Present Perfect or Present Progressive? Temporality in Early Soviet Avant-Garde Visual Arts OKSANA SARKIsovA (CexTRAL EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY | want the feo ‘salty 11 We mentind eo xperinen fr he fae : Rodchenko aa lhe words of everyday language that make their way into academic discourse are usualy the ones thet provoke the most heated debates, ‘The problem scems to depend not on the layers of supplementary ‘meanings, covering some ‘hidden core," but on the inapplicability of the uni- valent term in the situation where both the context and the purpose of the analysis make the author tailor the existing vocabulary to particular purpos- ¢s. To avoid possible terminological misunderstandings, I shall begin by defining the notion of the avant-garde as employed throughout this text, Which slightly restricts the immediate scale of associations generally invoked by the term (Poggioli 12-15). ‘The term ‘avant-garde’ could be equally applied to the interpretation of form, as well as to the content of some artistic creation. In the former case the attention is mostly concentrated on the manifested stylistic innovations {Gn the case of visual ars, this would be an elaboration ofa new pictorial lan- guage), while the latter emphasizes a certain radical ideology behind the project and is necessarily more self-reflexive (Biirger 22).! In other words, in my interpretation avant-garde is itself an ideology that implies particular {emporal relations with the world. Briefly speaking, it postulates a linear development ofthe world that is encoded in the avant-gardists’ positive self- evaluation: in the eleologically unfolding historical process they see their role not only as the prophets of a dawning future, but as active demiurges ‘ho, with the help of works of art, making this future happen. Making arta Part ofthe public sphere necessitates the development of an atistic language that can influence, cause, and ditect certain societal changes, ensuring that art and life progress in the same direction Russian avant-garde artists appear to claim their rights to the future approximately at the same time as their Westem counterparts (Krusanov 20. 25). It would be incorect to think that the 1917 revolution was a radical break in the avant-gerde worldview. Rather, being often more radical than politicians, avant-garde artists saw a unique opportunity to implement theit ‘ideas in practice ~ one of the major reasons that Soviet Russia isa perfect 103104 Srupies IN SLavic CutturEs case study for analyzing artistic utopias. Active participation in agitation and propaganda during the Civil War shaped revolutionary ideology, but cer- tainly did not create it anew (Lodder 47). Nevertheless, the Marxist canon ‘was important as a strong teleological referential framework for avant-garde artists.2 As [ try to show, however, there was no uniform interpretation of the ‘deal future, ‘These preliminary remarks already make clear the primacy of the ques- tions of temporality in the avant-garde movement, Practically, the old/new dimension acquires an ontological status with a clear value judgment: ‘After long centuries marking the destruction ofthe bearers of youth the day has come for the clash between youth and age. Today a des- perate struggle is being cartied on withthe old man who is tying to stifle youth, <...> We wish to form ourselves according to a new pat- tem, plan and system; we wish to buildin such @ way that all the ele- ‘ments of nature will unite with man and create a single, all-powerful image. (Malevich, 1920, 167) If we accept the distinction of “activism vs. expectation” as two opposite attitudes towards the future in the age of modernity (Kem 89-90),> the avant-garde would definitely qualify as the epitome of an active mode of life and thought. Considering the evolution ofthe inherent potentials of avant- garde ideology, | aim to show how it ultimately withdrew from its original activist stance and turned into the mode of expectation. Such an evolution was stimulated by changes in the environment (cultural, social, political), ‘but was not merely imposed on the artists. Starting from shared premises, the most uncompromising artists of the 19208 gradually diverged in creating opposing visions of the future (to which T refer as ideal types): provisionally, these two could be called “Constructivist” and “Organicist” canons. The visual and ideological lan- ‘guages of both were conceived before the revotution, but their development ‘was finelized, and their ways finally parted, during the 1920s. Before tum- ing to a detailed analysis of the development of these canons in painting, architecture, and cinema, I would like to give a brief explanation of the introduced concepts. ‘The origins of both constructivist and organicst visual languages are traceable to Cubism and Futurism, with their special emphasis on the pli- rality of perspectives, an analytical approach to form, an interplay between ‘materials and attempts to reproduce speed and movement on the two-dimen- sional canvas, as well as in the architectural models. The lessons learned by artists in Russia from these experiments were diverse: “ideal-typicalStupies im Stavic Curtures 105 Constructivism” emphasized the utilitarian functions of the construction, created by and for a “standard” individual who is the result, as well as the creator, ofthis process. Being mobile, rational, and pragmatic, this inv ual takes the best from the present for building the ideal future. Organicity, on the other hand, aimed at a unity that was close to the conservative Slavophile utopia or a monistic collectivism of God-builders (Williams 38- 40): «group not reducible to the mere sum of its individual representatives, ‘united by a common spirit and higher, almost metaphysical interests, com: runally working to create the apocalyptic future. My examination of the evolution of constructivism and organicism in the 1920s and thei impact on the modalities of time perception argues — through analyzing both the works and the manifestoes of the artists — that the activist attitude towards the future gradually ceded to « modality of mere expectation and, utimate- 1y, an abrogation ofthe active stance in relation tothe future in both canons. 1. Kazimir Malevich: the Lonely Cosmic Rider of art for experimenting with a new visual language. Borrowing ideas from Western trends, particularly French Cubism and post Impressionism, and, atthe same time, influenced by a European fascination ‘with primitive arts such Russian artists as Larionov, Goncharov, Lentulov, Filonov, and Malevich discovered the world of peasantry, Russian ortho- oxy, and traditions of lubok (Khardzhiev 59-60). The world created in their works attempted to recover a lost paradise. Receptive to these ideas, yet modifying them in order to align them with his Futuristic world view, sggiicsesivt Malevich elaborated new ways of expressing the unity of the world and showing the route to the collective par- adise that he refused to acknowledge as lost forever (Khardzhiev 117-18)4 Behind the language of Suprematism is the impetus to a radical break with the past, a “complete zero” necessary for creating a new reality rather than evoking associations with one already existing (Sharp 39).5 In other words, this new reality was envisioned as @ synthesis of the organic communal s 1 WE. > utopia with the characteristic features Figure 1 of modemity (Douglas, §).6 The new Lz before the revolution, painting was probably the primary sphere106 StupiEs IN SLavic CuLTuRES language was developed as a symbolism of forms and colors: the main shapes — square circle and triangle — stood for such complex entities as the word, the earth's movement, anda “higher force,” as well as ther inter. action, while the main colors — black, white and red — represented u versal evil, good, and revolutionary forces (Khan-Magomedov 101). It is important to emphasize the “direction” of Malevich's noifigurative I sage: unlike abstract painters, such as Kandinsky, he created his world “top-to-bottom,” moving from general to particular (Kovtun 321) Aiming at no less than the creation ofthe perfect New World, Malevich did not refine existing models, but searched for new principles (Figure 1), Since he saw ‘no necessary unity in the elements of the present, Malevich projected his ‘deals up in space and ahead in time, occupying the whole cosmos with his utopian Visions: [The keys of Suprematism led me to discover what had not yet been realized. My new painting does not belong to the Earth exchisively. ‘The Earth has been abandoned like a house infested with termites And in fact in man, it his consciousness, there is a striving towards space, an urge to take off from Earth, (Douglas 26)” ‘The October