1
Seminar Portfolio
Karim Jaspers, Department of Architecture, Building and Planning, University of Technology, Eindhoven. This portfolio contains the seminar part of the project for the master course ‘The Thinking Eye’ at the University of Technology, Eindhoven. The purpose of this course is to think and rethink the way space is represented on paper.
June, 2020
Karim Jaspers
With supervision of Hélène Aarts
Author Note
WEEK 1 2 3 4 5 6
Concept Portraits Composition Tonality Projection Colour
Hand Drawing
Evaluation and Bibliography
Reading Guide and Time line
READING GUIDE 8
Study of Aesthetics This report is the second of two booklets for ‘The Thinking Eye’. The first booklet contained self-made drawings inspired by the theory of Suprematism by Malevich. The booklet reported the development and journey through different styles, with a lay-out based on the compositions of Malevich. The lay-out of this booklet is based on El Lissitzky - a fellow Russian avant-gardist - who developed his own version of Suprematism, established on the analysis of Russian and Western art [1]. His open mind formed the artistic connection between East and West. This objectivity is key in analysing drawings. The first step of formal analysis is to objectively describe what is visible in a painting, without attaching any meaning to it [2]. Only after all the elements have been defined, it is possible to draw conclusions from it. In each week one or two pairs of artworks are analysed and compared with each other. The artworks are selected from different historical periods and different geographical locations. However, there was a preference for two distinctive styles: the precursors, practitioners and successors of Suprematism, and detailed hand-drawn images. To get a good overview and a feeling of size of the artworks, an outline of all artworks is made on the next page, based on relative size and time of creation.
9
TIME LINE 1500
1911 10
If known, otherwise estimated:
RELATIVE DIMENSIONS
1923
1970 11
Hand Drawing 12
Extension of the Mind
“This is what I do - sometimes quite instinctively. I forget the whole maze of problems for a while, as soon as the feel of the assignment and the innumerable demands it involves have sunk into my subconscious. I then move on to a method of working that is very much like abstract art. I simply draw by instinct, not architectural syntheses, but what are sometimes quite childlike compositions, and in this way, on an abstract basis, the main idea gradually takes shape, a kind of universal substance that helps me to bring the numerous contradictory components into harmony.� - Alvar Aalto [3] Alvar Aalto beautifully describes how the act of drawing is an extension of the mind and I believe greatly in this as well. Spoken word and argumentation is essential when I design a building, but simple sketches can overrule any argument made. In these sketches, a certain power is present that words cannot easily describe. Drawings can show the ideal situation and, with that, a vision can form. A vision to which all further decisions have to adhere. As a result, drawings can reveal subconscious utopia.
13
1
CONCEPT
ZVI HECKER & KARIM JASPERS
14
Sketching a Vision Geometric Idealism
15
16
01
Zvi Hecker Concept Sketch of Beit Haspirala 1989 Fine-liner on Paper 42 x 29 cm Location unknown
02
Zvi Hecker Concept Sketch of Synagogue in Mitzpe Ramon 1969 Fine-liner on Paper 29 x 42 cm Location unknown
17
03
Karim Jaspers Knowledge section of Library Design 2019 Ballpen on Paper 14.8 x 21 cm Private Collection
04
Karim Jaspers Awareness section of Library Design 2019 Ballpen on Paper 14.8 x 21 cm Private Collection
Geometric Idealism The first time I viewed the sketches by architect Zvi Hecker, they immediately attracted me. Although they were made in a quicker style than I usually draw, they were very similar to my drawing style. The only difference was that the sketches by Hecker seemed to be more chaotic at first glance.
are made in a mere A5 sketchbook, with large attention to details, creating a more intimate atmosphere. Although both drawings are made using dry techniques, there is still a clear difference in tonality. The fine-liner of Hecker uses cross hatching to create difference in contrast, but the overall contrast is not as large as in my drawing. Here, the ballpen is used in one direction per plane, where each hatching follows the logic of perspective.
The drawings by Hecker show a lot of planes and volumes, drawn in a type of extreme perspective, that resemble an architectural structure. They are viewed from the outside. However, the sketches are ambiguous in how the volumes are attached to each other. However, when you look at it long enough, you start to discover geometry and organization.
In conclusion, both drawings showcase their architecture, the ideal situation of their design. However, the drawings by Hecker are probably made in an earlier version of the design process as they mainly show the large volumes, instead of focussing on materialization and detail. In my drawings, these details are known and the volume is fixed.
In my pair of drawings, the space is clear from the beginning. It portrays two interior hallways, or the same hallway viewed from two positions. However, the viewpoints differ in shapes, lighting and contrast. It has a clear perspective and repetitive geometry.
In essence, the architecture of Hecker illustrates a geometric idealism [4]. A logical organization of the same shape that can create a more chaotic reality. This is shown by the asymmetrical composition and lack of clear volumes and contrast. His architecture rejects the repetitive postwar building blocks, and rather envisions a more diverse, but still affordable architecture.
