Humanity Project: New Saints

We are responsible for those we have tamed.
You know who.

New Saints

When I started creating this exhibition, I had no idea how much information I would have to process.
I delved deep into the history of iconography and realized that this is not my method.
Then I dived into statistics and got stressed out.

I touched upon our loved ones, our friends, our pets. I have lived on this earth for a long time and I am not naive enough to think that pets were created solely for the joy of companionship. No, we (humans) simply eat them.

I am not calling anyone to anything with this exhibition. This exhibition is not about what anyone should eat. This exhibition is about mercy.
I am aggressively trying to draw your attention to this issue. This is my manifesto.

Why did I name my exhibition this way? For me, all these animals are holy for one simple reason.
They have not harmed anyone.

And therefore they have only done good. Isn’t that enough? How many people do you know who meet these criteria?
Moreover, I would call them holy martyrs considering their life circumstances.

I am not interested in the offended feelings of believers and non-believers. The least I thought about was in what form these paintings were made.
The fact that they sometimes resemble icons does not make them so.

You will find on these paintings not only horrifying statistics but also learn what animals think of you. You may even be able to read their monologues in their native language if you can, of course.

This exhibition is not about religion or faith. This exhibition is about humanism.

Respectfully, Igor Shulman

This is not an exhibition of the works of artist Igor Shulman but rather the state of the soul of man Igor Shulman.

By raising the theme of martyrdom and using the stylistics of icon painting, the author painfully reflects on life. One could pretend that the exhibition is dedicated to the theme of animals being killed by humans, but it is much more interesting to see in “New Saints” the confusion of a successful artist in the face of Death.

According to ancient Church teachings, martyr’s blood washes away all sins, and in the history of the Church there are known cases where unbaptized people who professed faith in Christ and then suffered torture were honored in the Church as holy martyrs. It was said about them that they were baptized with their blood.

But animals do not sin. They have nothing to wash away with their blood. So why do we consider them martyrs? Because animals are absolute victims. Or victims in the absolute sense.

Without any justifications, other viewpoints, fact-checking, and lovers of evaluating crimes with phrases like “Not everything is so straightforward.” At Igor Andrianov’s exhibition “New Saints,” everything is absolutely straightforward.

We have been witnessing death live since February 2022. And we have become accustomed to it despite the horror of what is happening. Reflection on murder, violence, and death logically leads the artist to images of the executioner and the victim.

Today at this exhibition we see another answer – the artist is unequivocally on the side of the victim.

For us, the viewers of this exhibition, it does not matter at all whether Igor Shulman is a vegan or vegetarian, whether he eats pork or releases Christmas carp back into the Vltava River. We see the drama and tragedy of an artist who experiences profound pain from any violence. And the ability to feel another’s pain distinguishes the artist from the viewer.

October 12, 2024. Prague

Anton Litvin
Exhibition curator
Director of the festival of contemporary
culture and human rights Kulturus.

Another important thought that comes to mind is that if you have any questions, feel free to approach me; I will answer them. But tomorrow at four o’clock, I will be talking to everyone who comes and is interested about each painting—what it embodies and what it actually conveys.

Additionally, tomorrow, with everyone who comes, we will be painting one large, beautiful picture. I don’t know the theme yet; we will come up with it together. The canvas is prepared, everything is ready, and everyone can contribute their part. As for what we will do with it afterward, we will figure that out. So welcome!

Look around, enjoy it if you can.

I want to explain the concept of everything you see here. The concept is very simple—it’s about our pets and what we do with them. And we simply eat them. This includes absolutely all the pets you see present here. We—I mean humanity, not just the two of us—are the ones doing this. The exhibition has nothing to do with religion or iconography. These are references. References, let’s say, to an iconographic form. If I have touched on the feelings of believers, then honestly, I don’t care. Such feelings are worth little to me. The exhibition is not about religion; it’s about humanism. That’s probably all.

If Anton Litvin, as the curator, would like to say a few words about this exhibition, I would be very grateful to him, and you would likely find it interesting to listen to him.

