Constructivism (seeds of modernism) by indiaoshea

Bauhaus Archive Berlin Museum of Design

CONSTRUCTIVISM Seeds of Modernism

The making of the Bauhaus concept, developments in design history 1830 to 1950

James Volks & Susan Harrison

• El Lissitzky • Naum Gabo

Artists

Introduction

• Alexander Rodchenko

03 Conclusion

Graphic Design

The Constructivism movement began in the early 1920’s amidst the Russian Revolution. Constructivists were a group of Avant Garde artists who sought for change in their current society. Their goal was to educate citizens and ‘to create an ideal image of the future and a memory of the past.’

Introduction

The Russian political party known as the Bolsheviks, found by Vladimir Lenin, wanted to overtake and authorize stability in Russia. The most proficient way Lenin thought to do this was through art. Constructivists believed art needed to have a purpose. Coinciding with the efforts to keep the Bolsheviks forefront of the Russian political parties, they generated public posters, wall paintings and were ‘commissioned to create advertising campaigns’. This stemmed from the old Russian tradition of the Lubok, which was a way to inform peasants of current events within their city and kept them updated on the political status. Constructivists were efficient workers who focused on symmetry and proportions, using flat colours, geometric shapes and precise lines when creating their work. With this ideology in mind, they had three fundamental principles they would adhere to. Tectonics, which refers to the assemble of their art and how they will begin their design. Faktura, indicates the appropriate use of materials chosen and the purpose. Lastly, Construction is associated with how well they had organised their designs.

Constructivism was the new mode that emboied this essentially anti- aesthetic attitude. Constructivism's first or "laboratory" period reached fruition in the "Non-Objective Creation and Suprematism" exhibition of January 1919. By 1921 Constructivists were announcing the "death" of art. The artist had come to be seen as an engineer interested in modern materials, dynamics, and social utility. Many of the Constructivist groups turned their attention to attempts to join art and technology. In Magdalena Dabrowski's words, "a new Productivist phase in art began." Some of the results of this shift are seen in the industrial designs of Popova and Stepanova, Rodchenko's graphics and photography, and Malevich's designs for chinaware. These Constructivist efforts laid the very foundations for modern industrial and graphic design.

A movement with origins in Russia, Constructivism was primarily an art and architectural movement. It rejected the idea of art for arts' sake and the traditional bourgeois class of society to which previous art had been catered. Instead it favored art as a practise directed towards social change or that would serve a social purpose. Developing after World War I, the movement sought to push people to rebuild society in a Utopian model rather than the one that had led to the war. The term construction art was first coined by Kasmir Malevich in reference to the work of Aleksander Rodchenko. Graphic Design in the constructivism movement ranged from the production of product packaging to logos, posters, book covers and advertisements. Rodchenko's graphic design works became an inspiration to many people in the western world including Jan Tschichold and the design motif of the constructivists is still borrowed, and stolen, from in much of graphic design today.

Alexander Rodchenko, Cover for Novyi Lef, 1928

Artists

Alexander Rodchenko

Alexander Rodchenko was born in 1891 in Saint Petersburg. At the age of 14, he and his family moved to Kazan. Here, he met the artist Varvara Stepanova, who he would marry and work with for the rest of his life. In 1914, the couple moved to Moscow where Rodchenko enrolled in the Graphic Section of the Stroganov School of Applied Arts. In the following half decade, Rodchenko’s aesthetic practice would evolve quickly; while he counts among his earliest sources of inspiration the Art Nouveau theatrical drawings of Mir Iskusstva (World of Art). By 1915, Rodchenko had earned a spot in Moscow’s Futurist circles. In 1916, he exhibited his artworks at the Futurist exhibition Magazin in Moscow, organized by Vladimir Tatlin. Rodchenko was a symbolic artist within the Constructivism movement.

He was an all rounded man, who balanced several different realms of design, from Painting, Photography, Sculpture and Graphic design. Rodchenko studied at Kazan School of Art in Odessa. In these years (1910 - 1914) he learnt many skills and began his youthful journey of success. The Art Nouveau movement and Futurism is what led him to become the influential Constructivist. Alongside these movements he was greatly influenced by Kazimir Malevich, the founder of Suprematism. This movement involved the use of basic forms such as circles, squares, lines and rectangles. Rodchenko, created his noted Black on Black series, he directly challenged the more established artist and the fundamental principles of Suprematism. The white in Malevich’s paintings connoted the infinite expanse of the ideal.

Rodchenko used black, in a variety of textures and finishes, to ground his painting in its physical properties, bringing attention to the material quality of its surface. In contrast to the tilting plane of White on White , the arcing forms of Rochenko’s canvas suggest dynamic motion. ‘Non Objective painting No.80’ is an Oil painting on canvas. The intent of this work differed from Malevich’s, he wanted to express the quality of materials, through the texture and surface. The black background permits the colours on top to excel. According to (Examining art of the WW1 era) it also ‘symbolizes infinite space’. Examining the chosen shape in the centre of the composition, the circle was selected precisely to again reflect the idea of infinity and movement. With the addition of the white circular sparks spaced around, adds a shadow and layering affect, giving it a three dimensional appearance.

Later Rodchenko moved towards creating artworks concerning the Russian revolution. He had great ambition and engagement during this period. In spite of this, he evaded painting and photography and so forth developed and created posters, advertisements and propagandic designs to prevail the citizens of the Soviet Union. His most renowned creation of Graphic design during this time was ‘Books!’, a Soviet political poster. Reverberating the goal of Constructivism, which was to create a meaning and purpose through art, ‘Books!’ communicated an ‘arresting art that reflected the everyday lives of the Russian people’ reported (Agitation and Propaganda). This was the most efficient way Rodchenko and fellowconstructivists believed ‘best conveyed the messages of the Communist state to the masses’ stated (Art Through Time: A Global View).