The hallways show a perfect symmetrical composition, and although the shapes itself show movement, the composition is still rather static. The spaces lead outwards, which makes the viewer be part of the space, creating an atectonic image. The sketches by Hecker have an asymmetrical, central composition with dynamic shapes due to the diagonal lines. The structures are portrayed as objects in the centre of the drawing, making it a tectonic image.
In my case, this geometric idealism is also applicable. The drawings show a similar repetition, but made of more basic elements. It is less confusing, but is still able to create a diverse building appearance due to the clear volumes and symmetrical compositions. The shift between the two different repetitions in the building creates one whole: that of knowledge (strict and static), and awareness (free and dynamic).
The sketches by Hecker are both made on an A3 sized paper, where you are more overwhelmed by the big volumes. There is no further detail shown. Contrary, my drawings
18
01
The tonality expresses conceptual sketching
03
The many details and small size of the drawing creates intimacy
02
The cross hatching creates a feeling of chaos
04
The hatching according to the perspective creates order
19
2
PORTRAITS
CIGOLI & LEONARDO DA VINCI EL LISSITZKY & REM KOOLHAAS KAZIMIR MALEVICH & ZAHA HADID 20
Analysis through Time Rebirth Transformation Nearing the End
21
05
22
Cigoli Cupola del Duomo di Firenze 1559 – 1613 Materials unknown (seems to be ink and watercolour) Size unknown Istituto Germanico, Florence
06
23
Leonardo Da Vinci Anatomical analysis of the movement of shoulder and neck 1509 – 1510 Pen and three shades of brown drawing ink, washed over black chalk 29.2 x 19.8 cm Windsor Castle, Royal Library
Rebirth of Analysis On first sight, the two drawings are very similar. They are parts of an old sketchbook or parchment role. They show an analysis of a certain object (building and human body), instead of a finished representation. The drawing by Lodovico Cardi – also known as Cigoli – shows the detailed section of the dome of Santa Maria del Fiore. It is a flat, parallel perspective, yet he still creates depth. Underneath, the corresponding floorplan of the apse is visible. On the sides more details are given, such as a rotated geometry of the dome itself and side-notes with measurements. The drawing by Da Vinci shows the anatomical analysis of human muscles and tendons, specifically those of the upper arm, shoulder and neck. It displays six studies and dissections from different points of view. Two of them show a realistic face attached to the shoulders. The objects are guided by his characteristic mirrored handwriting. Cigoli uses a symmetrical composition where both the section and the floorplan are positioned in the centre, and therefore gain most of the attention. Only the notes and side sketches break this pattern. Da Vinci has less organisation. The objects are placed in two asymmetrical columns. The horizontal and vertical lines are clearly visible, but the bottom right sketch is following diagonal lines instead, which attracts the attention and becomes the centre of the drawing. It creates a more dynamic image compared to the static section by Cigoli. The sketch by Cigoli is linear due to the lines that
divide the different planes. It shows the geometry of the church, including measurements. The shadows and contrast are indicated by the use of what seems to be water colour. The coloured blue highlights these shadows and demarcates parts of the floorplan. On the left, ink is used to create the texture of the roof. The sketchbook page by Da Vinci shows more unity by the usage of only a limited colour palette of pen and three shades of brown drawing ink. He uses the ink to create his typical cross hatching in a very precise, yet fast way. The hatching follows the curves of the body and creates a large contrast. This chiaroscuro manages to create the illusion of three dimensionality on a flat paper. Both drawings ultimately indicate the study and dissection of an object. They show how forces travel through the object. Cigoli manages to carefully highlight the geometry of the church, but it is still linear and static due to its drawing style and symmetrical composition. The drawing becomes flat as there is not much contrast and no use of perspective. The hand writing seems to be pushed to the side, instead of being integrated. The sketch by Da Vinci shows dynamic movement and a highly three dimensional aspect due to the composition and exaggerated chiaroscuro. He is not only able to convey what the body is made of, but also how the aspects are used to transmit forces and movement. It shows the highly analytical and curious mindset of Da Vinci, his great understanding of the subject matter, and his very precise attention to detail [5]. Even a single page of his sketchbook can be seen as a great piece of art.
24
05
The geometrical section of the dome is rotated
06
Integration of dissection, realism and text
05
The interior becomes flat due to lack of contrast and perspective
06
Dynamism and three-dimensionality due to diagonals and chiaroscuro
25
07
El Lissitzky The New Man 1923 Lithography, 53.5 x 45.6 cm MoMA
26
08
Rem Koolhaas, Elia Zenghelis Roosevelt Island Redevelopment Project (axonometric) 1975 Gouache and graphite on board, 98.1 x 73.7 cm MoMA
27
Transformation Both of the images show a very linear approach of drawing. The organisation of different planes is positioned in a certain order to create a depiction of an image. The painting of El Lissitzky is a three dimensional configuration of what implies to be a person: ‘The New Man’, as the title suggests. It is centrally positioned on the canvas, with diagonal lines running towards the middle. It consists of only two layers - object and residual space - making it highly tectonic. Its main body is a red square - positioned parallel to the frame - on which other body parts are attached in a diagonal order. On top are two circles containing stars that seem to form the head. The figure is performing a movement, a type of dance or sporting activity, due to the placement of the limbs. The arms and legs are positioned as a hyperbola, constructing the asymptotes that form the cross of the body. A similar diagonal cross is constructed in the painting by Koolhaas and Zenghelis, but this time as a result of using an axonometric projection. Here, the painting consists of multiple layers that increase in detail. The river forms the background. On top of that is the Roosevelt Island, on which a building complex is visible. The last element is the bridge that runs out of the frame, creating an atectonic expression. The bridge and the coastline form the diagonal axes leading towards the centre where the main buildings are located.