revolution seemed a chance for the realization of the most daring projects. In 1919 Malevich moved to Vitebsk with a group of fol- Jowers and started interesting experiments by creating an artistic commune, UNOVIS (Utverditeli Novogo Iskusstva), based on the utilization of collec. tive creativity to translate his ideals into practice (Statskih 53): ‘Today the man has awoken who shouts forall the world to hear and calls all humanity to unity. Our unity is essential for his being: not to obtain rights and liberty o to build an economic, utlitavian life, but in order that, by safeguarding of our bodily needs, our being may advance to the single unity and wholeness on the path of universal ‘movement, as our main, and, indeed, only goa. ... We wish to form ourselves according to a new patter, plan and system; we wish to build in such a way thet all the elements of nature will unite with man and create a single, all: powerful image. (Malevich, 1920, 167) Suprematism’ goal of transforming the world was based on a distinetion between “reality” and “actuality” that viewed reality as concealed by the “objectified” surface of the world, and recoverable only by loss of the chains of the figurative present (Khardzhiev 123). Thus, reality was perceived as the future and no longer understood in spatial terms, Such ideas were closeStupies In SLavic Cuctures 107 to the vision of bogastroitel tivo (God building), based on the mystical, reli- gious unity of the proletariat, elevated by the revolution to the full realiza- tion ofits potential and thus truly become “like God” (Williams 57). Yet, the further development of the outlined ideas soon led to a parting of the ways of the originally coherent UNOVIS group. Bringing the future into the present meant a search for practical solutions to the numerous problems forcing artists to confront the present. Already in 1921 Malevich mentions a need to adopt “a more Constructive approach to the present requirements of reorganizing the world” (Lodder 160). As artists plunged into work, along with paintings and non-figurative constructions, they created decorations for the revolutionary holidays in the city (flags, placards, decorations for buildings), worked out the design for public places (stages, tribunes), as well as for objects of everyday use (porcelain, other household facilities) and sketched out a number of Supremtst architectur- al complexes (Khan-Magomedov 63).8 However, while tailoring their artis- tic language to the needs of everyday reality, artists quickly realized that Suprematism was impossible to apply without taking functional needs into account: Despite its good intentions, in realty it amounted to little more than ‘what the Constructivists attacked as applied art. Keeping to the pic- torial language of Suprematism, the artists Kept the sphere and the ccube as the major forms without regard to their functional require- ‘ment. (Lodder 163) ‘The dilemma appeared as follows: either to keep and further develop the language of Suprematism, while sacrificing immediate utilitarian feedback, or to compromise that language by allowing the logic ofthe particular prob- Jem to define the means employed. In the second half of the 1920s, after UNOVIS was already dissolved,? Malevich authored a number of theoreti cal works defending his visual language and ideology from multiplying attacks. In answering accusations against the uselessness of his art, Malevich ‘was unable to subordinate his views to reality, and in his works God is not Cast Down (1922) and The Suprematist Mirror (1923) he chose to deny the existence of reality itself by dissolving it into holistic nothingness: 1. Science and art have no boundaries because what is comprehend- ed infinitely is innumerable, and infinity and innumerability are equal to nothing 2. If the world’s creations are God's paths and if “His ways are inscrutable,” then both He and His path are equal to nothing.108 Stupies IN SLavic Cuttures 3. If the world is the creation of science, knowledge and labor, and if their creation is infinite, then it is equal to nothing. 4. If religion has comprehended God, it has comprehended nothing, 5. science has comprehended nature, it has comprehended nothing 6. If art has comprehended harmony, rhythm and beauty, it has com prehended nothing, 7. If anyone has comprehended the absolute, he has comprehended 8. There is no existence either within or outside me; nothing can change anything, since nothing exists that could change itself of be changed. <,,.> (Malevich 1923, 224-25) 7 In folding the present into the futuristic utopia, he targeted the furure end thus lost touch with reality. This dissociation, in its turn, made him finally abandon Suprematism, but only after he had fully developed its potential. '0 Opting for the altemate strategy — to serve the “visible today” instead of the “remote tomorrow” — led Malevich's most talented colleagues, such as Lissitscky, Klutss, and Tatlin, to adopt the ideas of Contructivism and associate themselves with adherents of a utilitarian and productive approach toart. Yet the attempt to project the present into the future was not free from contradictions, either, and eventually led to another blind alley. I, From the Temple to the Factory: the Story of Constructivism rematism i ct emai supreme on he avant-gade cll ene G sits ii eo a ren oy iat pronounced by Is "suceson” phenomenon a he pase Septet ote lover Moscow. The sop windows xii ton eter al spt, And ts Yor ling, One sly nn th dy a eapenaton coming Andis erecta ths vy nen hat sapematom shoul ef create meaning What as soperatin Clearly rave expression, bts prey itso, lode 12) New artists came to develop a new language, combining the revolutionary ‘ideology, their vision of the Soviet future, and the expressive force of their ‘material to achieve the necessary synthesis of form and function (Taylor °?- 43). One of the first attempts to answer the demand of the state was imple- ‘mented by Tatlin, a friend and colleague of Malevich who later searched forSTUDIES Iw Stavic Cuttunes 109 4 practical application of his creativity, drifting away from Suprematism, While accepting certain elements of its visual language. Enthusiastically reacting to Lenin's plan of monumental propaganda," Tatlin nevertheless cspised the figurative monuments created by other sculptors. He offered the altemative of a synthesis of modern art and life, pregnant with a sym- bolic meaning of the universal order, fused with futuristic dynamism, As a principle itis necessary to stress that first of all the elements of the monument should be modern technical apparatuses promoting agitation and propaganda, and secondly that the monument should bbe a place of the most intense movement; least ofall should one stand or sit down on it, you must be mechanically taken up, down, carried ‘away against your will, infront of you must flash the powerful lacon- ic phrase of the orator-agitator, and further on the latest news, decrees, decisions, the latest inventions, an explosion of simple and clear thoughts, creativity, only creativity. (Lodder 56)!2 ‘The monument to the II International (originally conceived as @ monue ‘ment to the Proletarian Revolution) was a talented implementation of these ‘ideas: it combined the Suprematist emphasis on geometrical forms (cube, Pyramid, and cylinder, located one on top of another) with the dynamism of 8 diagonal and two spirals that together made up a light modem structure simultaneously evoking the Eiffel tower, oil derricks, skeleton masts of ships, and various Futurist sculptural works (see Figure 2). ‘The tower was to be made of steel and glass, perceived as the “= epitomes of modemity, as well as a symbol of the steel will of the proletariat, combined with its clear consciousness. The Monument was to be invested with multiple functions, con- taining a number of conference halls, an information center, and telegraph. Moreover, the emphasis on the dynamism of the structure was taken almost literally, for its various parts were supposed to rotate at dif Figure 2. ferent speeds (the cube — once10 StTuDIES IN SLavic CuLtuRES 2 year, the pyramid — once a month, the cylinder — once a day, and the radio station on top — once an hour), thus representing a microcosm aligned with the harmony of the whole universe (Lodder 62; Khan-Magomedov 101-102) ‘This project attempt aimed to unite the past, present, and future by a par- ticular logic and a certain direction of development. Tatlin, however, never bothered to provide relevant engineering calculations on the feasibility of the project,"? which came under strong criticism from other avant-garde artists, who saw the monument as uselessly complicated by symbolism at the expense of practicality. At a time of general concem With productiveness and the utility of art, one of the most serious accusations, leveled by the col- leagues was the ‘aestheticism’ of the project, which caused others to aban- don the tactics proposed by Tatlin and to search for other solutions to cur- ‘ent needs, And the needs of the present were various. An urge to build, cre- ‘ate, and construct united an otherwise diverse group of artists, who devel- ‘oped the ideology of Constructivism, which focused on the present, aban- doned metaphysics and irrational spirituality, and spoke of a New Realism: We do not look for justifications either in the past, or in the future. ‘We assert that the shouts about the future are for us the same as the tears about the past: a renovated day-dream of the romantics.