Alexander Rodchenko, ‘Non Objective Painting No.80’

09 15

Alexander Rodchenko, 'Books!' 1924

In this 1924 poster, Rodchenko combines the two media in an image that is mechanical and linear. The text, in big block letters, is clear and legible; no flourish of the artist’s hand is evident. The photograph of a woman who appears to be calling out the Russian word for “books” is Lilya Brik, a fellow member of the Constructivist circle. Her image has been manipulated and integrated into the bold design. The aesthetic of immediate communication exemplified by Rodchenko’s poster was characteristic of official Soviet art of the period and was in use not only for posters, but also for political journals, book covers, and other kinds of propaganda. Through images that were visually arresting and easily accessible, Rodchenko and his colleagues believed that they could best convey the messages of the Communist state to the masses. In this 1924 poster, Rodchenko combines the two media in an image that is mechanical and linear. The text, in big block letters, is clear and legible; no flourish of the artist’s hand is evident. The photograph of a woman who appears to be calling out the Russian word for “books” is Lilya Brik, a fellow member of the Constructivist circle. Her image has been manipulated and integrated into the bold design. The aesthetic of immediate communication exemplified by Rodchenko’s poster was characteristic of official Soviet art of the period and was in use not only for posters, but also for political journals, book covers, and other kinds of propaganda. Through images that were visually arresting and easily accessible, Rodchenko and his colleagues believed that they could best convey the messages of the Communist state to the masses.

In 1923, Rodchenko teamed up with the period’s most experimental Constructivist theorists, artists and designers to establish the magazine Left Front of Arts (LEF). Through articles, artworks, and poems, the contributors explored the ways that the arts could express Bolshevik ideas through formalist principles and promote a new Socialist culture. Rodchenko designed the covers, initially through the medium of photomontage, and in later years, through photography. One of Rodchenko’s most successful projects that appeared in LEF was a 1923 photo collage that he specifically designed to accompany the text of Vladimir Mayakovsky’s poem “Pro Eto” (About This). Mayakovsky wrote the poem to his muse and lover, Lily Brik. For the project, Rodchenko pasted a portrait of Lily Brik looking straight at the camera with piercing eyes, over the blue, gouache title. Other pages combine snapshots of the two lovers alongside often surprising or humorous juxtapositions: accompanying the line “and again / the walls of the burning steppe / ring and sign in the ear with the two step,” Rodchenko pasted Lily Brik’s face amid images of Western decadence such as a foxtrotting couple, whisky and cigars. “Pro Eto” was one of many collaborations between Mayakovsky and Rodchenko on graphic work, who would be especially prolific in the field of advertising. In 1923, Mosselprom, the state advertising agency, hired the duo to create posters promoting state-sponsored household objects like table oil and bread. In each of these posters, the slogan was produced by Mayakovsky and the collage work by Rodchenko. Their collaboration even extended into the realm of bookmaking: around 1924, Rodchenko created a series of portraits of Mayakovsky and incorporated them into a collage for the back cover of Mayakovsky’s book A Conversation with a Tax Collector About Poetry. In the collage, it appears as if Mayakovsky’s head has transformed into the Earth, and airplanes whimsically fly around him.

Alexander Rodchenko, ‘Pro Eto’ 1923

In 1891 Rodchenko became an artist and designer of many mediums including painting, photography, sculpture, advertising and packaging. Heavily influenced by the upheaval surrounding the Russian revolution of 1917, he was one of the most prolific constructivist artists of the period. He was also a member of the Productivists, which pushed for the introduction of art into every day life, a concept which in many ways describes modern day graphic design. His early focus was on painting before starting his career as a graphic designer, later he would experiment with photography and photo-montage. Most of his design work was for the Russian airline company Dobrolet, producing many packages, advertisements, logos and posters. His design work for other clients ranged from book covers to bookmarks, photo-montage and illustration, and even set and costume design for various Russian theaters.

Alexander Rodchenko, Pioneer girl, 1930

In 1921 he declared "The End of Painting" when he exhibited three solid monochromatic canvases, one each, in hues of red, yellow and blue. He deemed that he had reduced painting to its logical conclusion and that there was no reason to continue exploring the medium. This opened the doors for the beginning of a new Utopian way of life, and way of approaching art. Rodchenko's work influenced so many of the designers of the early 20th century that it is impossible to catalog the vast reaches of the idealogy that he helped define during his career. The Museum of Modern Art, New York presents the first U.S. retrospective of the work of Alexander Rodchenko (18911956), one of the leading Russian artists in the period following the Revolution of October 1917. On view from June 25 through October 6, 1998, the exhibition is comprised of more than 300 works in a wide range of mediums and includes an approximate reconstruction of the Workers’ Club that Rodchenko

Alexander Rodchenko, ‘Fire Escape’ 1927

designed for the Exposition Internationale des Arts Décoratifs et Industriels Modernes. It is organized by Magdalena Dabrowski, Senior Curator, Department of Drawings, and Peter Galassi, Chief Curator, Department of Photography, The Museum of Modern Art; and guest curator Leah Dickerman, Assistant Professor of Art History, Stanford University. The exhibition is accompanied by a book, which reproduces all of the works in the exhibition and includes essays by the three curators as well as by Varvara Rodchenko and Aleksandr Lavrent'ev, the artist's daughter and grandson. The exhibition and its accompanying publication are made possible by The International Council of The Museum of Modern Art and the William Randolph Hearst Endowment Fund. Additional funding is provided by The Trust for Mutual Understanding, The New York Times Company Foundation, and the Howard Gilman Foundation.

Alexander Rodchenko, Dinamo, 1935

El Lissitzky, Self Portrait, 1914

El Lissitzky

El Lissitzky another highly regarded artist from the 1920’s. He grew up in Vitebsk, now known as Belarus. In 1909 he applied to Saint Petersburg Art Academy, where he was rejected due to the law at that current time, which stood by ‘only allowing a certain number of Jewish students to attend Russian Universities’ (The Cultural Vanguard). When the Bolsheviks gained victory in the Russian Revolution, along-with emancipation for the Jews, Lissitzky’s systematic view “das zielbewußte Schaffen” meaning the artist could change society, came to life. He, similarly to Rodchenko formulated propagandic works in relation to the Russian revolution and the Bolsheviks.