gazes to the diagonals. Due to the atectonic image, your eye exceeds the frame, after which it is free to wander around the rest of the image, only returning to the red complex after a while. The New Man does not let you wander around: your view keeps following the cross and returning to the central red square. The New Man uses more contrasting colours black and white. This creates a central image with sharp demarcations with the background. Form and residual space are unambiguously separated. This separation is more subtle in the axonometry. Saturated colours are used in the main project that highlight the focus point, but the secondary structures have colours that are similar to the surrounding building volumes. The entire drawing becomes a unity, embedding the project in its context, while still standing out. Both images show the transformation of the existing. The New Man is a depiction of a human body, concluded from the Suprematist visual language and theory. It is a reflection of the Suprematist world implemented in the physical world [1]. It is a very strong icon, expressing aggression, excitement and control. The Roosevelt Island Redevelopment Project presents the transformation of an island. The image shows the power and strength of Koolhaas’ proposal. It demonstrates how it is a project on its own that is still able to connect to both the natural and the physical context.
As a viewer, you know immediately that these buildings are central due to their expressive colours. The red forms a dominant plane in the middle of the axes, after which the eye
28
07
The object is entirely within the frame
08
Some objects extend further than the frame itself
07
Red is used as the main body of The New Man
08
Red is used to indicate the centre of the redevelopment project
29
09
30
Kazimir Malevich The Mower I 1911 – 1912 Oil on Canvas 113.5 x 66.5 cm Museum of Fine Arts of Nijni Novgorod
10
Zaha Hadid Kurfuerstendamm 1986 Oil on Canvas Size unknown Location unknown
31
Nearing the End At first sight both of the images are heavy, contrasting and screaming for attention. It is impossible to ignore these paintings, irrespective of their context. Their (probable) large sizes makes them feel overwhelming and demanding. Malevich depicts a person in the middle of the image, touching three of the four sides of the painting as if he is too colossal for his canvas. He looks directly at the viewer, while holding a sharp scythe. The colour palette consists of black, white, some yellow and brown, and a considerable amount of red. The red background suggests that the Mower is located in a natural environment with flowers. Hadid has painted an urban elevation of the Kurfuerstendamm, after which the painting is named. The central building is positioned in the middle of two vertical, extracted faรงades. They pop out due to the colour contrast and lightness, compared to the intense, red background.
difference, complementary colour contrast is used as well, accompanied with thin, black lines that create a border between the two. These lines make both images linear and almost flat, especially in the image of Hadid. Malevich still uses the Cubist gradients to create separate volumes and depth in the body of the Mower. However, there is no specific light direction and the gradients are exaggerated. The body seems to consist of geometrical cones and other shapes. In Kurfuerstendamm, any depth cue has disappeared, except for the buildings on the back that are made of lower saturated colours. It shows only planes without gradients, positioned in such a way that they form buildings. To conclude, both images have an interaction between form and residual space, where the background screams for as much attention as the object itself. This is achieved by the use of contrasting colours, a linear painting style and a disappearance of depth cues. Knowing the context of the paintings is crucial in understanding this. The Mower was painted right before Malevich turned to Cubo-Futurism, collages, and ultimately Suprematism [6]. Here, the background and objects become one unity: a non-objective universe. The painting of Hadid was made seventy years later, yet she was highly influenced by the Suprematist movement of Malevich [7]. Her buildings lead the Suprematist universes back the physical world, where they still contain the two-dimensional planes and compositions of Malevich. All things considered, these paintings seem to be a precursor and successor of Suprematism.
