czech Art, in: Berghaus Günter (ed.), International Futurism in Arts and Literature, Berlin - New York 2000, s. 122-143. CrossRef

3. Pomajzlová Alena, On the Real Author of the Cycle Parables of the Gospel, Previously Ascribed to Natalia Goncharova, https://modernartbrno.com/blog/on-the-real-author-of-the-cycle-parables-of-the-gospel-previously-ascribed-to-natalia-goncharova/, vyhledáno 17. 7. 2023 (barevné reprodukce cyklu).

4. Pomajzlová Alena, Růžena. Příběh malířky Růženy Zátkové / Story of the Painter Růžena Zátková, Řevnice 2011.

5. Pomajzlová Alena, Růžena Zátková: An Unortodox Female Futurist. In: Berghaus Günter (ed.), International Yearbook of Futurism Studies, Berlin - Boston, 2015, s. 136-167. CrossRef

6. Šmejkal František, Futurismus a české umění, Umění XXXVI, 1988, s. 20-53.