Lissitzky’s most celebrated artwork from this era was one of Graphic design, recognised by the title ‘Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge’. This abstract poster symbolized the current political struggle. Observing the composition, there is a red ‘acute-angled triangle emerging from the upper left corner, puncturing the circle situated on the right hand side, pointing to its centre.’ (Kamczycki / Books.google.ie) . The geometric forms within this composition may survey nonrepresentational qualities, nevertheless actually hold a considerably large amount of essence. The white circle on right hand side personifies supporters of the old order and the red wedge exemplifies the Bolsheviks.

El Lissitzky was a Russian born artist, designer, typographer, photographer and architect who designed many exhibitions and propaganda for the Soviet Union in the early 20th century. His development of the ideas behind the Suprematist art movement were very influential in the development of the Bauhaus and the Constructivist art movements. His stylistic characteristics and experimentation with production techniques developed in the 1920s and 30s have been an influence on graphic designers since. In his early years he developed a style of painting in which he used abstract geometric shapes, which he referred to as "prouns", to define the spatial relationships of his compositions. The shapes were developed in a 3-dimensional space, that often contained varying perspectives, which was a direct contrast to the ideas of suprematist theories which stressed the simplification of shapes and the use of 2D space only. He moved around in the 1920s and spent time in both Germany as a cultural representative of Russia and, after he was diagnosed with pulmonary tuberculosis, Switzerland in a Swiss sanatorium. But this never stopped him from working as he continued to produce propaganda posters, books, buildings and exhibitions for the Soviet Union. in 1932 Stalin demanded that artists conform to much stricter guidelines or be blacklisted, Lissitzky managed to retain his position as head of exhibitions. In 1941 his tuberculosis overcame him and caused his death. Lissitzky’s entire career was laced with the belief that the artist could be an agent for change, later summarized with his edict, “das zielbewußte Schaffen” (goal-oriented creation).[2] Lissitzky, of Lithuanian Jewish оrigin, began his career illustrating Yiddish children’s books in an effort to promote Jewish culture in Russia. When only 15 he started teaching, a duty he would maintain for most of his life. Over the years, he taught in a variety of positions, schools, and artistic media, spreading and exchanging ideas. He took this ethic with him when he worked with Malevich in heading the suprematist art group UNOVIS, when he developed a variant suprematist series of his own, Proun, and further still in 1921, when he took up a job as the Russian cultural ambassador to Weimar Germany, working with and influencing important figures of the Bauhaus and De Stijl movements during his stay. In his remaining years he brought significant innovation and change to typography, exhibition design, photomontage, and book design, producing critically respected works and winning international acclaim for his exhibition design. This continued until his deathbed, where in 1941 he produced one of his last works – a Soviet propaganda poster rallying the people to construct more tanks for the fight against Nazi Germany. In 2014, the heirs of the artist, in collaboration with Van Abbemuseum and leading worldwide scholars on the subject, established the Lissitzky Foundation in order to preserve the artist’s legacy and to prepare a catalogue raisonné of the artist’s oeuvre.

Lissitzky’s artistic interests at the time were exclusively centred on Jewish themes and culture. He took part in Semyon Ansky’s ethnographical expedition investigating the monuments of Jewish culture in the Pale of Settlement, illustrated Yiddish books such as Moyshe Broderzon’s Sikhes Khulin 1917; “Profane, or Idle, Chatter” and Khad gadye 1919; “One Kid”. The illustrations for these books show the influence of both Cubo-Futurism, a Russian offshoot of European Futurism, and lubki (inexpensive, hand-coloured popular prints). In his early years he developed a style of painting in which he used abstract geometric shapes, which he referred to as “prouns”, to define the spatial relationships of his compositions. The shapes were developed in a 3-dimensional space, that often contained varying perspectives, which was a direct contrast to the ideas of suprematist theories which stressed the simplification of shapes and the use of 2D space only. He moved around in the 1920s and spent time in both Germany as a cultural representative of Russia and, after he was diagnosed with pulmonary tuberculosis, Switzerland in a Swiss sanatorium. But this never stopped him from working as he continued to produce propaganda posters, books, buildings and exhibitions for the Soviet Union. in 1932 Stalin demanded that artists conform to much stricter guidelines or be blacklisted, Lissitzky managed to retain his position as head of exhibitions. In 1941 his tuberculosis overcame him and caused his death.

El Lissitzky, Sikhes Khulin, 1917

El Lissitzky, ‘Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge’ 1919

According to El Lissitzky and his friends, the art before 1917 was “old-fashioned” compared to new art movements called Constructivism. ‘Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge’ is a great example of this movement. Futuristic, containing new tools, new style. Artists were all about moving forward. The main goal of this art was to spring Russia into the future. This poster was made in support of the efforts of the Bolshevik Red Army to overcome the anti-communist White Russians, the poster creates a powerful dynamic composition using basic geometric shapes in red, white, and black.

The few words are aligned with the diagonal trajectory of the red triangle so the act of reading follows the overall movement of the design. The red triangle pierces the white circle like a pin in a balloon, implicitly freeing it from the surrounding darkness. A smaller triangle and circle repeat the same theme in the upper right, and throughout the design small red rectangles dominate small dispersing white rectangles, symbolizing the Red Army’s triumph over the White Russians.