Both objects have a central composition that is close to symmetrical. Here, the horizontal and vertical lines are important. The objects are placed parallel to the picture plane, by which it is approaching the viewer. Combined with the intense colours and size, it feels overwhelming and intimidating. The poisonous red forms the biggest part of both paintings. It is used as the background on which the objects itself pop out, but unlike regular backgrounds, these ones seem to pop out as well, creating an interplay between form and residual space. To strengthen this
32
09
Poisonous red gives the Mower an aggressive expression
10
Poisonous Red brings the background forward
09
The lighting source is unclear in the gradients of the volumes
10
The volumes have become flat due to the absent of gradients
33
3
COMPOSITION
LEONARDO DA VINCI & EL LISSITZKY EL LISSITZKY & HERBERT BAYER 34
Fixed Energy Clash of Motion Clash of Icons
35
11
Leonardo da Vinci Riverbank and breakwaters for the diversion of the Arne 1504 Pen, ink and watercolour 41.6 x 23.6 cm Windsor Castle, Royal Library
36
12
El Lissitzky Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge 1919 Lithography 69.2 x 48.8 cm Museum of Fine Arts, Boston
37
Clash of Motion This pair of images both demonstrate the difficulties and solutions for painting movement and action in a two dimensional, static image. It is especially challenging in images - as the chosen pair - that use only flat surfaces and almost no signs of depth. Leonardo Da Vinci portrays a weir - or low head dam - through which water has broken [8]. It is a top view of a landscape, including the river Arno. The initial impact at the large dam forms the centre of the image, showing the power and movement of water. Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge portrays the Russian Civil War, in which the Red Wedge is the group of Bolsheviks that breaks the white order [1]. Again, power and movement are portrayed. Movement is made by the use of diagonals [9]. Both images have a similarly positioned diagonal cross: one line leading from top left to bottom right, coming towards the observer. This line is the protagonist in both stories. The perpendicular line leads from bottom left to top right, indicating the barrier which is broken. Both images are atectonic, especially the one of Lissitzky. The diagonal cross creates a central composition: the point of attention is where the triangular shape hits the circle. There is a large contrast between the sharp triangle and the balanced, infinitely symmetrical circle. In the painting by Lissitzky, the red triangle is the largest object of the image (not counting the black background). It hits the ‘white order’ perpendicular to the outline of the circle, creating tension and action. The water current of Da Vinci hits the weir on a different spot: the side of the circle. Instead of breaking right through the middle, Da Vinci
38
uses the circle as a whirlpool, as an extension of the triangle, creating a swirling movement that continues further on the right. The river and background are both made using low saturated colours, creating one unity. It shows the movement and flow of water by the subtle differences in saturation of water colour. Using this wet technique, Da Vinci makes a painterly image that fits well with the subject matter. Lissitzky uses only a small palette of colours: black, white and red. White is used as an infinite background on which black (or dotted black) and red objects are positioned. The red objects are the protagonists of the story as they have the most outspoken shapes and most saturated colour. Besides the main storyline, both images depict collateral damage. Da Vinci shows the breaking of a horizontally positioned embankment on the right of the image. Moreover, he shows a more artistic representation of the impact of water by the use of small points and droplets above the weir. Lissitzky indicates the collateral damage by painting smaller elements, surfaces that are equally divided around the border between black and white, as if a magnet pulls them closer. The text elements are spattered around the remaining of the image. Movement is created by composition and colour usage. With Da Vinci, your eye follows the flowing current of the water, due to the succession of triangle, circle and line. Lissitzky creates diagonal movement and tension through the perpendicular position of triangle, circle and black diagonal. Here your eye crosses through the painting, creating action, movement and even revolution.
11
The triangular shape hits the circle at its border
12
The triangular shape hits the circle right in the centre
11
Collateral damage is visible on the right embankment
12
Collateral damage is visible in smaller geometrical elements
39
13
El Lissitzky Der WolkenbĂźgel fĂźr Moskau 1925 Material unknown 42.8 x 32.8 cm Van Abbe Museum
40
14
Walter Gropius (draft) & Herbert Bayer (drawing) Isometric Rendering of the Director’s Office, Weimar 1923 Material, size and location unknown
41
Clash of Icons In ‘Clash of Motion’, the pair of paintings showed the different ways of portraying movement. This pair of paintings each show an icon in architectural history, a representation of a new architectural style: Suprematism and Bauhaus [10] [11]. At first sight, both drawings look relatively similar. Lissitzky depicts a horizontal building placed on three vertical columns, located in a black and white context. All of this is framed by a circle, positioned centrally on the paper. This creates both a tectonic as an atectonic image. Bayer shows the interior of a cubic room, the Director’s Office as the title suggests. It is positioned in the middle of the canvas and uses colour to create furniture inside the space. Both of the paintings use an axonometric system where the architectural object is centrally positioned on a piece of paper. The images have a rather static overall composition due to the internal frame of the circle and the cube. However, the ‘Wolkenbugel’ shows more dynamism due to the use of planometry instead of isometry, accentuating the diagonal cross in the middle. Although the horizontal lines are positioned diagonally, this cross is able to highlight the ninety degree angles of the object. The object itself is very detailed, compared to the black and white context. The details are made in a linear approach, and without the use of gradients. There are no shadows present either.
internal frame. Its static isometry emphasizes the central shape of the cube. The furniture inside follows the same system and logic as the outside space, forming one unity. Again, the drawing is very linear: no gradients and no shadows are present. However, this time colour is used to differentiate between the different objects in the room. Greyish hues are used for the room itself, contrary to the more saturated colours of the furniture. Furthermore, there is no context or background present in this image. The border is the cube itself. Both paintings are icons in architectural history. The Wolkenbugel is the first horizontal skyscraper. Its horizontality is emphasized by the use of planometry. The internal, circular frame gives it an atectonic expression: its contextual space extends outwards. The building is located in a context, but this context is rather unclear. It shows that the building could be integrated anywhere, a first step towards international architecture. The cube is more static and faces inwards. The background is grey and details are absent. The cube is unrelated to its context and stands as an icon on its own. It is detached from its surroundings and fully internationalised and globalised. The drawing shows not only a new style in architecture, but a similar language in furniture design, graphic design and representation. This painting demonstrates an entire visual language applied to every scale that rests on the principles of Bauhaus. It is a true Gesamtkunstwerk.
