Russian Futurism and Constructivism: The Role of Art in Revolution

        We alone are the face of our Time. Through us the horn of time blows in the art of the world.

        The past is too tight. The Academy and Pushkin are less intelligible than hieroglyphics.

        Throw Pushkin, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, etc., etc. overboard from the Ship of Modernity.

        He who does not forget his first love will not recognize his last. 

        (D. Burlyuk, et al.)

    As a preface to the introduction of the Russian Futurism and Constructivism movements, it is important to understand the political and social environment from which they were born. After many years of Russia’s working class, emancipated peasants, and ethnic minority groups demonstrating their frustration with the prescribed political and social system, the start of the 20th century spawned mass uprising in Russia. 1905 marked the beginning of a Russian revolution which unfortunately devolved into violent terrorism. This lead to a rise in government repression through death sentences and execution. Then again in February and October of 1917, Russia found itself in the midst of revolution. In February the people overthrew the ruling Tsarist autocracy leaving the country in the hands of a provisional government. In October the Bolshevik party (“one of the majority”) coordinated an insurrection to take control of the country on behalf of the Soviets. Throughout this period of prolonged unrest, the Futurist and Constructivist movements would prove influential in directing the idealogical tides of the country towards the shores of modernity.

    Following the crackdown on descent from the Tsarist regime after the 1905 revolution, and inspired by Filippo Tommaso Emilio Marienetti, the author of the first Futurist Manifesto, a group of Russian intellectuals, writers, and artists formed the Moscow-based Hylaea. After issuing a manifesto entitled A Slap in the Face of  Public Taste, Hylaea would come to be known as one of the most influential groups of the Russian Futurism movement; a movement which shared many of its Italian counterpart’s interests in technology, the speed of urban life, and a repulsion for the old order. The movement broke into two main schools of thought: Cubo-Futurism and Ego-Futurism, both of which favored the literary art form. Cubo-Futurism aimed at expanding language to include arbitrary and derived words. Ego-Futurism was interested in the exploration of “self” through poetry.  While different in their execution, both branches of Russian Futurism were deeply involved in experimentation with language and the use of urban imagery. As one of the movement’s most notable artist, Vladimir Mayakovsky, famously proclaimed, “the streets shall be our brushes - the squares our palettes!” (Century City: Moscow 1916-1930). With the wind of Mayakovsky in their sales, Futurist artists began to participate directly in public life through festivals, exhibits, theatre, and film.

    In post-World War I Russia a new artistic and architectural movement called Constructivism evolved from Russian Futurism. Constructivism rejected the notion of autonomous art and centered around the idea of art as a social benefit. The movement found inspiration from the work of Vladimir Tatlin, a Soviet painter and architect. Tatlin believed that the lessons an artist learned in the studio should be used to service the real world. This philosophy may explain why Tatlin focused his later work around ideas of technology and the machine. Staying true to Tatlin’s principles, the Constructivism movement grew to service the post-October 1917 revolutionist Bolshevik government. Artists inspired by the slogan “Art into Production!” took their modernist ideas into factories for mass production and consumption by the Russian people. (C. Lindey). Constructivist Lazar Lissitzky’s created propaganda pieces like his famous example from 1919 entitled, Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge. Yet other artists, like painter and designers Liubov Papova and Varvara Stepanova, created consumer textiles which utilized imagery of electricity, airplane propellers, and the cogs of train and tractor wheels. The crescendo of the Constructivist movement came with Tatlin’s 1919 proposal for the Monument to the Third International, otherwise known as “Tatlin’s Tower.” Tatlin aimed to build the tower in order to celebrate technology and the machine aesthetic by incorporating search lights and screen projectors into the structure. Tatlin’s Tower forced itself into a gray area between functionality and pure art. The controversy surrounding such an endeavor opened up channels of communication between Russia, Germany, and the rest of the world regarding Constructivism, the future of art, and the future of society. With that, the Constructivism movement solidified its place in Modernist history and continues to influence the practice of art to this day.

    With an understanding of the Russian Futurist and Constructivist ideologies, and the way their efforts inspired real movement within Russian society, can you get a sense as to whether the work by the American artists we have studied thus far aimed to be as revolutionary as their Russian counterparts?

      Markovich Lissitzky

     Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge

     1919

Vladimir Tatlin

Monument to the Third International 

(Tatlin’s Tower)

1919

          

Liubov Popova

Sample of Printed Fabric

State Tretiakov Gallery, Moscow

Varvara Stepanova

Textile Patter Design for Production

1924

Works Cited:

Burlyuk, David, et al. “A Slap in the Face of Public Taste.” Marxists, www.marxists.org/subject/art/literature/mayakovsky/1917/slap-in-face-public-taste.htm. Accessed 2 October 2016.

“Russian Revolution of 1905.” Britanica, www.britannica.com/event/Russian-Revolution-of-1905. Accessed 2 October 2016.

“Russian Revolution.” Wikipedia, 29 Sept. 2016, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Revolution.

“Russian Futurism.” Wikipedia, 24 Sept. 2016, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Futurism.

“Constructivism (art).” Wikipedia, 28 July 2016, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivism_(art)

Christopher L. C. E. Witcombe. “Modernism & Politics.” Art History Resources, arthistoryresources.net/modernism/politics.html. Accessed 2 October 2016.

Christine Lindey. “Art and the Bolshevik Revolution.” Communist-Party, 26 Nov. 2015, communist-party.org.uk/about/item/2150-art-and-the-bolshevik-revolution.html.

“Century City: Moscow 1916-1930.” Tate, www.tate.org.uk/whats-on/tate-modern/exhibition/century-city/century-city-moscow-1916-30. Accessed 2 October 2016.

Saul Alpert-Abrams. “Russian Futurist Manifestos and the Steamship of Modernity.” World Literature Today, 25 June 2013, www.worldliteraturetoday.org/blog/interviews-translation-tuesday/russian-futurist-manifestos-and-steamship-modernity. 

Christina Lodder. “Liubov Popova: From Painting to Textile Design”, Tate Papers, no.14, Autumn 2010, www.tate.org.uk/research/publications/tate-papers/14/liubov-popova-from-painting-to-textile-design. Accessed 4 October 2016.

“Varvara Stepanova.” Monoskop, monoskop.org/Varvara_Stepanova. Accessed 4 October 2016.