Ben Farr. Level 4. OUIL401. Studio Brief 1 Discuss the role that Illustration can play during periods of Political and/or social upheaval Image makers can be hugely influential during times of political and social upheaval. A role of illustration in politically or socially turbulent times can be to create a coherent visual identity or brand for a movement or political party. A compelling visual identity can prove a powerful persuasion tool and unite people behind a cause or set of ideals. Effective image making can help make sense of a political issue and make it seem more accessible. At the start of the twentieth century Russia was going through a period of extreme political and social instability. There was huge unrest amongst the poverty-stricken working class. In 1905 protesters converged at the gates of the Tsar’s Winter Palace. Police killed over 100 peaceful protesters, this day is now referred to as Bloody Sunday. The events of Bloody Sunday led to nation-wide revolts and strike action. Trust and confidence in Tsar Nicolas II had been lost. The Tsar managed to cling on to power by creating a parliamentary body with representatives from the working people. WW1 prolonged the Tsar’s stay in power, as the country attempted to rally behind their leader, but by October 1917 the revolutionaries had lost patience, Vladimir Lenin and his Bolshevik party had seized control. At the same time as the political and social revolution in Russia, art was also entering into a new era. A group of avant-garde artists in were developing a new art form, leaving behind the bourgeois ‘art for art’s sake’ that had gone before. They wanted to make art that had a social purpose, art had to be understood by the general public. They strived to achieve complete abstraction; getting rid of distractions to create minimal artwork that could be easily interpreted by a largely illiterate working class. This group of artists became known as the Constructivists. The Constructivist ideals were aligned with those of Lenin’s and his new emerging government. ‘In an unusual alliance in the story of modern art, the artists of Russia were wholeheartedly with the establishment, not against it. And what better way for the Bolsheviks to promote their radical and progressive new way of life than embracing the country’s radical and progressive artists?’ (Will Gompertz, 2012, p180). The backing by the new government meant opportunity for the constructivists as they were enlisted to promote the new regime. ‘The Revolution had swept away the middle class. From now on the only art patron would be the state. By an extraordinary stroke of luck, the Russian avant-garde got, from the embryo state, the patron it needed’ (Robert Hughes, 1991, p87). Robert Hughes (1991) argues that constructivism was the closest of all the Russian art tendencies to Lenin’s ideals. ‘Instead of Primitivism, modernity: the modernity of rivets, celluloid, aeroplane wings…Instead of the static figure, the dynamic unfolding forces. Art (its creators hoped) would be open to everyone instead of a few initiated souls’. The new government was eager to get their radical constructivist brand image out in the public. ‘The task given to the artists was straightforward: create a visual identity for communism’ (Will Gompertz, 2012, p180).
Vladimir Tatlin the founder of the constructivist movement was the perfect figurehead for constructivism in the eyes of the government. He had worked as a sailor and a marine carpenter so was a working man of the people, these skills also fed into his work. He had gained artistic notoriety through his sculptures which he called ‘Corner Reliefs’. They were assembled sculptures from everyday items: wood and iron and wire, constructed in corners where Russians place their icons. Of the back of this success Tatlin was asked by the People’s Commissariat for Education to design a Monument to the Third Communist International. The immense monument was planned to be three hundred feet higher than the Eiffel tower; the symbol of a new Russian age of construction. This is the clearest example of Tatlin’s utopianism, which which was the feeling the government wanted to transmit to the people of Russia. It became known as Tatlin’s tower and is one of the most famous buildings never to be built. Gompertz (2012) writes that the purpose of the tower was an outward statement to the world to show that the Soviet Union was the height of modernity, bigger and better than anywhere else, dwarfing the Eiffel Tower. ‘No state had ever set down its ideas with such radically abstract images, and that they were not actually built is less significant than that they were imagined’ (Robert Hughes, 1991, p87). Many of the Constructivists ambitious projects and utopian plans for the future never came to fruition ‘Russia had no spare bronze, steel or man power. Artists were therefore employed on more immediate Agitprop jobs that have mostly perished – posters, street theatre floats, and parade décor’ (Robert Hughes, 1991, p87). Tatlin’s tower shows the willingness to strive for the unobtainable that the constructivists exuded. But does the fact that many of the Constructivists ambitious projects and utopian plans for the future never came to fruition show a partnership between artists and government striving for a better future or one that is promising utopia and failing to deliver it to the people? Ever since the Bolsheviks took power Russia had been embroiled in civil war. ‘Despite the hardships, the food and fuel shortages, artists managed to express some of this excitement in the revolutionary festivals’ (Christina Lodder, 1983, p47). Could this be perceived as a government which was happy to commission artists to distract the people form more serious problems in the country? El Lissitzky’s lithographic poster: Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge (1919) is an example of how illustrators and artists can use symbolism to help create a brand image for a cause or political movement. ‘He made posters which were meant to communicate with the masses in a purely abstract way. How do you incite people against the White Russian army? The message is ‘beat the whites with a red wedge’ (The Powers That Be, 1980). With its combination of early graphic design and political symbolism, Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge is regarded as one of the most iconic constructivist propaganda posters produced.