Bayer uses the cubic object itself as an
42
13
Planometric projection creates movement
14
Saturated colours form the foreground
13
A black and white context is created inside the internal, circular frame
14
The cube itself forms the internal frame of the painting
43
4
TONALITY
JHERONIMUS BOSCH & CARLIJN KINGMA GIOVANNI BATTISTA PIRANESI & PAUL RUDOLPH 44
Contrasting Ideas Between Fear and Desire Between Structure and Confusion
45
15
Jheronimus Bosch The Garden of Earthly Delights 1490 - 1510 Triptych oil painting on oak panel 205.5 x 384.9 cm Museo del Prado, Madrid
46
16
Carlijn Kingma A History of the Utopian Tradition 2016 East-Indian ink 119 x 84 cm Private Collection
47
Between Fear and Desire The triptych of Bosch is a well-known depiction of heaven, earth and hell. Even though the material and general subject matter is different, the drawing by Kingma looks very similar at first glance. ‘A history of the Utopian Tradition’ is a modern version of the triptych, depicting utopia, reality and dystopia [12]. Creating these extreme worlds is done by similar tonal differences. Through the division of light and dark, both artists divide their artworks into three parts. There is a very clear distinction between middle and right, but the left and middle panels look more similar to each other. In The Garden of Earthly Delights, the vertical layers are directly separated with a frame. Moreover, with the use of tonal differences and contrasts with wet techniques, Bosch manages to divide them even further. The right panel has the sharpest contrasts. Here, the light comes from different sources, such as the fires burning in the landscapes. Bright, earthly colours are used, instead of the natural green hues in the middle panel. This middle panel has lower contrasts, but abundant details to create an interesting composition. An overcast sky is used with uniform lighting. There is no clear direction of the lighting, and the shadows are very diffuse. The water seems to be completely transparent, revealing what is underneath instead of reflecting that which is above. The left panel has the least amount of details, making the panel feel the most balanced. Similar to the middle panel, uniform lighting is used, however, this time there is more contrast, especially in the shadows.
Kingma uses separate perspective systems to create a vertical division. With nuances in tone using cross hatching, she is able to divide the different projections. Again, there is no clear light source. She is very selective in which objects cast shadows. Those diffuse shadows are mostly cast by smaller elements like people and animals. This time, the water does reflect the objects above, making it feel more realistic. Additional to the vertical layers, both triptychs are divided into horizontal layers as well. Bosch breaks down the landscapes into three parts by the use of landscape features, differences in depth and saturation. The objects get smaller and their colour saturation disappears in the heaven and hell panel. On the middle panel, however, there is only a small change in saturation, apart from the mountain range on the background. Kingma divides the drawing into twelve different scenes, almost each of them with a different perspective. They highlight different viewpoints or perspectives - of the story of utopia, reality and dystopia. However, there is a less sharp division between the three worlds of Kingma than in the painting by Bosch. The utopia, realities and dystopia seem to be merely different viewpoints or directions existing in the same world. Both artists manage to create multiple worlds within one canvas by varying tonal differences, nuances and contrasts. Even though these worlds have their own character, they can still be perceived as one unity as the division between them is subtle. Using tonality, both artworks are able to show a world between fear and desire.
48
15
Balance through colours, details, and contrast
16
A clear unity and brightness characterises the utopia
15
Large contrasts and multiple light sources create a frightful atmosphere
16
Vertical layers and dark repetitions embody the dystopian perspectives
49
17
Giovanni Battista Piranesi The Gothic Arch, from Carceri d’Invenzione (Imaginary Prisons) 1749 - 1750 Etching, engraving, sulphur tint or open bite, burnishing 54.4 x 41.2 cm The Metropolitan Museum of Art
50
18
Paul Rudolph Art and Architecture Building, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, Partial exterior perspective 1958 Ink on board 101.6 x 76.2 cm MoMA
51
Between Structure and Confusion To be able to analyse the differences in hatching and tonality, two drawings are picked that convey their expression merely through the different use of hatching. The drawing by Piranesi shows a type of expressive construction, made of large, stone blocks. There are many pathways, bridges, figures and other details that make the drawing feel chaotic. Even though there is no great ambiguity in foreground and background, the space still feels confusing.
rhythm by flying through the space. Due to an extreme version of a two-point-perspective, a lot of diagonal lines are formed that create movement in the image. All of this is done by etching, which seems almost impossible. Peter van Coelen, curator at Museum Boijmans van Beuningen, even states that ‘No printmaker had attempted anything so ambitious since the days of Rembrandt’ [13]. Rudolph does the complete opposite. He probably has used a ruler to construct the very neat hatching lines. They follow the static onepoint-perspective flawlessly. He occasionally uses cross-hatching to indicate darker parts or shadows, but even this is based on the perspective. He only deviates from it when drawing plants or other vegetation, but even then, he uses neatly organised shapes of leafs.