Lissitzky received his initial art training in Vitebsk (now Vitsyebsk, Belarus), a city that would play a major role in the development of the Russian avant-garde. In 1903 he studied in the art school of Yehuda (Yury) Pen, but he soon left for Germany, dissatisfied with the provincial atmosphere of Vitebsk. Once in Germany, he enrolled in the department of architecture at the Technische Hochschule in Darmstadt, where he studied from 1909 to 1914. During this period he also traveled to France, Italy, and Belgium. When World War I broke out, he made his way back to Russia, settling in Moscow, and studied from 1915 to 1916 at the Riga (Latvia) Polytechnical Institute (now Riga Technical University), which had been evacuated to Moscow. Lissitzky took a degree in engineering and architecture and began work as a draftsman in an architect’s office. Lissitzky’s artistic interests at the time were exclusively centred on Jewish themes and culture. He took part in Semyon Ansky’s ethnographical expedition investigating the monuments of Jewish culture in the Pale of Settlement, illustrated Yiddish books (such as Moyshe Broderzon’s Sikhes Khulin [1917; “Profane, or Idle, Chatter”] and Khad gadye [1919; “One Kid”], a popular Passover seder song). The illustrations for these books show the influence of both Cubo-Futurism, a Russian offshoot of European Futurism, and lubki (inexpensive, hand-coloured popular prints). In 1919 Marc Chagall, who at the time was director of the revolutionary People’s Art School in Vitebsk, invited Lissitzky to teach architecture and graphics there. When Kazimir Malevich—a painter and the founder of a movement he called Suprematism, which advocated the supremacy of pure geometric form over representation—also began to teach there, Chagall and he fell out, and Chagall left, while Malevich assumed the directorship. Lissitzky remained in Vitebsk and became one of Malevich’s principal students and followers. In 1925 Lissitzky returned to Moscow. Between 1925 and 1928 he cofounded a number of periodicals propagating the most progressive artistic tendencies of the 1920s. He continued to be an innovative force in book and exhibition design. He created Soviet pavilions for a number of international expositions, and he collaborated with Aleksandr Rodchenko and other avant-garde artists on the remarkable propaganda magazine SSSR na stroyke (1930–41; USSR in Construction). Despite his poor health and the increasingly vehement rejection of Modernist aesthetics by the Stalinist establishment, Lissitzky persevered in his artistic endeavours. He died of tuberculosis some six months after Hitler’s invasion of Russia.

This set off a radically new period in Lissitzky’s art. He began working under the name El Lissitzky and abandoned figurative art for Suprematism. He created Suprematist designs for a two-year anniversary celebration of the Vitebsk Committee to Combat Unemployment, and he also designed a series of propaganda posters, the most famous of which is Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge (1919–20). During this period Lissitzky began to work on a series of abstract geometric paintings, each of which was called a proun, his acronym for proyekt utverzhdeniya novogo (“project for the affirmation of the new”). The proun works were first shown at an exhibition of the Suprematist collective Unovis (Utverditeli Novogo Iskusstva, “Affirmers of New Art”). They combined Lissitzky’s interests in graphic arts, architectural forms, photography, painting, and other formal types into a unique and dynamic art. They also signalled Lissitzky’s embrace of Constructivism, which sought to use abstract art to express progressive social values and to encourage the transformation of society. In the autumn of 1921 Lissitzky became a professor at the state art school in Moscow, but he left for Berlin in December to establish cultural contact with German artists. Lissitzky’s period abroad (1921–25) was particularly creative. He participated in the production of a series of art magazines, published a number of books, including Suprematichesky skaz pro dva kvadrata v 6-ti postroykakh (1922; About Two Squares: In 6 Constructions: A Suprematist Tale) and (with Jean Arp) the three-language Die Kunstismen—Les Ismes de l’art—The Isms of Art (1925), and became a member of the well-known Dutch group De Stijl. He also met the artist-designer László Moholy-Nagy, who helped transmit Lissitzky’s ideas on art to western Europe and the United States through his teaching at the Bauhaus. From that point on, photography joined graphic arts as one of Lissitzky’s chief tools. With his frequent travels and contact with other artists, Lissitzky became a transformational figure, intermingling the innovative arts of Europe and Russia and advancing the exchange of experimental forms and ideas.

“ In Moscow in 1918 the short circuit which split the world in two flashed before my eyes. This single blow pushed the time we call the present between yesterday and tomorrow like a wedge. My efforts are now directed to driving the wedge deeper. One must belong to one side or the other – there is no midway.”

After a very successful one-man exhibition of Lissitzky’s works at the Kestner-Gesellschaft in Hanover at the beginning of 1923, Lissitzky was commissioned to make a portfolio of colour lithographs as a New Year gift for the members of the Society. As this proved to be greatly in demand, the owner of the lithographic printing-press, Chapman, invited him to make a further portfolio. This time he decided not to make abstract works (Proun), but a series on the theme of puppets from a mechanical theatre for which he already had several watercolours which he had brought from Russia. Permission was given for him to use a room in the Kestner-Gesellschaft as a studio and he began the work of transferring his drawings on to the stone in the summer of 1923. The portfolio was published later the same year by the printers Rob. Leunis and Chapman of Hanover in an edition of 75 copies, of which the Tate’s is no.8. El Lissitzky, ‘New Man’ 1923

El Lissitzky, ‘Globetrotter’ (In time) 1923

The first performance of Victory over the Sun in St. Petersburg in 1913 constituted a very important event in the history of the Russian avant-garde and was the joint creation of the playwright Alexei Kruchenykh, the designer Kasimir Malevich and the composer Mikhail Matyushin (see The Drama Review, XV, autumn 1971, published by the School of the Arts, New York University, for a translation and background information). Devised as a manifestation of Futurist theatre, it involved the deliberate disruption of rules of grammar and syntax, the invention of new words, and passages written in 'zaum', the Futurist transrational language of pure sound. Malevich's costumes were Cubist-like, made of painted cardboard and wire; one of his backdrops apparently consisted simply of a black and white square within a square divided diagonally.

Lissitzky would not have seen the original performances as they took place when he was living outside Russia, but the 'opera' was revived in Vitebsk in 1920 by the Unovis group of which he was a member, with d,cor by Yermolayeva; his first designs for a mechanical theatre version seem to have been done soon afterwards. The portfolio has a case in red, with a design in black which when closed forms the letter F (for 'Figuren'). Then there is a title page in German headed 'The plastic form of the electro-mechanical peepshow Victory over the Sun from the opera written by A. Krutschonjch Moscow 1913'. The portfolio is stated to have been published in a single edition of 75 numbered copies drawn on the stone by the artist and signed by him, the printing being arranged by Rob. Leunis & Chapman G.M.B.H., in Hanover in 1923.