With Russia falling into civil war and the white guard looking to overthrow Lenin’s socialist government, El Lissitzky took it upon himself to do something to support the Bolshevik side. It was believed at the time that the non-objective nature of Lissitzky’s work would lend itself to being understood by the generally uneducated masses. ‘During the Civil War the requirements of agitation and propaganda had fostered the creation of images which could be easily identified by a largely illiterate population’ (Christina Lodder, 1983, p184). The Image was produced as a poster and distributed in order to try and generate support for the revolution. It was not for the gallery and but for the streets and the people. A red triangle pierces a white circle, the canvas cut across by a diagonal line dividing the picture in half, white on one side, black on the other. Visually striking, but was the message of El Lissitzky’s work actually universally understood? The idea was that by communicating through abstracted images the illiterate people found it easier to interpret the message of the works and perhaps the general public at the time understood this symbolism and imagery. but was the visual language too different to what had gone before? It was work like this that was supposed to instil confidence in the oppressed population, it depicts the Bolshevik party as the dominant force in Russia, which would raise moral during the revolution. Maybe the people were swept along by the boldness and excitement of this completely new abstract image making. If they weren’t then it could be said that this famous piece of civil war propaganda wasn’t connecting with its intended audience and el Lissitzky was not fulfilling his role as communicator to the people. Alexander Rodchenko was a leading figure in the development of the constructivists. He is a key example of someone who seized the opportunity to create work in support of the new communist government and their ideas and enterprises. Rodchenko’s work stretched across many art forms, making him one of the best exponents of the communist brand identity. Of all the constructivists Rodchenko’s work was the most commercial and most accessible in everyday life. ‘His images were as direct and arresting as a shout in the street. They were not fantasies, like modern advertising, but organizations of what was available: what the street gave’ (Robert Hughes, 1991, p95).
Lenin demanded that artists increase their usefulness and contribution to society and widen the distribution of their work. This meant that the constructivist principles became allencompassing stretching across all fields, from posters, to packaging, films and festivals. In 1921 Famines and food shortages hit Russia. To help alleviate the problem Lenin allowed some private enterprises under new economic policy. Many within Lenin’s party didn’t like this move as they saw it as a compromise with capitalism. Rodchenko however thrived under these new circumstances. Rodchenko’s commitment to the revolution and the Lenin government led him to leave fine art all-together, devoting his skills towards design.
His piece Lengiz. Books on all the branches of knowledge (1924), sometimes referred to as ‘Books!’, was the start of Rodchenko’s obsession with the mass produced image. The work takes on a new graphic design style, combining photography with block shapes of gouache and cut paper on photographic paper, mounted on cardboard. Surrounding the Photograph are precise, tessellating, geometric shapes. The design is crisp and bold. It feels definite as though each shape and colour has been well thought through in order to construct the composition. The purpose of the poster is to increase reading amongst working people. Rodchenko made many pieces of design and advertising work to promote different government campaigns such as cultural development, electrification and education. He teamed up with Vladimir Mayakovsky, a futurist poet, who would write the words for their posters. The two became seen as experts in advertising and would design posters and packaging for state-run companies. ‘They sought to propagandize for goods and consumption in a way that accorded with their ideology. Thus they could continue to promote communist ideals, partly by selling products that would help strengthen the Bolshevik regime financially’ (Vibece Salthe, 2013, p33). Rodchenko along with artists like El Lissitzky and Gustav Klutsis also pioneered the photomontage. The connection through photography to reality and truth was a key tool in communicating with the people. ‘it was precisely this ability to present a concrete image linking the everyday life of the viewer with the political and social precepts of the communist party that made the photomontage such valuable propaganda weapon’ (Christina Lodder, 1983, p187).