When I started to communicate with him actively and when Igor was invited to the SlovoNovo festival, he began to think in terms of projects rather than individual works. It seems to me that a turning point occurred in his consciousness, and as an artist, he reached a completely different level. After that, we saw exhibitions in Prague in a completely different format. These were not individual commercial works. He himself emphasizes that this exhibition is not commercial; for an artist, this is a very serious step—to start creating non-commercial works. What we saw in the gallery under Charles Bridge and what we will see today is certainly an absolute, mature expression of a mature person.

Igor asked me to write a text for this exhibition, and I gladly did so with great joy. The only thing is that he slightly censored it in the catalog. I don’t know; I’ll pretend I don’t know, but I suspect why. Fortunately, I have the original of my text left, and even if Igor says now that he objects, I will insist on reading the original. Because it seems to me that the censored parts are quite important, at least for me as the author of the text.

So what did I write about this exhibition?

“This is not an iconostasis; this is not a collection of pet portraits; this is not even an exhibition of paintings; this is an exhibition of the state of the soul of Igor Andrianov. Raising the theme of martyrdom and using the stylistics of icon painting, the author painfully reflects on life. One might pretend that the exhibition is dedicated to the theme of animals being killed by humans, but it is much more interesting to see in ‘New Saints’ the artist’s bewilderment in the face of death. According to ancient church teachings, martyrdom washes away all sins with blood. In church history, there are known cases where unbaptized people who professed faith in Christ and subsequently suffered torture were honored in the church as holy martyrs. They were said to be baptized with their blood. But animals do not sin; they have nothing to ‘wash away with their blood. Why do we consider them martyrs? Because animals are absolute victims or victims in absolute terms. Without any justifications, other points of view, fact-checking, or enthusiasts evaluating crimes with phrases like ‘not everything is so unambiguous. At Igor Andrianov’s exhibition, everything is absolutely unambiguous! We have been witnessing death live since February 2022. And we have become accustomed to it despite the horror of what is happening. Reflection on murder, violence, and death logically leads the artist to images of executioner and victim. A few years ago, as a butcher and executioner, the artist depicted the Russian dictator, thereby removing questions about whose side he is on. Today at this exhibition, we see another answer—on the side of the victims. For us, viewers of this exhibition, it absolutely does not matter whether Igor Andrianov is a vegan or vegetarian, whether he eats pork or releases Christmas carp back into the Vltava River. We see the drama and tragedy of an artist who experiences immense pain from any violence. And the ability to feel someone else’s pain distinguishes an artist from a viewer. Thank you, Igor!”

Yesterday’s vernissage was an undeniable success—there were so many people that you could hardly move (it reminded me of “Here everyone is, Nikita, Dyusha Metelkin” from prehistoric times). I want to highlight the quality of the video art, which beautifully immersed us in the theme; Igor collaborated with Alexander Karnovsky (who also served as the event’s DJ), and he made the right choice.

Arkadiy Freydlin wrote a good post about the meanings of the exhibition, but the artist disagreed with him, as well as with the curatorial text by Anton Litvin.
Therefore, the author’s tour of the exhibition today was particularly interesting. No, Igor didn’t have recommendations for us or answers to our questions about what to do with this human cruelty. He—an artist—merely “drives nails” into our consciousness, marking painful points. He has a hammer, but unfortunately no crowbar. However, he showed and explained to us the inscriptions in cow and bird languages.

Then we painted a picture together. The maestro started by dividing the canvas in half with a horizontal line. We followed him and also divided the world into lower chaos with skulls and upper grace with butterflies.

But the maestro returned and turned everything upside down again, adding blue and red, dynamics and drama, contrast and internal logic.

Children and dogs participated. A particularly tender duet formed between Odysseus Os’kin and Monica the pug, who crawled between the legs of those painting and filming, tapping their little nails on the floor in unison.

The painting turned out bright, unsettling, and quite reflective of our shared inner state.