<..> ‘Today is the deed. ‘We will account for it tomorrow. ‘The past we are leaving behind as carrion, ‘The future we leave to the fortune-tellers ‘We take the present day. (Gabo, Pevsner 214) ‘The first Constructivists declared the primacy of form over texture, line over surface, structure over color, and three dimensions over two. They saw their ‘major achievement in paying attention to the combination of elements in space, tothe balance of lines in a construction, as opposed to the assemblage of elements into a composition. Their works did not imply any global vision ofthe future, but, rather, concentrated on the present, making its forms clear, precise, and laconic. The visual language of such artists as Sergei and Viadimir Sternberg, K. Medunetskii, and N. Gabo marked another step in the direction of utilitarianism, while the works themselves, despite the artists’ declarations, remained purely abstract. Clearly, the strongest eriti- cism of the current uselessness of such artistic experiments came from the defendants of the principle of functional construction, ‘The Institute of Artistic Culture in Moscow (INKhUK), established inStuoles iW Stavic Cuttures m1 1920, subsequently became an institutional incarnation of Constructivist ideas (Nakov 98).!4 The core ofthe frst Constructivist working group with- in INKhUK — A. Rodchenko, B. loganson, V. Stepanova, A. Gan— grad- ually developed a coherent Constructivist ideology. It advocated the subor- dination of att to the practical needs of the moment, rejection of easel paint- ing as bourgeois aestheticism, development of the functional language of form, and providing artists with an engineering or other technical back- ground, Toganson's description of the evolution of his own formation is pre- sented a5 a notmative history of the movement: “From painting to sculpture, from sculpture to construction, from construction to technology and inven tion — such is my path and such is and will be the final aim of every revo- lutionary artst"(Lodder 96). Exclusivist and aggressive in relation to all other forms and languages of art, Constructivism declared the present its sphere of interest, and renounced both past and fture as either outdated or idealistic. Diametrically opposed to Malevich's holistic visions and Tathin’s romantic ideas, Constructivist logic taken to its extremes was no less contradictory. It denied the artists’ authority, subordinating it to the technical problems ofthe present. The free- ddom to develop a new formal language became greatly restricted by the pre- scribed function of the object that theoretically permits one the “best” real- ization of any particular problem (see Figure 3). The artist's task thus was formulated as a search for this best option rather than as experimentation with a range of alternative possibilities ‘The priority of the functional side of every artistic work was most tuncompromisingly formulated by O. Brik in his work From Picture to Calico-Print, in which the only credible artistic attitude implied the estab- Figure 3nz Stupies IN SLavic CuLtuRES lishment of close links with factories, elimination of easel painting (as alien to the Soviet State [sict)), and rejection of cooperation with other groups of left-wing artists. While Brik’s position cannot represent the views of all Constructivists, and was criticized by Rodchenko, among other artists, for its rigidity, it nevertheless stands as a logical outcome of the Constructivist line of thinking. The later split of the INKMUK theoreticians into Constructivists (concerned with the material formation of the object) and Productivists (oriented towards industry while negating the autonomy of aesthetic considerations) demonstrated the incompatibility of the ideas of the two groups. ‘This brief outline ofthe evolution of Constructivism aims not to provide 4 value judgment, but to support my argument of changing attitude towards the futute from activity to expectation, which follows from the logic ofthe avantgarde artists, An attempt to build the future from the present led to a rejection of at's independence, thereby annihilating its creativity, While Constructivism succeeded in developing its unique visual language, tha lan guage was possible only while its ideology remained flexible. Political ‘changes, which put an end to artistic experiments by treating them as harm- ful formalism, occurred after artists’ verdict of “uselessness” upon their col- leagues. Appropriating the interests ofthe state and adopting them as an autistic credo led to the elimination of creativity regarding the future III, Between Earth and Sky: Building the Future hile the revolution in architectural style within this period, \ \ ] inspired by opportunities to create a New World, seemed to sur- pass the wildest utopian dreams, most of the projects did not go bbeyond a provisional stage or theoretical discussions. Nevertheless, the abundant literature on the development of Soviet architecture never ques- tions the utopian nature of its conceptions (Khan-Magomedov 1983; Papemnyi 1985; Kopp 1985; Brumfield 1990). The two main architectural ‘groups were formed in the Institute of Artistic Culture (INKhUK) only a short time after the Institute opened, and they developed two opposite per- spectives on architecture and urban problems, as well as on the environment in broader terms. In 1923 the Association of the New Architects (ASNOVA) was formed under the leadership of Ladovskii (Khan-Magomedov 592), 5 and in 1925 M. Ginzburg, the Vesnin brothers, and those sharing their under- standing of the social approach to urban planning together founded the Union of Contemporary Architects (OSA) (Khan-Magomedov $94).'6 Both ‘groups might be said to have symbolically “grown out” of Tatlin’s monu- ‘ment, elaborating its potential; however, ifthe former aimed at a new syn-Stuples IN SLavic CurruRes 13 thesis of plastic forms, the latter took a mote functionalist approach (Frampton 171), ‘While the organizations’ names reveal a similar determination to win a symbolic competition for authority, the ways the two groups perceived and constructed new architecture contrasted dramatically. The visual language adopted by these schools often was composed of the same “avant-garde” ingredients (as opposed to that of more traditional architects), but it was their understanding of the immediate tasks of architecture that made the two groups follow alternative paths of development, The theoretical works and architectural projects of OSA reveal how its permanent concern with com- smunal aspects of housing and social aspects of regional and town planning follow an organicist paradigm, whereas Ladovskii and his followers’ inter- cst in human psychology, psychoanalysis, and the laws of aesthetic percep- tion resemble rationalistic and individualistic Construetivism.7 ‘Astarting point for OSA was the presumption that the environment above all molds people. In order to shape & new person one has to provide him/her with a completely new type of environment, aimed at eliminating conflicts, inequality, and alienation. Thus, OSA advocated not a gradual transformation of existing conditions, but # complete abandonment of the ‘old for the sake of building the new: Architectural methods should resemble those of the ‘inventor’ (xs06pemamene), which means abandoning any recourse to borrow- ing from the past, whether in the field of architectural forms, or spa- tio-functional solutions, Research in architecture, as in any other field, should aim at organizing and formulating practical tasks which are dictated by the age and valid for the future. '® (Kopp 24, empha- sis added) Similarly to the attempts of UNOVIS, the architect-inventors planned to cre- ate the future from scratch, which meant changing the immediate environ- ‘ment fiom the outdated bourgeois type of dwelling into communal housing (Gom-komunna), Stated in 1927, the project received stiong governmental ‘encouragement, owing to severe housing shortages in urban areas. The cre- ‘ation