In his book Propaganda Edward Bernays (1928) argues that all leadership uses propaganda and manipulation of the news to present themselves, commercial products and social ideas to the masses. He refers to how society is controlled and steered towards a way of living or to create acceptance for an idea by invisible governors as “the mechanism, which controls the public mind” (Bernays (1928) p18). Although Bernays is writing about America, the principles can still be applied to Russia. In an era when the poster was the primary form of mass communication Lenin’s government had control over the constructivist’s output and therefore could create a public image for Lenin himself and his party. Lenin’s death in 1924 brought this blossoming period of Russian art crashing to an end. Once Stalin gained power he routed many of the constructivists out. Stalin didn’t care for the constructivist ideologies. Many of the constructivists left Russia those who stayed ended up in jail or were deprived of work. ‘Stalin, the terrible simplifier, made anything that wasn’t mass art a political crime. The Constructivists were, from his point of view, bourgeois formalists, little specks of useless free imagination in the great ocean of his new Russia. Some he killed, some he starved, and all of them he degraded’ (The Powers That Be, 1980). ‘State art in Russia went back to its traditional task of reinforcing the narcissism of power’ (Robert Hughes, 1991, p97). One could argue that under Stalin the role of artists and illustrators was still to create a visual identity and brand image for the government, they just have less choice and artistic freedom about how to do it than under the previous government. ‘And so you might think the one brave attempt to connect revolutionary art to revolutionary politics was crushed’ (The Powers that Be, 1980). Socialist Realism became the dominant art form in Russia, glorifying communism and potentially partisan. ‘The only moral of this, apart from the familiar fact that artists tend to work for whoever pays them, is that the modernist styles were value-free and could serve almost any ideological interest. This was equally true of that dictator’s delight, neo- classicism, the house style of Hitler and Stalin’ (Robert Hughes, 1991, p99) The success of the constructivist aesthetic and design didn’t die with Lenin, artist László Moholy-Nagy continued their ideals of form before function while working as part of the Bauhaus movement. The bold design aesthetic can be seen in protest and propaganda art today; a primary example of this is the work of street artist Shepard Fairey. Fairey came to prominence of the back of his OBEY campaign. The idea behind this was to question advertising and propaganda and make work without an obvious motive, to provoke thought and encourage people to question the images they see around them. The OBEY message became associated with an opposition to rules and figures of authority and power. Fairey shares the opinion of the constructivists that art should exist outside of gallery spaces - it can have greater impact when placed in a public environment. Unlike the Constructivists Fairey is not in the pocket of a government or regime. Fairey uses street art because of its directness, he has used it to comment on society, and to criticise governments and political decisions especially during the Bush administration. Like the Constructivists with Lenin, Fairey’s HOPE poster in support of Barack Obama came from a place of appreciation for the man, and a shared set of ideas. ‘His opposition to the war in Iraq when it was an unpopular position, his stands on health-care reform and the environment and decreasing the power of lobbyists—those were all things that resonated
with me’ (Shepard Fairey 2010). There was opposition to the Obama HOPE poster from some corners because this was such an obvious endorsement of a politician and a figure of power, going against the work Fairey had made before. But he justifies the campaign by saying that he felt Obama represented everything that was wrong with the previous administration. People can feel like spectators politically sometimes but Fairey says “If you want to Change what’s going on around you you have to be willing to participate” (Shepard Faiey, 2008). The HOPE poster was an emblem of the Obama election campaign and has become one of the most iconic political artworks of recent times and perhaps in history. Fairey made has made his opinions clear on artists and designers having a political voice; ‘The more people that participate in democracy the better it works’ (Shepard Fairey, Obey this Film 2014).