Naum Gabo

Naum Gabo was an important Sculptor during this period. He was born in Bryansk, Russia. Gabo attempted many different courses before entering the art world. He began Medicine and Natural Science, then moving onto Philosophy and lastly he took up Engineering in Munich. When Gabo met part of the artists involved with the Avant Garde style, he very much took to this art design. One artist in particular Alexander Archipenko, a significant sculptor of this time, greatly influenced Gabo on his introduction to this movement. In 1914 Gabo constructed his first sculpture, ‘Head No.2,’ inspired by the previous Cubism movement. He regularly used modern techniques and materials in his sculptures to convey the ‘expression of lightness, balance and equilibrium.’ (Neurohr and Pasini / Taylor and Francis Online). He succeeded to make efficient low density sculptures and avoided irrelevant weighted elements. Some of these sculptures would have been made using cardboard, plywood and common materials. The first sculptor Gabo designed, ‘Head No.2’ was a set of four similar works, it was carried out using intersecting galvanised iron sheets. He felt it was his ‘first masterpiece and the critics of the time agreed’ stated (Adam-Storer, Richard / doublestonesteel.com). The figure is gazing down, in a prayer like position, with shoulders slightly bunched and eyes closed. Gabo ‘worked addictively, building his sculptures piece by piece to create precise, linear forms, buoyed by lightness and dynamism.’ sourced (Naum Gabo / Artsy.net) This is notably shown within the series of sculptures.

Constructive sculptor and painter. Born in Briansk in Russia, named Naum Pevsner; younger brother of the sculptor Antoine Pevsner. Entered Munich University in 1910, studying first medicine, then the natural sciences; also attended art history lectures by Wölfflin. Transferred in 1912 to an engineering school in Munich. Met Kandinsky and in 1913-14 joined his brother Antoine (then a painter) in Paris. After the outbreak of war moved first to Copenhagen, then Oslo; began to make constructions in 1915 under the name Naum Gabo. 1917-22 in Moscow with Pevsner, Tatlin, Kandinsky and Malevich; wrote and issued jointly with Pevsner in 1920 a Realistic Manifesto proclaiming the tenets of pure Constructivism. Lived 1922-32 in Berlin in contact with the artists of the de Stijl group and the Bauhaus. First one-man exhibition with Pevsner at the Galerie Percier, Paris, 1924. With Pevsner, designed the set and costumes for Diaghilev's ballet La Chatte 1926. 19325 in Paris, a member of Abstraction-Creation; 1935-46 in England, first in London, then from 1939 at Carbis Bay in Cornwall. Edited Circle jointly with J.L. Martin and Ben Nicholson in 1937. Moved in 1946 to the USA and settled in 1953 at Middlebury, Connecticut; became a US citizen in 1952. Professor at the Graduate School of Architecture at Harvard University 1953-4. From 1950 onwards carried out several large sculpture commissions, including a sculpture for the Bijenkorf store in Rotterdam 1955-7. Created Hon. KBE 1971. Died at Waterbury, Connecticut.

Naum Gabo, ‘Head No.2’ 1916

“Expression of Lightness, Balance and Equilbrium”

As one moves around the sculpture to the left (that is to say, to the figure's right), the head seems to turn also, until seen from the side, there is another complete face looking towards one. The other side, however, only has a profile view. Although there are certain superficial similarities to analytical Cubism, Gabo said that he regarded his aims, to create in terms of space, as completely different. 'Constructed Head No.2' was made first in cardboard and then in galvanised iron, which he later covered with yellow Ripolin mixed with sand as a protection against rust. It was included in the exhibition of recent Russian art at the Galerie van Diemen in Berlin in 1922, but was sent back to Russia after the exhibition closed instead of being returned direct to the artist, who had decided to settle in Berlin. Gabo then completely lost trace of it for over forty years and, assuming it to be lost, made a version in bronze about 1958-9 the same size (45cm high) He afterwards made four further versions, starting with one 94cm high in Cor-ten steel (a steel widely used for building purposes which rusts but is self-sealing) made about 1965. This was followed by three monumental enlargements all 175cm high: first the one in Cor-ten steel now in the Tate Gallery, which according to Mrs Gabo and Charles Wilson, Gabo’s assistant, was made in 1966 and not 1964 as has sometimes been stated; second another in Cor-ten steel of a slightly different thickness made in 1966-7; and third and finally one in stainless steel. Apart from the Tate’s work and the one 94cm high, which belongs to Oslo University, they are all still owned by Mrs Gabo.

Gabo told the compiler in 1972 that he intended to carry out this sculpture on at least this scale from the beginning and that he had the possibility in mind of making one several times the size. A series of drawings from 1915-16 suggest that this work was conceived initially as a complete standing figure (see Nash and Merkert nos.77-81, pp.156-9). Its subsequent adjustment and evolution is typical of Gabo's working process. Experimenting with sheets of paper or cardboard, he developed small models such as this one, repeatedly refining them until in their final form they became templates for larger versions of the work which were then produced in more durable materials. This work appears to have been the first in a series on the torso theme. It pre-dates another, very similar, cardboard work, Maquette for 'Constructed Torso' 1917-18, reassembled 1985 (see Nash and Merkert no.7, p.97). This maquette was almost certainly the prototype for a version in sheet metal of similar size, bought by the Russian State in 1920 but now lost (reproduced Hammer and Lodder, no.12, p.34). Another version in celluloid, probably constructed in Berlin in the 1920s, also disappeared after it was sold to an American collector in the 1920s.

