The painting ‘1918’ is one of the most prominent works of the Ural region of the 1960s. It sparked arguments as soon as it was conceived. The reason is that this painting showed Lenin not as a humble and wise guide, but rather as a powerful and maybe even cruel ruler. The painters broke from the tradition of depicting Lenin which had been established in the USSR, so their contemporaries regarded the painting as a certain challenge. Young people laid flowers to it, while the authorities were looking for ways to forbid it altogether.

It is important that, despite the unconventional scene they chose, Brusilovsky and Mosin used the traditional imagery. In the 1960s, every element of the composition was instantly recognized: the ‘vozhd’ (the Communist leader), his allies, soldiers in budenovkas (broadcloth helmets), the Red Square, and revolutionary flags. An art expert Yevgeny Alexeev wrote that the painters used the imagery with no intention of changing its historic meaning,

However, this combination of the traditional imagery and a new approach to depicting the vozhd was often viewed as strange. Many people were puzzled by the poster image of Lenin. The sharp outlines of his head, the heavy chin, the vacant expression — all of this did not fit the conventional idea of a wise and kind ruler.

Lenin’s wide-open mouth particularly drew the eye of the public. Yevgeny Alexeev explained that the image of a person calling for attack was not favored even for revolutionary posters,

The viewers were excited not only by the subject matter of the painting, but also by its mixture of various pictorial techniques. Gennady Mosin, recognized for his monumental works, worked on it together with Misha Brusilovsky who was famous for his experiments. Most likely, it was Brusilovsky who contributed greatly to the bold stylization and unique composition of the ‘1918’. However, nothing can be said for certain, for there is not one pictorial technique that was solely characteristic of one of the artists. None of them went into detail about the allocation of their duties. If asked the question, Misha Brusilovsky would reply with a joke,

Nonetheless, both their contributions were significant, and the painting turned out complex and vivid. It possesses a balanced combination of the ‘austere’ poster art and the authentic look of the elements — the textured surface of the platform wood, the high degree of detail of the fabric folds, and the life-like portrayal of the characters.

After a long deliberation, the party agreed to let the ‘1918’ painting to enter exhibitions. However, its style still was not established as entirely government friendly, for the painters managed to convey the ambiguous feeling of that tragic period of Russian history. The timely and socially acute fashion of the painting influenced a whole generation of new Ural artists.