Because of his fame Fairy now regularly exhibits in white space galleries, a far departure from his roots as a street artist. In an unusual alliance in 2009 Fairey was commissioned to create the visual branding for Saks Fifth Avenue. If the Obama poster went against Fairey’s previous work, this campaign seems a further departure from his street art, punk roots. There are clear constructivist design principles being used in this campaign. The red, white and black, the diagonal lines, references to deconstructing, it’s almost as if Rodchenko were making work for a state run company. Does Fairey see his role as a designer to promote Saks and therefore generate spending in-turn helping the US economy? Creating a communist propaganda style campaign for an expensive clothing outlet seems a little odd, hopefully Fairey is being ironic, poking fun at the absurdity of the combination. ‘Arm yourself with a slouchy Bag’ has Fairey lost his artistic integrity and become a pawn for companies and authority? The Constructivists were more designers or illustrators than artists. There is an accepted belief that artists are rebellious against the powers that be, but illustrators or designers in times of political or social upheaval can be commissioned to create work supporting the government or creating a visual identity for said government or leader. Alexander Rodchenko produced two manifestos in 1921, the first announcing the arrival of the
constructivists. Soon after he released a second manifesto proclaiming death to art and its bourgeois ways. He proceeded to change the name of the Constructivists to Productivists. This signalled a new direction for the artists, who were to become designers. It is this change in direction to create designs and illustrations that sees the constructivist really give themselves to the communist cause. It could be argued that in times of social and political upheaval that illustrators have more power to impact on the opinions of people. Unless they have a specific interest in the arts, people tend to look at art, and especially fine art, as not for them. But through posters, packaging, flyers and leaflets, book covers, and school text books illustration can become part of people’s lives, permeating onto the streets and filtering into people’s homes.
Bibliography Books: BARKHATOVA, Yelena, BÜCHTEN, Daniela, SOLOVEV, Denis and SALTHE, Vibece. (2013) Propaganda! - Russian and Norwegian posters 1920-1939. Nasjonalbiblioteket: National Library of Norway. Oslo. BERNAYS, Edward, (1928). Propaganda. Ig Publishing. Brooklyn. GOMPERTZ, Will, (2012). What are you looking at? 150 Years of modern art in the blink of an eye. Penguin Books ltd. 80 Strand, London WC2R ORI, Penguin Group. HUGHES, Robert, (1991). The Shock of the New. Thames & Hudson. 181A High Holborn, London, WCIV 7QX. LODDER, Christina, (1983). Russian Constructivism. New Haven, Yale University Print. MOORE, Colin, (2010). Propaganda Prints: A History of Art in the Service of Social and Political Change. A&C Black Publishers. 36 Soho Square, London, W1D 3QY. ROWELL, Margit and WYE, Deborah. (2002). The Russian Avant-Garde Book, 1910-1934. Museum of Modern Art. 11 West 53 Street, New York. Websites: ANALOGUE76 (2013) The Russian Constructivists. [Internet] Available from < http://analogue76.com/blog/entry/the_russian_constructivists [24/3/16]. BURGOYNE, Patrick, (2008). Constructivism: the ism that just keeps givin’. [Internet] Available from < http://www.creativereview.co.uk/cr-blog/2008/august/constructivism-theism-that-just-keeps-givin/ [27/01/16]. HATHERLEY, Owen, (2011). The constructivists and the Russian revolution in art and architecture [Internet] Available from < www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2011/nov/04/russian-avant-garde-constructivists [27/01/16]. LANDRY, Renee-Claude. GRAD: Gallery for Russian arts and design. (2014). [Internet] Available from < https://www.grad-london.com/blog/solidarity-people-/ [24/3/16]. OBEY GIANT, The art of Shepard Fairey (1995). [Internet] Available from < https://obeygiant.com [4/5/16]. TATE. Constructivism. [Internet] Available from < http://www.tate.org.uk/learn/onlineresources/glossary/c/constructivism [24/3/16].
The Art Story. Constructivism [Internet] Available from < http://www.theartstory.org/movement-constructivism.htm [25/01/16]. WILSON, Eric. (2009) Soviet-era art inspires a Saks ad campaign. [Internet] Available from < http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/08/fashion/08ROW.html [4/5/16]. Video:
HUGHES, Robert. (1980). The Shock of the New – ‘The Powers That Be’. BBC. Available from < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JEx6CDW6-o [4/5/16]. NOVAK, Brett (2014) Shepard Fairey: Obey this film. Available from < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcSBr4ZKmrQ [4/5/16].