Gabo told the compiler on 21 June 1972 that he made the original Heads Nos. 1 and 2 in order to prove to himself and his friends in Norway, where he was then living, that the system of open construction which he had derived from the three-dimensional models made by physicists and mathematicians could be applied to any image and in particular to a traditional subject such as the human figure. 'Constructed Head No.1' was made in 1915 first in cardboard and then in plywood. He considered that it was only a partial success as it was insufficiently concave, especially in the lower section, so he went on to make 'Constructed Head No.2' which he felt embodied his ideas completely. The starting-point for it was a charcoal drawing of 1916 which depicted a woman in a hat with a veil, though the hat and veil are omitted from the sculpture itself.The sculpture is built out of pockets of space, with the metal ribs springing from a central axis. There is only a single convex element - a curved plane forming the figure's right shoulder - and even this is not closed. He was particularly interested in the possibility which this spatial freedom afforded of combining several different aspects of the same image (see, for instance, the series of photographs of this sculpture which he used to illustrate this point in one of his lectures published in Of Divers Arts, pp.110-14). If, when viewing the sculpture from the front, one thinks away certain of the shoulder details so that the neck is isolated from its background, the figure appears to be erect and alert, whereas the whole figure is of one of a person leaning forward in a hunched position with her hands resting in front of her. as a replacement, which is slightly different in some of its details. However the original was brought out of Russia in pieces about 1964-5 and reassembled. As the yellow paint had begun to come off, creating a very ugly surface, he thought it best to remove it.

Naum Gabo, ‘Linear Construction No.2’ 1970

This version of 'Linear Construction No.2' was preceded by a version 30.5cm high now in the Addison Gallery of American Art, Andover, Massachusetts, four 38cm high in various private collections, and three 91cm high belonging to Mrs Miriam Gabo, to the Stedelijk Museum, Amsterdam, and to the Art Institute of Chicago. (Gabo's unrealised project of 1949 for the decoration of the Esso Building in the Rockefeller Center, New York, also included two forms of this type mounted above the revolving doors on the 52nd Street side and designed to turn with the doors - see the note on T02184). Mrs Gabo's piece, which is the earliest, dates from 194953. All these are in colourless transparent plastic, but apart from the one at Andover, all have a black cut-out shape in the centre. The present work was made specially for presentation to the Tate in memory of Sir Herbert Read, and the artist wrote on 26 August 1969 that 'I decided to make this work, "Linear Construction 2" because I know that Herbert was very fond of that image and I myself made this piece so that it differs from all other versions of it. I made it all white, without the black inlay in the center because I felt that in order to keep the spirit of serenity as a memory of Herbert, no black should be in it'. (In saying this he must have forgotten that the Andover piece, obtained from him by exchange in 1952 and entitled 'Linear Construction, No.2, Variation No.1', also has no black middle insert). The first version, made in 1968-9, was damaged and the piece had to be entirely remade in the winter of 1970-1. It is intended to hang, but also be just supported by a base. The effect should be more or less static but with a slight suggestion of turning.

This was made as a project for one of the rooms in the house which the architect Eric Mendelsohn built for himself at Rupenhorn, Berlin, in 1929. The house had a painting by Ozenfant in the hall, a bronze relief by Mataré in the music room, and a painting by Feininger in the dining-room. There is a letter of September 1930 in the Tate Gallery Archive in which Eric Mendelsohn asked Gabo: 'Where are the sketches? I need them urgently, as I must make up my mind'. In the end the commission was abandoned, but Gabo carried out his idea for the left-hand relief independently in the larger 'Construction in a Niche'. The Tate Archive also owns a rough pencil sketch for the double relief, which is undated, and a larger pencil drawing on squared paper for the left-hand relief, which is signed and dated 1929. Like the larger constructions, this was discovered in a dilapidated state in the loft of Gabo's house in April 1976 and repaired for inclusion in the exhibition at the Tate later the same year.

Naum Gabo, ‘Double Relief in a Niche’ 1929

Naum Gabo, ‘Red Cavern’ 1926

Although this relief was exhibited at the Tate in 1976-7 in conjunction with T02145 'Construction in a Niche', it is actually quite different from the right-hand section of the 'Model for "Double Relief in a Niche" ' (T02170) and may have been made independently. The date 1926 given in the catalogue of Gabo's exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art, New York, in 1948 suggests that it was made several years earlier, which seems quite possible on style.

Kinetic Construction (Standing Wave) is a mechanical sculpture consisting of a plain steel rod emerging from a small black wooden base, now encased for protection in a clear acrylic box. When activated by the press of a button, the machine springs to life: through the rapid oscillations caused by a hidden electric motor in the base, it forms the illusion of a sinuously twisting, three-dimensional shape. The image generated through these movements, with its quivering transparency, is that of a ‘standing wave’: a term taken from the field of physics, familiar to Gabo through his studies in natural science and engineering. Gabo and his brother, fellow artist Antoine Pevsner, had been inspired by the 1917 Russian revolution to move back from Europe to their native Russia. In Moscow Gabo was exposed to the fervid political and aesthetic debates of the post-revolutionary period and became closely acquainted with avant-garde artists such as Vladimir Tatlin and Kasimir Malevich. It took Gabo almost three-quarters of a year to realise his concept. In the chaos of civil war, finding it difficult to source the basic machine parts that he needed, he conducted extensive experiments using salvaged materials in a mechanical workshop in the Polytechnicum Museum. The artist wrote in 1969: ‘It was done in a primitive way, but the only way I could have done it at that time, when conditions were such that looking for elaborate mechanisms was to search for a golden plate from the moon!’ (Gabo 1969, p.89). Kinetic Construction (Standing Wave) was among Gabo’s earliest abstract works, a dramatic departure from the intersecting planes of the figurative works that he had been creating since 1915. As perhaps the first motorised sculpture (Natalia Sidlina, Naum Gabo, London 2012, p.52), it was a distinctive response to the non-objective forms and utopian ambitions of his avant-garde Russian contemporaries. Although Gabo often emphasised the work’s genesis as a demonstration model, it was exhibited as a work of art, appearing in Moscow in 1920 as well as in the landmark First Russian Art Exhibition (Erste russische Kunstausstellung) in Berlin in 1922. Frustrated by the technical difficulties of electrical constructions, Gabo did not pursue kinetic sculpture in the early 1920s, although he did explore the potential of newly developed plastics and continued to work with abstraction for the rest of his life.

