So. Closer to Dmitry Vorontsov, and we shall try "to tell" - to dot a little... The man on an engraving is holding the uplifted left hand in effective "angular" gain, his head is dropped, we can't see his face, his foot is leaning …on the apparatus. Perhaps, he has put his head into a basin with water, and his left hand searches for a soap bar? Or low pitching a head, he goes fast to the spectator on a strange bicycle? Or he looks with effort in the microscope - kaleidoscope which construction is so unusual? But the artist facilitates the task: the character has put his head in an enormous meat grinder, and his left hand … Yes, but in these circumstances it is necessary to realise how a meat grinder functions. What a curious thing is a scene of the direct action!

Or. Three middle-aged men with scientific appearance bent over the object of examination. They look quite concentrated. What do they study, by their expression? A rare flower? A map of a war act? Or we see the guys from the UFO ship during the analysis of an early planet's naked nature? No! The passionless artist chose a skull, hardened on a mount, as an object of analysis. So. Whether Dmitry Vorontsov is dehumanisator? You see: not massive characters at all but rather gloomy subjects are the principals of these two engravings' "sense" composition. Subjects, exhibits, plants - they all yield maliciously concentrated suggestion. Sometimes similar exhibits do well without human presence. For example, there is something looking like "composite astrolabe" on the engraving which represents the instruments of the celestial investigations. The apparatus with two telescopes and angle gauge needn't the human presence, it indifferently studies its own sky.

In our opinion, there are three (among other) paradigms essentially influenced on the modern actor: 1) his craft and relevant technique, 2) spirit of the epoch's art, 3) problem of the personal myth which (whether it is desirable or not) appears even in neutral compositions. Is the dehumanisation a spirit of epoch or is it the problem of the personal myth? Here there is a composition. The circle with a pentagram in centre and other polygons (classical, taken from Bohme and his followers - representing the Universe around of the microcosm) is supported by the man on knees. In the foreground there is a large spider, which centre is on the overturned triangle of "ground" space element. The spider has great sharp paws - and two of them pierce the body of the atlant man. The idea is common, as everyone another - idee ce... It is possible to change a symbolic circle to something else, it is possible to leave only the spider in a white space of a sheet... But then it will be abstract and will not show the futility of human gains to the spectator, and so on.

Whether the artist should impose to us cheerful or gloomy conceptuality? It is difficult to say. Anyway, it is hardly necessary to insert a common reason, taken from the outside, into the drawing. In Dmitry Vorontsov' engravings the meat grinder, the skull, the spider - all these objects exist in their ominous uniqueness, and it does not correspond at all with the emotional ambivalence of the given objects.