ofa new community was to result from a radical restructuring of space within each building, not only by creating public spaces (communal Kitchens, corridors, and study/leisure rooms), but also by providing such services as public laundries, cafeterias, 60 called ‘meal-factories’ to free ‘women from time-consuming household occupations. The goal pursued was 4 “cultural revolution” in life-style through cresting a new, communal (wo)man (see Figure 4).!9 The influence of the utopian thinkers clearly man-na STUDIES IN SLavic CuLTuRES ifests itself in the elaboration of the rules of communal life intended to change traditional modes of life: [T}he family in the normal sense of the word no longer exists. Children live independently, although they obviously still have nec essary contacts with their parents via heated corzidors... Adult com- ‘mune members sleep in groups of six (men and women separately), or two by two, the former ‘husband’ and ‘wife." (Kopp 81)20 ‘While never fully imptemented in practice, such theories played an impor- tant role in the discussions of communal housing, an appreciation for which, was gradually growing. Such community-building reached its extreme in a Bigantic, yet very detailed project worked out by Borshch and Vladimiroy in 1929, which was never implemented: it aimed to incorporate 1,680 inhabi- tants in the living area, functionally divided into six sectors: rest, food, mar- ried life, children’s education, culture, hygiene, and health. Figure 4 Reconstruction of the residential buildings, however, was only a halfway solution on route to the creation of a new environment. As new social rela- tions were supposed to penetrate all human activities, the OSA's attention tumed to the reconstruction of both work and leisure places, often making the two coexist in one space (see Figure 5). In this vein various attempts ‘were made to tum factories into “new architectural organisms” (Kopp 103):2! the factory was supposed to become a true center of “social engi- neering,” simultaneously fulfiling professional, educational, and leisure functions ‘The factory has become the true home of education — the universi- ty of the new socialist man. Our largest meetings take place in the factories. Plays an‘! concerts are given there duting rest periods ‘Thus, the factory itself has become the melting pot of the sociairza-Stupies in Stavic Cutrures 1s Figure 5 tion ofthe urban population; its architecture is not merely the wrap- ping for a group of machines but something completely diferent and new. (Kopp 103)22 ‘The working clubs, which were gaining popularity among the architects, were endowed with similar functions, in order to structure rest time. They offered a range of educational and propaganda activites, including theater, Cinema, exhibitions, mectings of interest groups (for example, astronomy was a subject of increasing interest), lectures, and debates. Gradually the focus shifted to more participatory kinds of activities, such as athletics, for example, so that the structures, as Lissitzky put it, would become “the real ‘workshops for the transformation of men” (Frampton 175)23 Everybody ‘was encouraged to participate, and to invite and involve others. But a few years later even such sporadic cultural and educational centers came to be ‘een as too limited for an ideal person of the future, By the end of the 1920s the focus of OSA expanded, to incorporate planning whole districts, for which a new term first used in 1928 was coined: “social condensers." These Were the mechanisms for transforming habits, and referred to any “building, complex district, or even city which, in addition to its immediate functions, would firstly foreshadow the architecture and town planning of the frture s¢ that the users would grow accustomed to both; and secondly influence users through its use of space so as to introduce a new way of life into their social habits” (Kopp 70) (see Figure 6) ‘The main priorities and directions of OSA's further development are already quite visible at this point. The idea of radically transforming the16 Figure 6, by shaping him/her in the present and refusing to adjust to the already exist- ‘ng modes and practices of life. Starting from communal housing and mov- ing to the planning of city districts, industrial centers, and rest areas, OSA needed to take just one more step to undertake city and regional planning, ‘This step was made at the very end of the 1920s, when OSA declared archi. fecture out of date and proclaimed the importance of creating ideal "green i sities” ex nihilo 4 Pursuing this goal, Ginzburg and Okhitovich headed i ‘group of disurbanists, basing their ideas on the plan of electrification that Provided a necessary infrastructure for regional planning. From this point of view communal houses already seemed to be an outdated vision of the j futur: We have now arrived at a moment of disenchantment with the so- i calle ‘commune’ that deprives the worker of living space in favor of / corridors and heated passages, The pseudo-commune tht allows the | worker to dono more tan see at home, te eee deprives him of both living space and personal convenience (the lines that form outside bathrooms and inthe canteen) is beginning to pee, ‘voke mass unrest. (Frampton 176)25 ‘The new concept was maximally communal and organic, as it called for 4 unity that includes nature and makes it a part of everyday life: “green cities” envisioned a zone structure separating various activites by green areas (Frampton, 176).26 Disurbanization implied decentralization and the Creation of small organic communities evenly spread throughout the coun. I ‘Ty. Ginaburg's final housing project retains nothing ofthe original urge forStuoles iw Stavic Cuctures u7 change, but, rather, emphasizes peaceful and harmonious coexistence with ature ‘The housing unit has two facades... Sunrise and sunset, nature on all sides, all that is not luxury but the satisfaction of undeniable needs, ‘The sun traverses the whole housing unit. When the windows are swung back, the unit is wansformed info a terrace surrounded by ‘greenery. The bedroom loses its specific “bedroom” character almost ‘completely. It dissolves into nature...(Kopp 150)27 OSA architects started with a very active attitude towards the future, but ame to hold position close to the expectation pole (using S. Ken's termi- aology) when dissolution in nature (in space) became more important to ‘bem than its radical transformation in order to fulfill an existent plan (in ime), The ‘ahead-to-the-future' vision of time initially provided a strong ‘eleological impetus, which ultimately was replaced by more “downto. sarth” concerns. ‘The itinerary of ASNOVA both resembled and differed from OSA’s, Similarities emerge in the oficial statements and declarations of the two, where each organization claims to incarnate the vanguard of contemporary xchitectural thought and to pursue the most rational and most socialist type >f urban planning 8 The significance of these claims, however, was differ ant. ASNOVA was much more concemed with the individual than the col. ective: thus, the visual language developed by ASNOVA architects was focused on the laws of perception, both physiological and psychological, ‘The activity ofthis group mostly entailed teaching at the Higher Artistic and Technical Studios (VKRUTEMAS), whereas OSA’s members were 2etively involved in all ofthe housing projects of the era. The laboratory of Ladovski, the main, ideologue of this rationalist architectural movement, slosely concentrated on space and spatial aspects of mass, weight, and vol~ ame, claiming that “space was the basic material of architecture rather than ‘he structural elements"(Khan-Magomedov 108). Searching for the “laws of >ereeption," he implemented various psychoanalytical methods and tested ais models in the specially created psycho-technical laboratory called the ‘black room,” which allowed him to concentrate on the perception of “pure ‘onms.” ‘The visual language of Ladovskii is marked by pure, distinguishable eometrical forms, carefully balanced, but at the same time very dynamic and directed into open space. The architect never took into account the prac- ical, utilitarian aspects of such structures, but concentrated on the aesthetic ‘eanures of the model. These models appear to have no relationship to thens Stupies IN SLavic CuLtures environment, and remain uprooted, ungrounded, designed for being placed on cliffs, built into mountainous landscapes or given the shape of a skyscraper (Gee Figure 7). Ladovskii’s stu- dents at VKhUTEMAS went even further, creating “flying houses” (domolety), which were supposed to comprise whole cities in the sky Bliznakov 149). ASNOVA’S ‘ideas were Figure 7 shaped under the strong influ- ence