The drawing of Paul Rudolph is everything but confusing. It is structured, well-organised, and clearly conveys the different spaces. The one-point-perspective is accentuated by the use of parallel lines - or likely the other way around. The chaotic prisons of Piranesi are made using an equivalent hatching style. Crosshatching is used to create the different tonal values, however, there is no clear logic in the hatching. Sometimes, the lines are diagonal relative to the surface direction. Other times, they are perpendicular or even curved. The black border of each surface plane are not very neat, giving it a feeling of linearity. The borders itself are frequently exaggerated by thick, black strokes, however, they dissolve in both the object and the background, creating a diffuse, painterly demarcation. With cross-hatching, Piranesi draws dark and long, eerie shadows. The light source of these shadows is unknown.
Piranesi depicts the terrifying dungeons of a certain prison, full of dynamism, dark corners and contrast. He reveals only certain parts of the space, while hiding most of it, which creates a horrific and chaotic, yet curious atmosphere. Although Rudolph also uses hatching to create tonality, he does that in a very organised manner. He follows the perspective wherever he can, and uses a ruler to construct these lines. This contributes to a neat, balanced image. However, it also gives me an unstable feeling where one single touch can disturb the entire organisation.
The composition of the cross hatched surfaces seems arbitrary. There is a certain vertical rhythm due to the large columns in the space, but a lot of elements ignore this
52
17
Diagonal and curved cross-hatching
18
Organised cross hatching
17
Many elements follow their own, chaotic logic.
18
Even the vegetation has a certain pattern
53
5
PERSPECTIVE
KAZIMIR MALEVICH & EL LISSITZKY THEO VAN DOESBURG & FARKAS MOLNAR 54
Constructing a Viewpoint From Non-object to Object
55
19
Kazimir Malevich Suprematist Composition: Airplane Flying 1915 Oil on canvas 48.3 x 58.1 cm MoMA
56
20
El Lissitzky Proun (Study for Proun S.K.) 1922 - 1923 Watercolour, gouache, ink, graphite, contĂŠ crayon, and varnish on paper 29.7 x 21.4 cm Guggenheim Museum
57
21
Theo van Doesburg Contra-Construction Project (Axonometric) 1923 Gouache on Lithography 57.2 x 57.2 cm MoMA
58
22
Farkas Molnar Project for a single-family house Der rote Wurfel 1923 Ink and Gouache on board 91.5 x 59 cm Location Unknown
59
From Non-object to Object Suprematism indicates the end of realism, the end of redrawing natural phenomenon [6]. Suprematism consists of non-objective universes. It is full of floating objects like satellites or airplanes, such as the Airplane Flying. It is not a depiction of an airplane itself, but rather shows the exercise of flying [14]. Airplane Flying is a weightless object in space that is portrayed by using two-dimensional planes in a non-perspective system. It is a flat image, but still with depth in it. The white texture indicates the infinite, spatial background. Here, anything can be portrayed upon. The planes itself are made in one primary colour, without gradients. Each of them is placed diagonally, creating atectonic movement. The planes seem to be rectangles, but with slightly angled lines, creating a sense of depth in each plane. Airplane Flying is floating in space, free from all rules of systematic projection. Lissitzky continues on these Suprematist methods of depicting space. The objects of PROUN are still floating through space, yet there is a first step towards a threedimensional space [1]. The background itself shows movement as a result of a diagonal cross. This creates depth by resembling a one-point-perspective - the background is coming towards the viewer. Moreover, each object has its own perspective system. Some planes are still completely flat, but others follow their own axonometric system, including shadow and depth. They follow a system of three axes, fully perpendicular to each other. The objects are still floating through space, but they are assembling and forming a first type
of structure. PROUN shows a first move from Suprematism to architecture. The painting of Van Doesburg originated from De Stijl - or Neoplasticism - instead of the Suprematism of Malevich. However, it is based on the similar principles of non-objective art. It uses geometry, primary colours, and surfaces without depth and perspective to create a new universe or artistic language. However, De Stijl seems to be more embedded in strict rules. The painting of Van Doesburg shows how De Stijl can turn into architecture while still using the same principles. The painting is not a representation of a building, but a demonstration of systematic construction [15]. It is three-dimensional neoplasticism, due to the similar use of primary colours, simple rectangular planes and strict lines. The planes are placed in an planometry to highlight the orthogonal logic of the system. The planes have different scales and colours to highlight the multi-functionality of it on different levels. The same visual language can be used for buildings, furniture, and even graphic design. This isometry shows how non-objective art is turning into an object of the physical reality. Molnar builds further on the propositions of Van Doesburg, by implementing the theories in an actual building design. He shows the primary colours of red and black, but also a slightly deviating brown hue. He uses the horizontal line of the cabinet projection to show that the building can actually be placed on a ground and in a context (even though the context consists of two lines only). Finally, the non-objective theories of Suprematism and De Stijl have found their place in the physical world through architecture.