According to the artist, Kinetic Construction (Standing Wave) was initially produced for students in 1919–20 as a demonstration of the constructivist ideas expressed in his Realistic Manifesto (Gabo 1969, p.89). Written by Gabo and published jointly with Pevsner in August 1920, the manifesto proclaimed the need for art to connect with the political and industrial transformations of the era by establishing a more active relationship to space and time (reprinted in Gabo: The Constructive Idea: Sculpture, Drawings, Paintings, Monoprints, exhibition catalogue, South Bank Centre, London 1987, pp.52−4). The title alludes to the ‘kinetic rhythms’ advocated in the manifesto and the subtitle, Standing Wave, was introduced by the artist in around 1966.

Naum Gabo, ‘Kinestic Construction’ (Standing Wave) 1919-20

Kinetic art experienced a remarkable international revival in the 1960s, and Gabo was among those early twentieth-century artists hailed as a pioneer by a generation exploring the aesthetic possibilities of machinery. Gabo donated Kinetic Construction (Standing Wave) to Tate following his successful Tate Gallery retrospective in 1966, where one critic described it as ‘the exquisite little kinetic rod of 1920, quivering with hummingbird delicacy (a Brancusi-like essence of kineticism which makes all subsequent efforts look mutton-fisted)’ (Nigel Gosling, ‘Structures in Space’, Observer, 20 March 1966, p.25). Because of its fragility many of the work’s components had, by then, been gradually replaced and its overall effect subtly altered. Archival records from the late 1960s and early 1970s show that in subsequent repairs and replicas, the artist was concerned not only to achieve a precise formal effect but also to maintain the ‘primitive’ mechanism of the 1920 motor, even though it is hidden from view. He also suggested adding a switch button to protect the delicate structure from wear, adding a new element of interactivity. In the aftermath of the Russian Revolution, when this work was made, materials were hard to come by. ‘It was the height of civil war, hunger and disorder in Russia. To find any part of machinery was next to impossible’, said Gabo. Originally made to demonstrate the principles of kinetics to his students, it reflects the artist’s belief in a sculpture in which space and time were active components. A strip of metal is made to oscillate so that a standing wave is set up. This movement in real time creates the illusion of volumetric space.

Naum Gabo, ‘Sketch for a Kinetic Construction’ 1922

Graphic Design 1920 51

The book designs of Rodchenko, El Lissitzky and others such as Solomon Telingater and Anton Lavinsky were a major inspiration for the work of radical designers in the West, particularly Jan Tschichold. Many Constructivists worked on the design of posters for everything from cinema to political propaganda: the former represented best by the brightly coloured, geometric posters of the Stenberg brothers (Georgii and Vladimir Stenberg), and the latter by the agitational photomontage work of Gustav Klutsis and Valentina Kulagina. In Cologne in the late 1920s Figurative Constructivism emerged from the Cologne Progressives, a group which had links with Russian Constructivists, particularly Lissitzky, since the early twenties. Through their collaboration with Otto Neurath and the Gesellschafts- und Wirtschaftsmuseum such artists as Gerd Arntz, Augustin Tschinkel and Peter Alma affected the development of the Vienna Method. This link was most clearly shown in A bis Z, a journal published by Franz Seiwert, the principal theorist of the group. They were active in Russia working with IZOSTAT and Tschinkel worked with Ladislav Sutnar.

The Constructivists' main early political patron was Leon Trotsky, and it began to be regarded with suspicion after the expulsion of Trotsky and the Left Opposition in 1927–28. The Communist Party would gradually favour realist art during the course of the 1920s (as early as 1918 Pravda had complained that government funds were being used to buy works by untried artists). However it was not until about 1934 that the counter-doctrine of Socialist Realism was instituted in Constructivism's place. Many Constructivists continued to produce avant-garde work in the service of the state, such as Lissitzky, Rodchenko and Stepanova's designs for the magazine USSR in Construction.

Alexander Rodchenko, Untitled 1920

In 1922 designer El Lissitzky and writer Ilya Ehrenburg founded an international design magazine featuring articles in Russian, German, and French. The goal of the journal was to publicize their recent experiences with Constructivism and disseminate their ideas about the role of art in revolutionary society. The articles highlight the important dialogue occurring between designers in the Soviet Union and Western Europe at this time, including those working out of institutions such as the Bauhaus.

El Lissitzky ‘Veshch’ 1923

Russian Constructivism was considered more of a philosophy than just a style, and reflected a belief in art for social change rather than personal expression. The Russian Constructivists were proponents of functional art and design rather than decorative, expressive art (such as easel painting) that was hung on walls. This echoed the revolutionary mood of the times where the bourgeois culture was being replaced by the revolutionary proletariat movement. The tools and techniques of the more traditional, figurative painting and art styles were replaced with “constructed” photomontages and strong typography. Russian Constructivism characteristically had minimal color palettes, often just red, black and sometimes yellow. They frequently had diagonal elements with circular and angled type and images. The resulting work was extremely dramatic, containing layered images coupled with powerful type treatments. This work was exciting, often jolting, and even shocking, which was in line with their goal to change society. This movement was a dramatic shift from previous, more conventional movements and philosophies of art.

Although originally intended for political messages, the Constructivist style seeped into product advertisements and posters of all kinds, as well as book covers and their interiors. Three of the most influential designers of the Russian Constructivist period are Alexander Rodchenko, the Stenberg Brothers, and to some extent, El Lissitzky, a Futurist who influenced the Constructivist movement. Here is a little background and a sampling of their work. Most of the work speaks for itself, but I have provided explanations for those that call for it. This Russian designer, photographer, painter and sculptor was considered one of the founders of Russian Constructivist movement. In fact, the term “constructivist” was originally coined by the artist Kasmir Malevich in reference to the work of Rodchenko. Although his original focus was painting, he then went on to play around with photography, typography, and imagery, combining them into what was then referred to as montage or photomontage. He eschewed easel painting for ‘industrial art’ as he called it – that is, art with a social purpose and message for the masses. Although much of his earlier work was for political purposes and to change the world, he went on to apply this artistic movement to ads for ordinary objects such as beer, pacifiers, cookies, watches, and other consumer products. In March 1923, Rodchenko published an article in which he said, “there is now a new illustrative method: montage of printed and photographic materials focused on a certain subject. Providing ample material of great demonstrative value and conviction, it dispenses with illustration by drawing.”