of the German sculptor A. Hildebrandt, whose ideas found ther visual incarnation in Ladovski’s mod- cls: “[Architecture] arouses a special sense of space, and so structures space that our visual impressions fre us ftom the effort necessary to find our bear- {ngs in nature” (Kopp 126)29 ‘The individuality and originality ofthe model wes valued over its social ‘or political functions. Accordingly, ASNOVA's slogans emphasized the cre- ativity ofthe individual, as well as his/her independence: “long live inivid- ualty, away with individualism” and “measure architecture withthe help of architecture” (arkhitekturu mer te arkhitekturoi) (Kopp 128). For Ladovski, Mel'nikoy and other ASNOVA architects, it was the present that determined and encouraged modem architecture. This point of view almost excluded the future from its perspective, not denying its significance, but, rather, consid- ving it a logical outgrowth of the present. ‘The development of this group's interests paralleled that of OSA archi- tects’. However, Ladvovskii’s communal houses and Mel'nikov's working club projects differed significantly in both their visual language and the ‘meaning with which they were invested. They viewed the person of the pres- cent but not the community as the main target, and their architecture had a strong individual touch; their language was functional and expressive. By ‘the end of the 1920s interest in city and regional planning was affecting Ladovskii and his followers, who quit ASNOVA to establish the Union of Achitect-Planners (ARU™) (Khan-Magomedoy 598), also called Urbanist, ‘The ubanists, however, interpreted the idea of developing new town settle- ‘ments, based on Marx's concept of dissolving the border between the city and the village, differently:| Stupies In Stavic CuLTURES 19 [ARU regards as incorrect attempts to define the development of a city in terms of the application and implementation of a single orga nizational form of settlement, since a solution of the problem of socialist settlements cannot be based exclusively on a single particu- lar principle. (Khan-Magomedov 599-600) ‘The urbanists hoped to create middle-sized towns (40,000-60,000 inhab- itants) of an agro- industrial character. They simplified the visual language of housing, which ultimately became similar to the one developed by OSA, and they accepted zoning that separated work and leisure areas, Paradoxically, by the early 1930s the visual language of the urbanists and disurbanists largely converged, which is remarkable, given their opposite original stances. The creation of the town network (no matter how big or small the planned units) practically eliminated temporal considerations from their thinking. While replacing temporality with spatial concepts, the architects put an end to what originally had been an active attitude towards the future. Ironically, in the early 1930s their projects were considered “untimely,” for the main problem was perceived as “how to redistribute mankind” (Miliutin 62), Since most ofthese projects, including ‘Green City,’ were never imple- ‘mented, the development of the ideas presented here features a kind of men- tal trip, one that culminated in a reversal. IV. Building the Future on the Screen: Birth of the Soviet Nation -sually referred to as the youngest child inthe family of arts, cinema ‘became accepted into “the family” only after years of intensive work at developing its own language, which eventually raised its status from a mere techhical amusement to an independent branch of art (Tsivian 30-32), Increasing narrative abilities, together with an illusory realism and ‘the technical capacity to travel through space, as well as to be preserved in time, endowed cinema with a power inaccessible to most of the other arts. ‘The development of montage techniques, experiments with flashback, dream sequence playback and other ways of manipulating recorded materi- al greatly enriched possible modalities of temporality within the framework of film, Cinema thus had the chance not only to become the most avant- garde of the new Soviet arts, but to make avant-garde principles its very essence, In this respect it challenged the traditional style of film making, which had been strongly influenced by theatrical canons of representation. Soviet avant-garde films of the 1920s represent an attempt to fuse entertain-120 STUDIES IN SLAvIC CULTURES ‘ment with propaganda by testing the existent visual canon on the screen and seeking the best ways of organizing its components, While film is probably the most ‘collective" of the visual arts, the story of cine-avant-garde language is best revealed through an analysis not of group or studio trends, but of works by particular artists. I therefore exam- ine here the films of two masters, both of whom greatly, however different- ly, influenced the development of film language. Dziga Vertav, originally the ‘most consistent in denying the “fictional” character of the cinema, devoted his career to creating a new type of “Constructivist documentary,” while Aleksandr Dovzhenko tried throughout his life and work to reconcile ‘organicism and rationalism, ‘When Denis Kaufman started a cinema career, he plunged into a com- pletely new world, This new life began with a change of name: by baptizing himself Dziga Vertov he created a pseudonym that combined the motion of the film-reel in the projector (from Russian verter’) with the audible associ- ations produced by it. This new life, marked by such a Futuristic gesture, immediately challenged the traditional approach to the cinema. In line with other avant-garde authors of manifestos, Vertov published his own version, We, declaring a need for a new language in cinematography: WE call ourselves kinoks — as opposed to ‘cinematographers — ‘herd of junkmen doing rather well peddling their rags. We see no connection between true kinochestvo and the cunning and calculation of the profiteers. <... > We are cleansing kinochestvo of foreign matter — of music, it- erature and theater; we seek our own rhythm, one lifted from ‘nowhere else, and we find it in the movement of things. <,..> For his inability to control his movements, WE temporarily exclude man as a subject for film. ‘Our path leads through the poetry of machines, from the bungling citizen to the perfect electric man. (Vertov 5-8) ‘The new aesthetics ofthe machine age saw the movie-camera as a part ofthe ‘New World, existing to achieve cine-truth, The mechanical perfection of the camera was to guarantee this truth, supported by the photographie precision of the image and secured by the absence of artificial settings, costumes, and actors. Such enthusiasm for “raw reality” notwithstanding, the avant-garde notion of truth receives a very specific interpretation. In brief, before being represented on the screen, reality should pass through multiple sets of filters in order to reflect a final vision of society: “It is necessary to get out of theSTUDIES IN Stavic Cuctures 121 limited circle of ordinary human vision; reality must be recorded not by imi- tating it, but by broadening the range ordinarily encompassed by the human eye” (Leyda 178). The fact that such a broadening ultimately leads to dis- tortion not only did not bother the artists, but was a reason for their enthusi- asm — Vertov's words served as a slogan for the whole epoch: am kino-eye, I am a mechanical eye. I, a machine, show you the ‘world as only I can see it. Now and forever, I free myself from human immobility... Now I, a camera, ... [am] maneuvering inthe chaos of ‘movement, recording movement, starting with movements composed of the most complex combinations. ... My path leads tothe ereation of a fresh perception of the world. I decipher in a new way a world unknown to you. (Vertov 17-18) In this statement itis already possible to see the controversy that lat would lead to the reversal of Vertov’s original position: reality “as itis, which is assumed to have the highest value, should be carefully constructed in order not to dissolve into chaos. Thus, the “correct” reality as such does not exist yet, and should be created following the rules of constructivism as “a higher form of engineering for our whole life” (Kopp 8). A futuristic vision of reality was believed to be created on the screen from the elements of the present. Dziga Vertov's first flims were documentaries on the civil war (often ‘composed from @ number of chronicles that made up one film) and the film- ‘magazine Kino-Truth (Kinopravda) — a newsreel composed of material tecorded without a preliminary scenario, but later organized into a narrative by the director. The films Lenin's Kino-Truth (1924), March, Soviet! and The Sixth Part of thé World (both released in 1926), as well as The Eleventh (1928), were