New trends in the development of a still-life genre in easel painting Kazakhstan beginning of the 21st century

Authors

  • Kayranov Ye. B. T. Zhurgenov Kazakh National Academy of Arts
  • Baygazina A.M. T. Zhurgenov Kazakh National Academy of Arts
  • Umbetova K.Zh. T. Zhurgenov Kazakh National Academy of Arts

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26577/jpcp.2020.v72.i2.04
        99 45

Abstract

The article discusses the new development trends of the still-life genre in easel painting of Kazakhstan
at the beginning of the 21st century. In search of their own “personality of the creator” in art and
freedom of expression, artists conduct creative experiments in different genres. In the visual arts, many
artists often turn to still life, finding their way into easel painting. For some of them, still life is the main
genre, where world perception and spiritual interest are expressed, and for others, a means of finding
their style and improving mastery. Inspired by success in creativity through a still life, they present their
works at various exhibitions and competitions, organize solo exhibitions. In this regard, the article analyzes
the still life of dynamic personalities, characterized by a variety of handwritings and individuals.
The importance of the still-life genre in the work of contemporary artists of the country is examined using
the example of the city of Almaty. Their contribution to the development of a still life genre in easel
painting of Kazakhstan at the beginning of the 21st century is determined. In a still life, more than in
any other genre of fine art, there are great opportunities to convey the wealth of the material world, the
bounty of the earth and philosophical thoughts about life.
Key words: easel painting, still life genre, creation artists, visual arts, the beginning of the 21st
century.

Downloads

Published

2020-07-02

How to Cite

Ye. B., K., A.M., B., & K.Zh., U. (2020). New trends in the development of a still-life genre in easel painting Kazakhstan beginning of the 21st century. Journal of Philosophy, Culture and Political Science, 72(2), 38–50. https://doi.org/10.26577/jpcp.2020.v72.i2.04