I would call it academicism. I don’t mean the painting tradition, as learnt in school, even though it is important. (This is what Kabakov was talking about). An academic school of painting teaches us the craft. The artist should be able to paint “inside” the canvas, but not just on its surface.
In my case we are talking about academic manner as the principle of building the project. A work of art should be syncretic. It is full only when it when it doesn't lack both the myth (non-verbal philosophy), and aesthetics. It is not necessary for art object to appeal to the "perfect" as an aesthetic category. "Sublime" and "disgusting" are no less valuable for art.