made according to the rules of the new genre and can hardly be characterized as documentaries (Fledelius 53-80).32 Spatial representation of material dominates these films: the immense diversity of the Soviet land constitutes a micro-universe, containing the snowy territories of the north, the fertile fields of the south, as well as peo- ple from various nationalities and cultures. Nevertheless, the temporal aspect is no less important for Vertov. The presented diversity possesses not only a spatial unity, but also a strong temporal vector of development: every step, every movement of the machine, every building built, every harvest collected, every book read — is a step toward the socialist future. At this stage, however, the future was still only anticipated, worked for and dreamt about. Vertov's next film, Man with a Movie Camera (1929) was the first for which he filmed the material according to a preliminary prepared plan. One122 STUDIES IN SLavic CuLTuRes ofthe highlights of Constructivist aesthetics, the film sought to develop a specifically cinematographic language, which could abandon inserts by encoding meanings within the film material itself. If the previous films, especially One Sixth ofthe World, focused on the spatial unity of various eras, Man with a Movie Camera created a temporal unity of various places. Filmed in different locations in Russia and Ukraine, it was later assembled in such a way as to represent a modem universe. Beginning as an anthropomorphic account of city life, it later emphasizes its ‘most modern (by definition, urban) elements: mechanisms set in motion, shops opened up, trams, trains and cars, factories, telephones, switchboards, typewriters as main chords in a dynamic “urban symphony.” The man with ‘movie camera constructs this life and its heroes from a mosaic of elements: the montage sequence of hands and faces creates new people, the people of the future: “reconstruction ofthe whole from the pats is replaced by the construction of the new entity from these parts — something that Kuleshov in another experiment called ‘a constructed person” and what Vertov (in his ‘manifesto) named ‘a perfect man™ (Tsivian 365). ‘The film not only contained a concept of the future, but also targeted future viewers. The complexity of the language, which refused to adjust to viewers’ expectations, accords with Vertov's general ideas of the transfor. mation of the world withthe help of cine-truth Vertov’s ideal recipient not only could not have, but should not have existed inthe empirical world — it was assumed that such a viewer does not exist prior tothe film, bu is induced by i, The drama of not understanding, even if it was not planned while conceiving the film (and here lies its main difference form the mainstream West European avantgarde), was nevertheless programmed, encoded its structure.” (Tsivian 358) Predictably, the language of Vertov's films (particularly Man with a Movie (Camera) remained unappreciated and often ignored. Even the positive eval- uations of the film emphasized its consciously incomprehensible language ‘(Youngblood 207). The constructivist logic, while emphasizing the furure direction of the film, nevertheless built it from elements of the present. The main actor responsible for creating the New World is an individual, the man with the camera himself. He often dominates reality (standing on top of the roof, being two or more times bigger than the pedestrians below), is omnipresent and records everything (sitting in the glass of beer in the pub, accompany- ing the firemen to the fire, and the ambulance to the place of an avcislent,Stuoles iN Stavic CuLtures 123 going down to the mines and up tothe factory chimneys). He has the right to manipulate spatial, as well as temporal, reality. In erating his future, he splits the image, multiplies and distorts i, reverses the movement, slows down or speeds up the action at will (see Figure 8). The viewers are situat- ced within atleast three temporal zones (not mentioning the time of actual viewing): the time of the audience watching the film in the cinema, the time of the actual filming that is on the screen, and the intermediate time of the ‘montage ofthe film, during which the viewers are introduced to the poss- ble manipulation of the cinematographic material ‘While intent on creating the future from elements of the present, Vertov at the same time strongly opposed the idea ofa gradual and linear temporal development of past-present-future, Like other avant-garde artists, he per- ceived realty as an eschatological break with the past — a vision that Figure 8.124 STUDIES IN SLavic CuLtuRes explains why for him reality had to be organized in a specific way: elements that do not belong to the future do not deserve to exist in the present: At the present time we sre experiencing a transitional period, which already contains the elements of future life but at the same time is overburdened with useless and outdated moments which should be usted and in no way shown on the screen, ... the most important is ‘not the bad boots and old jacket of the worker, but his energy and his ‘work, and such inconvenient shoes, clothes and flats we will have to replace with the very best ones, To use these unchanged objects of our life is inappropriate: new energy must have a new form, (Belenson 26.28) ‘The acceptance ofthe present as an ultimate source for the construction of the future made Constructivism particulaly vulnerable to upcoming changes. The films made by Vertov in the 1930s represent a sincere, though doomed, attempt to catch up with time. Three Songs of Lenin (1934) com. bines the avant-garde fascination with modernity with totalitarian elements of Stalinist aesthetics, of which Lullaby (1937) offers a perfect example. The {act that Vertov came to adopt totalitarian ideas inthe 1930s seems a pare. ox, but his readiness to see the future inthe present and the urge to create it at any price illuminate the contradiction The turbulent changes of the late 1920s let no one untouched, The life and works of another prominent film director, Aleksander Dovzhenko, demonstrate how his organic view of the world, radically different from that of Constructivism, evolved both visually and thematically, resulting within 8 decade in an interpretation similar to Vertov's. Though Dovahenko's career Started in the mid-1920s, his firs success and acknowledgment as an origi, ral director came only after his film Zvenigora (1927). Its language, still Schematic and sometimes overly pathetic, nonetheless radically differed from that of Constructivism: it nt only organically absorbed a legendary, ‘magical past, but also created a link between the past and present, mapping alternative paths tothe future, The two main characters searching for a legendary treasure buried in Some mountain represented two optional paradigms of the future, Divided along political lines (‘white” vs. “red”, for Dovzhenko they image two alternative directions of further development. Schematically, one offered « retum to traditions in the narrow sense — seclusion from modernity, a retreat into the past. The other opted forthe incorporation of modernity and change by its acceptance of socialist ideology (Trimbach, 109)33 Dovzhenko clearly stated his priovities: the former was a dead-end, whereasstupies IN Stavic CULTURES 125 he latter meant the right solution. The image of an ideal future informed all xis films, determining the portrayal ofthe present, Envisioning this future a8 1 new, perfected collectivism of the masses, as an organic symbiosis of aature and technology, Dovzhenko tied to create his vision of socialism on the screen. His univers, similar to that of Malevich, Tatlin, and Ginzburg, was consciously futuristic and utopian, but not perceived by him as unreal- istic, In the changing atmosphere ofthe early 1930s, however, an attempt to reconcile organic elements with triumphant modemity made the author vul- nnerable to totalitarian ideas, misroring the fate of Constructivism in cinema, Dovzhenko's Earth (1930) represents his most vivid and coherent attempt to bring together old and new, nature and mechanism, circular and linear, present and future, The film, originally conceived as propaganda for collectivization, de facto addressed more general questions of two different ‘modes of life, where collectvization itself came to be interpreted as a future tunity. The film is sometimes interpreted as “a search for the races of eterni- ty in the constantly changing word” (Margolit 109). This eternity, however, portrayed as the circular traditional world of the peasantry, came to be mod- ified by the linear changes of history, resurrected as @ new, improved, and expanded totality (see Figure 9). Dovzhenko made the