A huge thank you to everyone for the co-creation; the experiment and performance were successful, in my opinion. Close-up photos of details from the painting will be posted separately.

The representation of domestic animals in a style echoing the canons of iconography was particularly interesting. Although this approach may have offended some feelings, Igor himself emphasized at the opening that his works pursue exclusively humanistic goals. For me, the artist’s attempt to rethink the concept of sacrifice in the context of the complex and contradictory relationship with domesticated animals resonated deeply.

On one hand, humanity has used animals for sustenance for centuries; on the other hand, we attribute human qualities to them, placing them on an empathetic level with people. This duality in our relationship with our lesser brothers raises numerous philosophical questions.

In my opinion, the author, perhaps without intending to do so, touched on key aspects of human nature. He raised one of the most painful and relevant topics of our time—the internal struggle of man, his relationship with sacrifice, and ultimately with war as a phenomenon born from this duality.

Zvlášť zajímavé bylo zobrazení domácích zvířat v podobě, která se odráží v kanonech ikonopisu. Ačkoli tento přístup mohl někoho urazit, sám Igor na vernisáži zdůraznil, že jeho práce sledují výhradně humanistické cíle. Pro mě byla snaha autora přepracovat pojem oběti v kontextu složitého a protichůdného vztahu k domestikovaným zvířatům hluboce rezonující.

Na jedné straně lidstvo po staletí využívá zvířata k obživě, na druhé straně jim přisuzuje lidské vlastnosti, staví je do jednoho empatického řadu s lidmi. Tato dualita vztahu k našim menším bratřím vyvolává řadu filozofických otázek.

Podle mého názoru autor, možná aniž by si to uvědomoval, zasáhl klíčové aspekty lidské přirozenosti. Otevřel jedno z nejbolestivějších a nejaktuálnějších témat současnosti — vnitřní boj člověka, jeho vztah k oběti a nakonec k válce jako jevu, který je výsledkem této duality.

Особенно интересным стало представление домашних животных в образе, перекликающемся с канонами иконописи. Хотя такой подход, возможно, мог задеть чьи-то чувства, сам Игорь на открытии подчеркнул, что его работы преследуют исключительно гуманистические цели. Для меня попытка автора переосмыслить понятие жертвы в контексте сложного и противоречивого отношения к одомашненным животным оказалась глубоко резонансной.

С одной стороны, человечество веками использует животных для пропитания, с другой — наделяет их человеческими качествами, ставя их в один эмпатический ряд с людьми. Эта дуальность отношения к братьям нашим меньшим вызывает множество философских вопросов.

На мой взгляд, автор, возможно, даже не ставя перед собой такой цели, затронул ключевые аспекты человеческой природы. Он поднял одну из самых болезненных и актуальных тем современности — внутреннюю борьбу человека, его отношение к жертве и, в конечном итоге, к войне как к явлению, порождённому этой дуальностью.

Today, Igor Andrianov told us about his works. They are addressed to people through the eyes of animals, with texts about the amount of meat consumed.

The animals’ eyes are sad and trusting because they are domestic; they have entrusted us with their fates, and we…

Therefore, these animals exist in an aura of holiness, as if they are sinless before fate.

A priest once told me: it is not right to call animals by human names. You raise a pig named Glasha, a goat named Masha, and then you slaughter them for meat—it is not good.

Only humans are made in God’s image, and animals serve us. Millions of animals have no names; they are meat from birth.

Igor decided to give an aura of holiness to all the animals he depicted.

This is not a call to vegetarianism; it is an appeal from the weak and dependent beings to humanity.

On the theme of “Humanity,” Igor asked us to paint a picture together, and we did.

In the center of this humanity, a heart was drawn. Only a loving heart responds to the pain of others.

Thank you, Igor, for the paintings, and may there be new non-commercial projects.

Dnes nám Igor Andrianov pověděl o svých dílech.

Jsou to obrazy, které se obracejí k lidem skrze oči zvířat s texty o množství snězeného masa.

