Russian Constructivism

Johnson, Louis
Communication Design
Bertus

Russian Constructivism

The art movement that I choose to discuss is Russian Constructivism, also known as Construction Art. Constructivism is coined around 1918 and widely described as a post World War I off shoot of Russian Futurism. Futurism being a movement that is often linked to the end of World War I and concluding towards the end of World War II. The Institute of Artistic Culture in Moscow helped define constructivism in 1920-22. Proclaimed as the combination of particular material properties of the object, and its spatial relationship to environment. Constructivists were inspired by revolution and the idea that a young Russia could shape their own futures.
Constructivism, particularly coming out of Russia (Former Soviet Union), represents an art that is strongly connected to a place in time that does not last very long. Elements, considering Futurism, are found throughout much of the iconic works of Soviet leaders and art representative of Communism. Aspects of this are also seen in Constructivism, which I find very appealing. Not heavily relying on a large color palette constructivism stays in tones of red with black and white. Geometry is heavily used and embodies the means of production with what could be hints towards modernism. Constructivism reminds us of the history of the Soviet Union and is very connected to its color palette of red, white, and black. Red signifies one of the most heavily used hues in Communism, if not what we sometimes think of when we see the color, or that which it represents. Furthermore, the simplicity of some of the compositions makes them more powerful and direct to the audience. Figures are not restricted from constructivism and the images of the human figure used are often in action, marching, building, athletics, etc.
Constructivism inspired a revolution in architecture attempting to apply a three dimensional cubist vision to wholly abstract non-objective constructions with a kinetic element. The architecture is just as interesting to look at as the art from this movement. Their relationship to one another is very apparent and draws from futurism heavily. Simplicity in shapes and minimalism is very interesting. The ideas definitely transcend from art to architecture and back again. It is the relationship between art and architecture that is especially interesting, and I find myself moving from one to the other.
Furthermore, I find constructivism as a movement that has still been an inspiration to today. Something that is particularly powerful about art is that it can transcend time and almost always finds a place for somebody somewhere. What is history to time and place for one culture is represented celebrated years later, regardless of the change in cultural values, or social priorities, we find the most fascinating compositions challenge our basic emotions or urges. Constructivism reminds us of a past that is familiar but misunderstood by a majority of western culture. Does the western culture find it more interesting because of our disinformation? Does it hold a special significance for the generations directly involved in WWI and WWII? It is questions like these that further my interest in this art movement.