earth itself the focus of the film. It organizes and structures human life, gives it meaning, and determines its tempo. The death of the old grandfather in the beginning of the film is a very “natural” event, accepted and anticipated by everybody. There is a time to be bom and a time wh Figure 9,126 STUDIES IN SLAvic CutTuRES to die — an axiom confirmed by logic and nature. Earth recognizes no {tragedy inthis process; on the contrary, talking to his old friend, the grand father promises to “report how one feels up there — be it heaven or hell.” A Pregnant woman, children at play, and the lavish, bountiful apple-trees in this sequence stand for a promise of etemal rebirth end continuity Patriarchal harmony, however, is disturbed by intrusive novelties: a tractor 8s an iron symbol of modem times signals the redistribution of space that will break up the borders of the old in order to create anew unity of equal. Such radical changes necessarily meet stubbom resistance. Another death inthe film, this time of an enthusiastic young hero (Vasil) who sup- ports collectivizaton, while seemingly meaningless, symbolizes'a necessary sacrifice forthe birth ofthe new collectivity. Being killed atthe peak of his Physical and emotional development, this spokesman for the future helps to create a collective memory, bridging the old and the new order. His funeral ‘becomes the frst collective action of the village, set in the familiar environ- ‘ment of abundant nature, Vasil's death, while a tragedy for his family, his lover, his friends, and the village in general, neither stops nor impedes the advent of the future. Already created, this new life establishes its own ‘hythm: Vasil’s mother gives bith to a new child, Vasil’s lover “finds] hap- piness with another man, consoling herself with work and children” (Dovzhenko 69), and the earth blossoms and bears fruit, feeding and unify- ing all the men and women of the community. While this ideal unity was achieved on the screen, the inherent controversy of Dovzhenko’s approach nevertheless remained: the original organicity ofthe world was shaken to the core and could no longer be rebuilt. ‘The 1930s failed to unite the people, and Dovzhenko’s ideal of creating ‘the future in the present was later modified, never again embracing the har- ‘mony depicted in Earth. His film Aerograd (1935) takes the idea of creating the future in the present almost literally: the whole film is about a new city tobe built atthe “end of the world,” naturally, ex nihilo. The idea recalls the architectural projects of the early 1930s and still belongs to the avant-garde ‘way of thinking about time and space. The construction of the city, howev- cs is absent from the film. Moreover, as the end reveals, the city has not been founded yet, the process being postponed until a remote future, while the present consists largely of a passionate batle against enemies. Although the future is anticipated, the film lacks an active stance toward it ‘The language of the film belongs not ‘othe avant-garde visual canon, but to socialist realism. Interestingly enough, the visual language of Vertov's Lallaby, made two yeara after Aerograd, closely vesembles the latter, being 2 glorification of the pseudo-unity of the Sovict people. The inherent poten. tial for such an evolution was contained within avant-garde ideology andSTUOIES IN SLavic CuLTuREs 127 \was brought to life by the emerging totalitarian regime, combined with the consistency of an artist unwilling to modify his avant-garde fascination with the futur, Dovzhenko preserved his creative attitude toward the future and even sified it. His later ideas, however, sooner evoke a daydreaming roman. tc than a pragmatist — an identity avant-garde atts always passionately ‘ejected. In his speech at the artists’ meeting held in 1935, Dovzhenko out. lined two alternative types of relationship between the state and the atst, neither of which engaged an avant-garde mode of thinking: 1 don’t want to say that we should not illustrate with our work the activities of the party and the govetnment. ... What Isay is that itis ‘not enough to be mere illustrators. I dream about an aitist who could write a novel. This novel is later to be read by the Politburo, who ‘would then decide: “Stating tomorrow, this novel should be imple. mented in life, exactly following the scenario.” For what reason, how, by which workers and under whose supervision and what all that would mean — all that should be written in the novel. We still dlon’t have such artists, comrades, but our ideal should be to try to become them. (Yurenev 64) ‘Thus, the evolution of the cinema directors’ views demonstrates a similar {urn from activity to expectation, from the avant-garde urge to transform reality to an almost complete subordination to it. While possessing a built. in contradiction, the avant-garde as an ideology neither created nor fell vie~ tim to Bolshevik ideology and totalitarianism. Rather, the actualization of such an inherent potential depended on the context in which the avant-garde artists lived and worked. Constructions of the future were competing for the best representation of the present. By conceptualizing reality as the locus of aesthetic activity, howev. {artists came fo adjust to changes in the politcal and soc 1! environment. ith the gradual supremacy of Stalinism as one ofthe political altematives, the inherent potential for exclusivity became activated bot! in political and cultural spheres, leading to the formation of a single rionolithic canon, During NEP the avant-gardists constructed theit vision: of the future ay Strategies in artists’ competition for state support. Theit creative activism Sought to shape the future cither by building it from the elements ofthe pres. ent, or by constructing it anew. During the 1930s, however, the state ‘emerged as the ultimate and sole soutce of symbolic normativity. It froze128 Stuotes IN SLavic Cuttures {temporality by expressing an eternal present, which made both past and {ture fixed according to the iconology of totalitarian power. Avant-garde artists, aligning themselves with the external definition of reality, con- {ributed not only to the annihilation of the plurality of artistic canons, but, of their own creative individuality, as well Figures | Kazini Malev Syrenation: Yellow an Black, 1916. Oi on Canvas 79 5:70Sem Sate asian Meum, St Peetu Reyosiced om Me Gea Copa so shecelee 5 3, Yd Tain. Monoment orth Third Communit ermal, mote! on dpe, 1920 rom Kopp 3. Redeheko, Alkan: Mode! layout of « Wares" Club in the Soviet Paion, Pai, Imersateal Ebon, 925 Repos fom Khar Magarin, usenet 4M. Gincbry, Mls: ir of te epsinenlheing compere wg cement seve dung OSA rok for Scot RSFSR. bulong or ks release esa ee 1930 Fepectve ein of te gue ie showg he Sock Stearn Sees nesed byt bg on eh, Repadeced ae ene 4,1 Shlooy, Zev Cs, Moteow, 1920. Repeal fom Khan-Mogomedov, 46, sta: ion tt mi lteetousing uit dvd by OSA members inthe Seaton RSFSR Howing Retearh Son Ropoded fone Ronee 7. Lado, Eperinenal design fr «corel howe, Zita, 1920. Repedued fom Rh agin 54, easton $98 8.D. Vero, il fo Mon with Mie Comer, 1828. MoMA fl sits achive 9.4. Dovateko sil fom Earl 1930, MoMA fn stil neve Notes po ot suggest that he development of an atti language is by definton not a conscious roces or tha the two parts «form and content ould ext sepeatay anaes Gone ae Doce of analy The ea behind spaatng te (wo ast explain yeh of he ele, Sd abject visual ars wit clearly pronounced wali! sang. ihace a ees eugene tee pel rae San toe een snot ‘rweh ona area of experimental ate wera. fr compu verous post aes {5 defining the avant-garde se: Foagio, Renato, The Theory ofthe vn gate Cree ‘Be Belknap Press of Harvard University Prat, 968 and Blger, Petey, Tikoo of ke, garde, Mieaplis: Univer of inneton Press, 1988 Senay being much more acl han the politi leadership ofthe Soviet tate, teats gna viewed proletariat dictatorship and te rl of the Botheys ns tasetind ce BEE nay te ext cla revelation, binging fecdom and snare, Teh eee Bopdanov and his ideas of tee independent pute wards communism (lice eee andl) payed a age oe, Toby's dea of permanent evoluion beceoe sae eee tinge forte svat gd ta Fel 18g Minkoatin is wo iow We Live he ten ot what we now in diinguthed wo meds of expenencing the immediate fae “set wea eee ‘The cuca dite the oven of jet ane ee eee and emecan. ‘sual goes towards the utr, diving int the surroundings in cone steven Ya of expcaion the fare comes toward tn avis ws cone spereten ins avionment. Every individual ia mistur of both modes, Wek wakes eae ene he word and aint sn enya» Darape ot treaening seal eeeStupies iw Stavic Cuctures 129 4in Sin this metapiyses! concep vas frst demonsiaed atthe “010° exhibition in 1915 in