Oči zvířat jsou smutné a důvěřivé, protože jsou domácí; svěřili nám své osudy, a my je…

Proto jsou tato zvířata v aureole svatosti jako bezhříšní před osudem.

Jednou mi kněz řekl: není dobré nazývat zvířata lidským jménem. Vyrosteš prasátko Glašu, kozu Mašu, a pak je zabiješ na maso – to není v pořádku.

Jen člověk je podobný Bohu, a zvířata nám slouží.

Mnoha milionům zvířat chybí jména; od narození jsou to jen maso.

Igor se rozhodl dát aureolu svatosti všem zvířatům, která zobrazil.

Není to výzva k vegetariánství; je to oslovení slabých a závislých bytostí k člověku.

Na téma „Humanita“ nás Igor požádal, abychom společně namalovali obraz.

Uprostřed této lidskosti bylo nakreslené srdce.

Pouze milující srdce reaguje na bolest bližního.

Сегодня Игорь Андрианов нам рассказал о своих работах.

Это обращенные к людям через глаза зверей с текстами о количестве съеденного мяса.

Глаза грустные у животных, доверчивые, потому что животные домашние, они нам судьбы доверили, а мы их…

Поэтому эти звери в ореоле святости как безгрешные перед судьбой.

Священник однажды мне сказал: нельзя называть зверей человеческим именем. Вырастишь свинку Глашу, козу Машу, а потом их зарежешь на мясо – не хорошо.

Лишь человек подобие божие, а звери нам служат»

У миллионов животных нет имен, они от рождения – мясо.

Игорь решил дать ореол святости всем животным, которых он изобразил.

Это не призыв к вегетарианству это обращение слабых и зависимых от нас существ к человеку.

На тему «Гуманность» попросил нас Игорь нарисовать картину и мы это делали вместе.

В центре человеколюбия было нарисовано сердце.

Только любящее сердце отзывается на боль ближнего.

Спасибо, Игорь, за картины и пусть будут новые некоммерческие проекты.

On the second day, the artist talked about the entire exhibition and conducted a tour of each work. I got to know Igor, both as an artist and as a person, in 2018 thanks to SlovoNovo. Even now, when I come across photos from that exhibition, I think about how much I liked it.

And now, six years later, I see Igor’s cohesive conceptual project “New Saints.” The portraits of animals are painted in the style of iconography. My first thought was that people have disappointed me so much in recent years that let’s focus on animals.

Martyrs, saints, victims? A long time ago, an Orthodox teacher told me that animals have souls but they are not immortal. I don’t know if that’s true. And Igor places a text next to a portrait of a chicken stating that human civilization kills 15 billion chickens a year. Over many years, that’s a lot of souls.

The artistic concept of “New Saints” is great because it evokes many interpretations. I liked the curatorial text about the artist in the face of Death and about the unconditional sacrifice of animals as well as the humanistic explanation from the artist.

But despite Igor’s belief that the exhibition is not about religion but about humanism, I still see it as revealing the concept of “religion,” if we translate this word literally as “connection.” Through the connection between the viewer and the paintings one begins to look at animals in a completely different way.

I can’t say that I had an attack of sympathy and pity but there was a huge desire to look closely at them and at the paintings. I would like to express my gratitude to the museum organizer Tanya Weinstein and curator Anton Litvin for introducing such an interesting artist.

Na druhý den umělec vyprávěl o celé výstavě a provedl nás každým dílem. Igora jsem poznala jako umělce i jako člověka v roce 2018 díky SlovoNovo. I teď, když narazím na fotografie té výstavy, přemýšlím o tom, jak se mi líbila.

A nyní po šesti letech vidím Igorův celistvý konceptuální projekt „Noví svatí“. Portréty zvířat jsou malovány ve stylu ikonografie. Moje první myšlenka byla ta, že lidé mě v posledních letech tak zklamali, že se pojďme podívat na zvířata.