60
19
Non-perspective planes floating through space
20
Non-objects start to follow a threedimensional projection system
21
Primary colours and geometrical shapes form the basis
22
Non-objective art has turned into a building
61
6
Colour
ILYA CHASHNIK EL LISSITZKY THEO VAN DOESBURG 62
A Coloured Perception The Mixture of El Lissitzky
63
23
Ilya Chashnik Suprematist Composition 1923 Oil on Canvas 183.5 x 112 cm Museo Nacional Thyssen Bornemisza
24
64
Ilya Chashnik Design for a Suprematist architectural model 1925-1926 India Ink, watercolour and pencil on paper 22 x 17 cm Location unknown
08
El Lissitzky Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge Fine-liner on Paper 29 x 42 cm
65
25
El Lissitzky PROUN 19D 1920 - 1921 Gesso, oil, varnish, crayon, coloured papers, sandpaper, graph paper, cardboard, metallic paint, and metal foil on plywood 97.5 x 97.2 cm MoMA
26
El Lissitzky Entwurf Schaukabinett Museum Hannover - Wand 3 1927-1928 Graphite, gouache, metallic paint, black and red ink Size and location unknown
27
Theo van Doesburg Contracomposition of Dissonances XVI 1925 Oil on canvas 100 x 180 cm Gemeentemuseum Den Haag
66
28
Theo van Doesburg Colour scheme Cafe Aubette 1926-1928 Ink and gouache on paper 27.3 x 62.9 cm MoMA
67
The Mixture of El Lissitzky At first sight, the set of three pairs seem quite similar in style. Each pair shows one painting and one architectural representation. However, when analysing the colours, it is possible to see similarities and differences between them. The painting by Chashnik shows the floating non-objects of Suprematism in space. They are painted perpendicular to the frame, creating a more static image. Only primary colours are used, however, the blue is less saturated than normal. The objects themselves consist of the primary shapes of the rectangle and circle. Normally, Suprematists use a white, infinite background, but this time it is black, resembling a void rather than infinite space. The objects are floating in this void as satellites in the dark and endless space of the universe. The architectural drawing shows threedimensional, rectangular objects. Although they are still floating through space, they start to reassemble into a building. Three larger, flat, elementary shapes are positioned hovering over the structure: a square, a cross and a circle. The red cross, similar to the painting, is positioned in the middle and is guiding the viewer across the artwork. Here, it follows the lines of the two-point-perspective to the vanishing points They are positioned too close to each other, forming an extreme perspective that fits well with the extreme Suprematist ideals. The ‘white’ background is used to indicate the infinite space. The objects are black, and red forms the accent or the main protagonist in the story. PROUN 19D shows the great influence of
Suprematism on the paintings of Lissitzky. Unlike other Suprematists, he shows depth in some objects, each of them following their own isometric system. Moreover, the painting includes larger planes that run out of the image, acting as a type of atectonic background. It is not difficult to imagine the objects as an apparatus, architectural design or urban plan. There is almost no use of primary colours, except for a rather low saturated yellow and blue, and some small red accents. The other planes have greyish hues or are painted in very low saturated, primary colours. Together, they form a balanced harmony. In the architectural representation, a rectangular box is folded open. It can be viewed from both sides if the canvas is rotated. Here, the primary colour of red is used again. Similar to the paintings of Chashnik, it is used as a protagonist, the red line through space. It guides the viewer through the room. Other low saturated colours are used to form the rest of the surfaces of the room. The background is divided into black and white, indicating that the painting can be mirrored, and that both halves are close to the inverse of each other. On the black side, darker colours are used with a texture that is more filled in. On the white side, lighter colours are used with small differentiations between them. The final touch is a small, human figure, placed on top of the painting as if it is part of a photo collage. The different use of colours and the sharp border between the figure and the background make it stand out. The human figure is merely a visitor in the room. The Suprematist style is clearly visible in both paintings, however, this is not the only inspiration
68
23
The black background suggests a void rather than infinite space
25
Only some small elements have a fully saturated colour
24
The red cross is the centre of the drawing
26
Red indicates the guiding line through the room
69
The Mixture of El Lissitzky for the painter. Lissitzky is known for his connection with the Western European art world [1]. He has met with many famous painters, including Van Doesburg [16]. It is therefore important to analyse Western art and its connection with Lissitzky. It is hard to show the cause and effect relation between these painters. However, it is still possible to objectively analyse the paintings and make suggestions, but proofing the actual influence is too difficult. Lissitzky often uses low saturated colours to create a better balance in his paintings. Additionally, he uses grey tones as an intermediate between the primary colours, black and white. Grey is more neutral and guides the attention to the higher saturated colours, making them the main actors in the story. This is done in a similar way by Van Doesburg in Contracomposition of Dissonances XVI. There is still use of the three primary colours, however, also slight variations of these colours are used. Black and white are dominantly present, but grey rectangles fill up the gaps. Even slightly blue variants of grey are used, comparable to Lissitzky. Like Chashnik, red is used as an accent colour in the architectural representation of Lissitzky. However, in Van Doesburg it is not used as an accent. All colours of Van Doesburg have equal importance: they are positioned in the same order in a colour hierarchy. There is no one colour that pops out more or overrules the others, creating a balanced composition. Moreover, all pairs of colours are positioned almost symmetrically over the canvas.