Vladimir & Georgii Stenberg, Poster for the Moscow Chambre Theatre, 1923

Conclusion

Concluding my exploration of the 1920’s Constructivism movement, the three artists I chose to review, Alexander Rodchenko, El Lissitzky and Naum Gabo, all contributed a significant amount towards the progression and definition of Constructivism. They formulated expressions of Avant Garde art and created a modern society as a result of their work. This was accomplished through the use of strong colours, precision and meaning. In summary, it was to convert the normal idea of art and it’s purpose into a practical abstract form.

Constructivists significantly changed and influenced the art style, which they successfully managed to leave their mark on the world still to this day. Constructivism was the last and most influential modern art movement to flourish in Russia in the 20th century. It evolved just as the Bolsheviks came to power in the October Revolution of 1917, and initially it acted as a lightning rod for the hopes and ideas of many of the most advanced Russian artists who supported the revolution’s goals. It borrowed ideas from Cubism, Suprematism and Futurism, but at its heart was an entirely new approach to making objects, one which sought to abolish the traditional artistic concern with composition, and replace it with ‘construction.’ Constructivism called for a careful technical analysis of modern materials, and it was hoped that this investigation would eventually yield ideas that could be put to use in mass production, serving the ends of a modern, Communist society. Ultimately, however, the movement floundered in trying to make the transition from the artist’s studio to the factory.

Some continued to insist on the value of abstract, analytical work, and the value of art per se; these artists had a major impact on spreading Constructivism throughout Europe. Others, meanwhile, pushed on to a new but short-lived and disappointing phase known as Productivism, in which artists worked in industry. Russian Constructivism was in decline by the mid 1920s, partly a victim of the Bolshevik regime’s increasing hostility to avant-garde art. But it would continue to be an inspiration for artists in the West, sustaining a movement called International Constructivism which flourished in Germany in the 1920s, and whose legacy endured into the 1950s. Constructivism radically reimaged the role of the artist as an engineer with tools, rather than an academy painter with a brush. The Constructivists conceived of artworks as part of a greater visual program of awakening the masses toward revolution, and an awareness of class divisions and other social inequalities. Its ripple effects on art of the 20th century can be seen not only in movements like Brazilian neo-Constructivism, but also in Minimalism, which sought to further reduce form down to its most essential elements.

Constructivism may have originated in Russia, but it soon spread out across the continent, for example through the many Constructivists who taught at the Bauhaus in Germany. By the mid 1920s, the movement was in decline due to the increasing hostility of the Bolshevik regime towards avant-garde art. Still, the movement continued to flourish throughout the West until the 1940s. In England, for example, a version of Constructivism was established in the 1930s and 1940s. Joaquín Torres García and Manuel Rendón helped disseminate Constructivism throughout Europe and Latin America. In Latin America, artists including Carlos Mérida, Enrique Tábara, Aníbal Villacís and Oscar Niemeyer were greatly influenced by the movement. Its influence can also be seen on Minimalist artists, who were occupied with reducing form down to its most essential elements. In keeping with its global aims for Communist revolution, Constructivism was taken up by artists in other countries, too, especially in Germany—where László Moholy-Nagy at the Bauhaus felt its influence—and in Latin America. Though Constructivism as a historical movement had ended by the 1930s, when avant-garde activity became increasingly distasteful to the Communist regime, its influence could be felt throughout much of the 20th century.

They wanted to create an ideal image of the future and a memory of the past.

Bibliography

Text sources http://www.nailyaalexandergallery.com https://www.widewalls.ch https://m.theartstory.org/movement/constructivism/ https://magazine.artland.com/art-movement-constructivism/ https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-constructivism-brought-russian-revolution-art https://www.tate.org.uk/art/art-terms/c/constructivism https://www.britannica.com/art/Constructivism-art https://www.christies.com/features/A-brief-history-of-Constructivism-9811-1.aspx https://www.nef.com.tr/en/blog/constructivism-movement-and-its-history-modern-world-art http://www.eyemagazine.com

Image sources Alexander Rodchenko, Cover for Novyi Lef, 1928 Alexander Rodchenko, ‘Non Objective Painting No.80’ Alexander Rodchenko, ‘Books!’ 1924 Alexander Rodchenko, ‘Pro Eto’ 1923 Alexander Rodchenko, ‘Fire Escape’ 1927 Alexander Rodchenko, ‘Pioneer Girl’ 1930 Alexander Rodchenko, ‘Dinamo’ 1935 El Lissitzky, Self Portrait, 1914 El Lissitzky, ‘Sikes Khulin’ 1917 El Lissitzky, ‘Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge’ 1919 El Lissitzky, ‘New Man’ 1923 El Lissitzky, ‘Globetrotter’ 1923 Naum Gabo, ‘Head No.2’ 1916 Naum Gabo, ‘Linear Construction No.2’ 1970 Naum Gabo, ‘Double Relief in a Niche’ 1929 Naum Gabo, ‘Red Cavern’ 1926 Naum Gabo, ‘Kinestic Construction’ (Standing Wave) 1919 Naum Gabo, Sketch for a Kinetic Constructio, 1922 Alexander Rodchenko, ‘Untitled’ 1920 El Lissitzky ‘Veshch’ 1923 Vladimir & Georgii Stenberg, Poster for the Moscow Chambre Theatre, 1923.

Published in 2021 Edited by James Volks & Susan Harrison Institute of Art, Design & Technology Kill Avenue, Dun Laoghaire, Co. Dublin, Ireland, A96 KH79 Phone: + 353 1 239 4000 Email: info@iadt.ie http://www.iadt.ie Copyright 2021 All rights reserved. No part of this publicatiopn may be reproduced to be transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any information storage and retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publisher. Text & cover design: India O’Shea

CON STRUC TIVISM

James Volks & Susan Harrison The making of the Bauhaus concept, developments in design history 1830-1950