Mučedníci, svatí, oběti? Před dlouhou dobou mi jeden pravoslavný učitel řekl, že zvířata mají duše, ale nejsou nesmrtelná. Nevím jestli je to pravda. A Igor vedle portrétu kuřete umisťuje text o tom že lidská civilizace zabije ročně 15 miliard kuřat. Za mnoho let je to opravdu hodně duší.

Umělecký koncept „Nových svatých“ je skvělý tím že vyvolává mnoho interpretací. Líbilo se mi i kurátorské texty o umělci tváří v tvář Smrti a o bezpodmínečné oběti zvířete a humanistické vysvětlení od umělce.

Ale navzdory tomu že sám Igor považuje výstavu za ne náboženskou ale za humanistickou já v ní přesto vidím odhalení pojmu „náboženství“, pokud toto slovo přeložíme doslovně jako „spojení“. Skrze spojení diváka a obrazů začínáš na zvířata pohlížet úplně jinak.

Nemohu říct že bych měla záchvat soucitu a lítosti ale měla jsem obrovskou touhu se na ně a na obrazy pozorně podívat. Chtěla bych vyjádřit svou vděčnost muzeu organizátorce Tanyě Weinstein a kurátorovi Antonu Litvinovi za představení tak zajímavého umělce.

А во второй день художник рассказывал о всей выставке и провел экскурсию по каждой работе. Игоря, и как художника, и как человека, я узнала в 2018 году благодаря Словоново. До сих пор, встречая фотографии той выставки, думаю, как же она мне нравится.

И вот спустя 6 лет я вижу целостный концептуальный проект Игоря «Новые святые». Портреты животных, написанные в стилистике иконописи. Первая мысль у меня была о том, что люди в последние годы так разочаровали, что давайте смотреть на животных.

Мученники, святые, жертвы? Как-то давно мне один православный преподаватель сказал, что у животных есть душа, но она не бессмертна. Не знаю, так ли это. А Игорь на портрете курицы ставит текст о том, что в год человеческая цивилизация убивает 15 млрд куриц. За много лет это очень много душ.

Художественная концепция «Новых святых» хороша тем, что вызывает много интерпретаций. Мне понравился и кураторский текст про художника перед лицом Смерти и про безусловность жертвы животного, и гуманистическое объяснение художника.

Но несмотря на то, что сам Игорь считает, что выставка не про религию, а про гуманизм, я в ней все-таки вижу раскрытие понятия «религия», если переводить это слово буквально как «связность». Через связность зрителя и картин совершенно по-другому начинаешь смотреть на животных.

Не могу сказать, что у меня был приступ сочувствия и жалости, но огромное желание всматриваться в них и в картины. Слова благодарности музею и организатору Тане Вайнштейн и куратору Антону Литвину за то, что открыли такого интересного художника.

The Sunday exhibition of Igor Andrianov and the collaboratively created work on the theme of “humanism” made me reflect.
Humanism is a worldview in which man is the center of the universe. His interests are above those of other objects and subjects. It is commonly believed that humanism led to the understanding of the value of human life. Every (any) human life is a value. We must do everything to protect and preserve it.

The humanistic worldview has been actively developing for about 150 years and during this time it has encompassed and firmly embedded itself in Western civilization. And here’s what’s interesting: as a result, ethical boundaries have practically disappeared. Much of what was once considered unethical has become acceptable—within the framework of justifying the value of life. Add to this “depending on the point of view”—and we get almost complete permissiveness.

Returning to the theme of the exhibition—it concerns domestic “farm” animals. In the past, peasants had a “contract” with them: the peasant cares for the animal throughout its life, providing warmth and satiety, without knowing worries about food and shelter. In exchange, the peasant uses the animal’s strength (for labor) and its meat—when the time comes. A fair balance.

However, humanism, together with the industrialization of agriculture, has led to the loss of ethics in human-animal relationships. The attitude towards animals has become consumerist. This is a logical continuation of humanism: human interests come first, so all other beings are used as resources for oneself. What we have today is a consequence: millions of animals living in unsuitable conditions and high availability of meat products.