erogn. The exhbiion tof gest imporance ass suting pom or fie ecopten oe nga wsont of he fatre. For the Yepon afte eas eee oe Svatevies personal cilhood experince payed » great role in his Iter views on th nd vidal and community: nhs mtobopaphy he would Wis rhe soe Meta reer okie Wes eae aace eel gee hash ak fois. would never ody thought a he pcan ees well Dette Red ee et sey i ee ny fstons ony amg Tey Dade ching enacnes, oe in Douglas alevich was gent infiuenced by Tsiolkovakys works ts well as by the philosophy of cos- si Sicha cosmic hme wa sal gal thee hee Sees explosion of interes in science fein. Mat of which consisted in spatal waveling wed planets tnd wemporal visits othe future. The both wee often combines a ee orn ‘oplan stories such as: N. Fedorov's “Evening in 217” V. Bryusow's “Repabic of te Souther Cross” A. Bogdanov's "Red Stu," Va Okunev's “Coming world” See Vinca ‘nmymonus 2X aera, vin, on account of eeanamic hardship these architectural designs were never implemented snd remained models and drawing. See Khan Magomedoy, Ef Lisisiy, TESETSOT pecans University Art Museums, catalogue for an exhbiion of selected werk from Nowy Aarne lection, te Sprengel Museum Hanover snd the Staatliche Gale Monitbarg Hale Veoh Sone Lissitzky Koppes, Ef Liste: Lye, Lever, Texts Transated oy Helene Alone fed Mary Whit, 2n rev. e, New York 1980, SUNOVIS was dissolve in 1972, after which Malevich moved 0 evap wire he aed the Petrograd branch ofthe Ste Art Communes (GINKMUK) daring 1622-1986, devloning {he Seat ergy conceived in UNOVIS. Nav, Andrei B. (Andel Boris) von garde ‘ase. Fas: Fran Hara, 1984, "Coming forte second time in his Uf te te “zero poi.” Malevich Inte etme tothe fig. ratve patting ofthe peasant subjects, while nevertheless remaining aya he hos or his Supreratst pend, "Lenin's idea of 1918 was to create a evolutionary pantheon (orginally 66 nares were pro posed) and to commemorate the mas! important finery end Thekers fore We Nae oF ‘humanity in‘stonc and metal, tus erating certain pre-hstory of the Soviet Sate an up, Biting tslegiinesy. Among othr there were Marx Engels, Sparses, Danton, Rsbespens, skanin, Sabin, Uspensi, Dosievski, Rube, Vivbe, Quen and shes, Laden '2N, Punin "O nowasramax” (On Monuments), 1919. Quoted in Lodder, 6. Emphasis added ‘othe principal elements of synthesis of modem art and Ws plc funcon 3A wooden simplified mode! reproduced in al the studies of early Soviet art was builtin 1920 and demonstrated at the exhibit in Moscow. Milnes Nakov, As Tass theo sos ‘uprenatis and conuructvist art 1910-1923, November 1973 Tanualy 1974 [etsogue wrt bby Andrei B: Nakov} Londor Fischer Fine Art Lied, 1974 ovignally headed by Kandinsky, INKHUK radically changed its ideology, withthe Cant compg prone anda tag BES No et ‘ase Pa: Perand Yar, 198 IS*ASNOVA gradually came together in the course of the development of Zhivekulparch (1919-1920), Obras 1520-2) andthe Working Group of Arcntcctsn INKAUE (931 To85t It onstuton ‘vas registred in July 1923 and ts founders were Lesovakly tate, DDokuchue, Rukhpacy and ote. The fist and onl issue of levetiye ASNOVA; coe Lissitait and Ladovskit appeared in 1926" Ladoveki let ASNOVA with s prove ote ft lowes in 1928, when Balin became i leader» ASNOVA wes Gusolved 1938 aloog ‘thal eer groupings * Kha-hapomedon 92 16-0 was founded athe ond of 1925, with Aleksandr Vesnin as chairman, Ginzburg and YNikior Vesin at deputy chairmen, ané Orlow ne secretary. The memberhip ef OS metas frchaicraey, ae ne ar fling Se We" Cone, Sno Kos niko, Leona, and others Te pices! Conpenennan gpmennpe (Ces oa ‘Archietre} was published by OSA fom 1926 10 1980, wi Alcsand Vers od Goes 13 Malevich was working onthe stge design fo cube furistopers, “Victory ave the130 Stupies iN Stavic CuLtunes Et 28 OF ot expt hg eke: icin Soiihege SSR. 0 Sure crane Sass ce a ee bapa tegen ti ito wr" sein Sey ue pe cat at an of arn‘ ony rennet ANCOR Soma ts Sac EME eA ce Uae ett Tae ane Dance a ws eee GES el Sera gop ope eet upon apes nd Se eee EES eT evimen tret cca Tt Gly "he New Mend of Aes! Thing” 1986. Qed Kop, 24 Ego si ne ts es tine 126, Que in: Ky, 2 Re en prema EEF i Nee asses ney Sear oe emi wy cd wom eer i te Comat cf ot ad or ing ‘anna pala wi he my Spr techs ser et ane ek {Spey Waele dc oie chs ne centers ese, unc aise cs ices Pease nde ad a nage ny ie 2m ued prt on Kr i: lm 7 Onarga Kipp 1 Alot Khanors 1 Zim 18 Que ap toms DLiasitky. One of the characteristic examples would be Leonidav's concept of te club as. mil ra aa ef hi Scape al iret (ene ere sel Wi tek tl Spi. mclnsaine ee elegy tian ey et 2h cope tay om Ween nly eh ie Wes of epee tet np ka Ae be oe ie of mrs ‘poet 131), oust 1990, Quoted in: Frampton, 176 For eon ORitvsh se Khazars, 53.7, 260 of he ret hare consistn ops of hype was dren by Min ‘130, whe ted ute aa and oper freien aya ‘seit es roe ita ng ee al sre tg wt ln ion pro ener ton i vecenah inten, Gwcing mi ene es Casaningrocseed Sees ie that fier, and oly 6m apical Sve. Paton 6. Zea, 90, cuted in Komp 150, Seo Gnebor M. Spie nd epach toon spd tarllcn yma Senlevick Cabo het Pastas Sen eum ArmcedSudesn he cere Chess, tate nase een, nen Ses ew Yrs CY Oy MT Pca 2s for crap slogan an tere pubs in neil ASNOVA ed Soren ‘Arar heen cleo feb aco nsed wR spon {Blea ies wore developed in Les probes de afore dan le a pasties” 2g tenet mecing of ARL mw it oped i Fir Deaton, ws belé an Newer 894 wth cdo aehsman pa gan Sree hh See steer anette eg ml Thr ah gop Lega. Along wah ali eer foupgs RU oa aed SSE Napa 368, 3am exe fom A Ga "Conutvn.” quoted A. Kopp 8. Both Gn ad Yer eRe RRREEeneeeeeStuoies i Stavie Cucrures nh miles were wien the same yea - 1922 22th bis contdiction of representing “si aug cel econo i Stoel of te maton "ancumenny i ye geese ne ‘used K Fechan Thema fine we dosed w spot were tee ‘BES dean bona order) fare ovenlngcones ae for mre dete ais of Dovzheke's ies nthe cone of the Gtcusoa on ‘wool easanr i Ge 100s tee Tanah 08 Works Cited (Ar Oey EA. al Aet Oras EA. 10. Apne, E arton, Yon emonue cian, Al Waza Kanon Ones cepa rorecopenn eRe SineuometHasnee me. top Race 1908, ‘Bima. “The Reeaion of Uiepas Westin echo and SovitAvan-prie ‘Archincie in, Branfld, WC ed, Reshaping fasten rsa Wes etnclogyUplon Oreo Caria ional Cen Sura Carte Unni Pe so nes TS Bont ed Rina rt fe amg oy Cc, 190194 New You Seam gy me ~ Sr Pee ie rt A Teo 1900990 AA ld re Re as ose poe, nen oe Saat "Care: Weston Wise neta Coe br Ss es eae at, Bang Faery of te vogue, Ts. Mehl Shaw Mingle: Univety Bourn Rein Malesck New Yer: HN, Abra, 1954 Devt AS wre Mart St 2° Ley ilar Uso Mon, caags fr xi ‘cael wore fa Ne Ameen acon Se Ba Mac Sonex Gute Monsboy ae ost dis K nd hr: ty nile: Maso Rec Edetion un surnacerntaen Sig ene nd 530, New er: Tames doen 1985 werden, N-] Xapmnes, HK wemopar posse eoneapda. Skier Gia {Woazinor, VE) Xeon, BE Conemoraanrameanpye mpd nme pts oppcA Cocina ctf he UR New Yor 8: Muses om tee, ovin E "he Thed fh o Now Oct The Ce Ce Me es a) ‘et pre 1915-1932 New Yee Goggin Mace 0 IRmonA] igyeaon A Pena aetap Cont Tego Foose mpeg twee Hate] pees, Pocrcan.dxercnp exes. Moen Heyeene, 1959. | 5, in en te os, Mem Hoenes | Ui Ri on dct or Marl Ret. es Ba he a i Hpi Ch Reson Construction. New Haver Yle Vivre Pros, 19 Malevich ihe Gustin a Inve A” (990) Bay ont Tes hg Glow rae lard arvld itn, Trost Andere Cocrhagen’ borg, 10h GST Mater, Kaci The Sirsa Mr” (1909) Bend ono ase ese nh Frain Are bli Tee Anan Copcope eee, te Sa (sant, Eat Mago xi "ospci Seem sea es Frnostacen acer C58) oa: eeeeeeneeeeenee132 Stuptes IN Stavic Cuttures Mingo Metin ain adhe Rain avangars New Haven: ale UiversiyPe a MOREE Seo te ton of bald scl cet. Ta. Aur Sores Cambridge: M.L.T. Press, 1974. : Nakov, A. L‘avnut-god russe. Paris: emand Hazan, 1984 [avery il Kymutypa ‘ana’ Ann Arora tose ari eee eg Me Avtneorde. Cambridge: The Belnap Press of Harvard Universi Press, 1508 Fam NIL @ Tene, Mocen:irparyprosyacnccrxcanoearcerao “PA,” 1904 iowa nc He Rseton of he 10 Exe heey a Sete eg eke Ngan nd Sonter Avon-gante 13/51993" Newt Sale Ge at Maem, 1992:39.30, siege ois peste a4 New Wold” The Great Up: the Rusin and Svs ‘vant garde, 1913-193 sa Se: Rint Oe Sas: Science lati Se frm ase Countries New "ork: Random Huse, 190 Tore feta llertie unde he Bolsheis,Ylune One: The Crisis of Renewal 19/2 1524 London: Pa Mes 1991 ome GN tiie Fn Factory: New proaches o Resin and Sov {Gneina New York, Routed, 1951 2 Cera! Memcepa Apewan, Seve: open wees.” Kmosevece samen 29 w pla ign (0. Henoprecenpeyennn ame. Kurenai Poeun [96- roi PbS ip a a Bea he, Wings of Daigo Vero Ea. Ante Micon, Tans. Kevin ‘Bre, Bercy Univerty of Caieoia Pe, ad Wage Ge Othe Ble: Lenin end his Cre 19061914. Bloomington nding ‘Unversity Pres Yowgtand 9 1 Stet Ciena i he Sle Erm 1918-1885 asi: Univeiy of Toa res, 199