70
However, similarities can be found between the two architectural representations in the usage of low saturated colours, similar to the corresponding paintings. The primary colours are divided among the canvas, and the space in between is filled up with white, grey, dark grey, black, and other low saturated hues. Although Lissitzky has originated from Suprematism and has lots of similarities with them, some similarities can be found with the Western Neoplasticism of Van Doesburg as well. Lissitzky uses typical Suprematist techniques, such as using red as guidance, large black and white surfaces, and the free composition of colours in space. However, his primary colours are deviating from normal, and he uses large surfaces of low saturated colours, even grey. This could indicate his exceptional place between the Russian Suprematists and the Western Neoplasticists.
25
Large grey surfaces are used as a secondary background
27
Primary colours are used next to low saturated colours
26
Lissitzky uses a lot of different shades of grey for surfaces
28
Red accents are cut off
71
EVALUATION 72
Constructing a Vision It was incredibly difficult to start with analysing existing artworks. At first, I thought I understood drawings as I have made many myself. However, I was always occupied with the vision I tried to create, instead of the approach leading towards it. I knew the end result of my drawings, and used an ill-considered approach of getting there. When I started analysing the artworks, I immediately jumped to conclusions of what they are portraying instead of how. I have learned a lot regarding the formal analysis of paintings. I understand now how to objectively look at the separate entities of which the artwork is constructed. Even for the most simple artworks a lot of thought and trials must have preceded them. Many decisions must have been made regarding tone, contrast, colour, perspective and composition. It is only because of these details that the larger vision can be conveyed.
73
Bibliography
[1] Milner, J. (2009). El Lissitzky - Ontwerpen. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Antique Collectors’ Club Ltd. [2] Snazlan. (2017, April 10). Art Critism – Four Levels of Formal Analysis. Retrieved June 21, 2020, from https://snazlan.wordpress.com/2017/04/10/art-critism four-levels-of-formal-analysis/ [3] Pallasmaa, J. (2009). Eye-Hand-Mind Fusion. In The Thinking Hand (p. 73). Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [4] Perlson, H. (2014, September 17). A Life in Architecture. Retrieved June 21, 2020, from https://frieze.com/article/life-architecture-0 [5] Zöllner, F., & Nathan, J. (2011). Leonardo da Vinci - Het getekende werk. (E. Doelman, Ed.). Köln: Taschen. [6] Souter, G. (2008). Malevich - Journey to Infinity (1st ed.). New York, NY: Parkstone Press International. [7] Haciyeva, Z., & Hadid, Z. (214AD). Zaha Hadid and Suprematism | Tate Talks. Tate Modern. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GF_ qPKnrrHo
74
[8] Royal Collection Trust. (n.d.). Leonardo da Vinci (Vinci 1452-Amboise 1519) - A weir on the Arno east of Florence. Retrieved June 21, 2020, from https:// www.rct.uk/collection/912680/a-weir-on-the-arno-east-of-florence [9] Aarts, H. (2020). Composition and Expression [hand-out]. Eindhoven. [10] Olshanskaya, E. (2010). El Lissitzky’s Autograph on the Map of Moscow. Retrieved June 21, 2020, from http://theconstructivistproject.com/en/ blog/9/el-lissitzkys-autograph-map-moscow [11] Sckaer, T. (2019). The director’s room by Walter Gropius. Retrieved June 21, 2020, from https://www.ubm-development.com/magazin/ direktorenzimmer-walter-gropius/ [12] Kingma, C. (2016, April). A History of the Utopian Tradition. Retrieved June 21, 2020, from http://carlijnkingma.com/A-History-of-the-Utopian-Tradition [13] The Dizzying Imagination of Piranesi. (2019, September 1). Retrieved June 21, 2020, from https://www.boijmans.nl/en/exhibitions/the-dizzying-imagination of-piranesi [14] Kazimir Malevich - Suprematist Composition: Airplane Flying. (2012, December 23). Retrieved June 21, 2020, from https://www.moma.org/collection/ works/79269 [15] Theo van Doesburg, Cornelis van Eesteren - Contra-Construction Project (Axonometric). (2019). Retrieved June 21, 2020, from https://www.moma. org/collection/works/232 [16] Boersma, L. S. (2017, June 22). Suprematism and Neoplasticism - Malevich and De Stijl. Retrieved June 21, 2020, from https://www.stedelijk.nl/en/ digdeeper/suprematism-and-neoplasticism
75
76