This is an interesting circle that humanism has completed, leading us into a rather wild and unethical society.

What do you think about this?

Nedělní výstava Igora Andrianova a společně vytvořená práce na téma „humanismus“ mě donutila zamyslet se.
Humanismus je světový názor, ve kterém je člověk středem vesmíru. Jeho zájmy jsou nad zájmy ostatních objektů a subjektů. Obvykle se má za to, že humanismus vedl k pochopení hodnoty lidského života. Každý (jakýkoli) lidský život je hodnotou. Musíme udělat vše, abychom ji chránili a zachovali.

Humanistický světový názor se aktivně vyvíjí asi 150 let a za tuto dobu se rozšířil a pevně zakořenil v západní civilizaci. A co je zajímavé: v důsledku toho prakticky zmizely etické hranice. Mnoho toho, co bylo dříve považováno za neetické, se stalo přijatelné — v rámci myšlenky ospravedlnění hodnoty života. Přidejme sem „záleží na úhlu pohledu“ — a dostáváme téměř úplnou bezohlednost.

Vraťme se k tématu výstavy — jedná se o domácí „zemědělská“ zvířata. Dříve měli sedláci s nimi „smlouvu“: sedlák se o zvíře stará po celý jeho život, poskytuje mu teplo a sytost, aniž by znal starosti o obživu a hledání úkrytu. Na oplátku sedlák využívá sílu (tažnou) zvířete a jeho maso — když přijde čas. Poctivá rovnováha.

Humanismus však spolu s industrializací zemědělství vedl k tomu, že etika vztahů člověka se zvířaty byla ztracena. Vztah k zvířatům se stal spotřebitelským. A to je logické pokračování humanismu: lidské zájmy jsou nadřazené, proto celý ostatní svět člověk využívá jako zdroj pro sebe. To, co máme dnes, je logickým důsledkem: miliony zvířat žijících v nevhodných podmínkách a vysoká dostupnost masných produktů.

Jaký zajímavý kruh humanismus uzavřel a přivedl nás do docela divoké a neetické společnosti.

Co si o tom myslíte?

Воскресная выставка Игоря Андрианова и совместно с присутствующими написанная работа на тему «гуманизм» заставили задуматься.

Гуманизм — это картина мира, в которой человек — центр мироздания. Его интересы выше интересов других объектов и субъектов. Принято считать, что именно гуманизм привел к пониманию ценности человеческой жизни. Каждая (любая) человеческая жизнь — это ценность. Мы обязаны сделать все, чтобы защитить и сохранить ее.

Гуманистическое мировоззрение активно развивается около 150 лет и за это время охватило и прочно внедрилось в западную цивилизацию. И вот, что интересно: в результате этого практически исчезли этические границы. Очень многое из того, что раньше было неэтичным, стало допустимо — в рамках идеи оправдания ценности жизни. Добавим сюда «смотря с какой точки зрения посмотреть» — и получаем практически полную вседозволенность.

Вернемся к теме выставки — речь идет о домашних «сельскохозяйственных» животных. Раньше у крестьян был с ними «договор»: крестьянин заботится о животном всю его жизнь, благодаря ему животное живет в тепле и сытости, не зная забот о пропитании и поиске укрытия. В обмен на это крестьянин использует силу (тяговую) животного и его мясо — когда приходит время. Честный баланс.

Гуманизм же вместе с индустриализацией сельского хозяйства привел к тому, что этика взаимоотношений человека с животными утрачена. Отношение к животным стало потребительским. И это логичное продолжение гуманизма: человеческие интересы выше, поэтому весь остальной мир человек использует как ресурс для себя. То, что мы имеем сегодня, закономерно: миллионы животных в мало пригодных для жизни условиях и высокая доступность мясных продуктов питания.

Вот какой интересный круг совершил гуманизм и привел нас в довольно дикое и а-этичное общество. Что думаете об этом?