Vrubel attracted flowers along with precious carpets, luxurious carpets and antique fabrics. These living jewelry impressed the artist with special plastic beauty, as well as the inexhaustible visual potential that lurked in them.
When the artist was still living in Kiev, the difficult financial situation forced him to give private lessons to two ladies who wanted to learn how to draw in watercolor. Tired of theoretical explanations, the artist simply showed how to draw flowers. The selection of the latter as the object of the image is explained by the fact that one of the students, Natalya Matsneva, once painted them.
In total, Vrubel depicted about a dozen flowers, the outline of each of which was a unique masterpiece. The artist never sought to draw details, but this did not prevent him from finding something unique in such a fairly banal subject as flowers. As for Leonardo, for Vrubel there were no unworthy images of objects. The only important factor for the artist was the potential inexhaustibility of the forms of the subject image.
Each flower is endowed with Vrubel individual character. So, an orchid, depicted in one of Vrubel’s paintings, breaks frantically through a gloomy blue background, which gives it a certain aggressiveness. On the contrary, the dogrose depicted in Field Flowers draws attention to modesty and incompleteness - Vrubel sometimes quit work halfway if he saw that she had already exhausted herself.
The sketch “Lily” was created at a time when private lessons in Kiev were already behind. However, the image of the flower, which was intended as part of the stained glass window, has all of the above features. Infinity is the only word that comes to mind when you look at this lily. The richness of the lines conveyed in the spirit characteristic of Symbolists reveals a flower on the other hand, which only confirms the talent of Vrubel the painter.
Penitent Mary Magdalene Titian