←

Constructivism

Written by Justin Tomchuk

An artist’s practice is a personal attachment to a particular set of ideas and their execution of those ideas through art. As the artist changes and adapts, develops new theories and suppresses others or relocates his or herself into new societies and culture, so does their artwork. An artist’s practice, whether through style, method or productivity is always a reflection of that artist’s conscious or subconscious personality.

Constructivism is a mask with many faces. First impressions portray it as a simple art, minimalist, precise, a graphic exploration into shapes and space; but it’s much more than that. The deception left by the masks it wears is that the ideas that govern it are vast and variable; a labyrinth of ideologies. An abstract art with numerous definitions, interpretations and practices.

When the term “constructivism” first came into common use at the end of 1921, it could hardly be said to denote the work of a number of artists bound together by common stylistic properties. It embodied the determination of the artist and the theorist to pursue the implications of a marriage between art and social revolution. [Stephen Mann 1]

Originated as a response from the Russian Revolution of 1917, constructivism was more than an art movement, but a reassessment of the relationship between the artist, his tools, work and society. Vladimir Tatlin, who reputedly invented the term and practiced the art described constructivism in a 1920 exhibition catalogue as “complicated investigations into the use of the material itself” and “[a] Workers Art ... (which) should serve the masses, should be comprehensible to all, and should use industrial materials and techniques. 1”

It’s clear that Tatlin was greatly inspired by the communist revolution and wished to embody the power of unity and collectivity as a representation of change and revolution not only in politics, but through art. For Tatlin, constructivism was his way to secure an opposition to the individuality in art and to promote an art that was for the masses.

Even with the heavy political ideologies behind constructivism, the term itself remained rather vague and undefined and during most of the 20th century it was used mostly to describe artwork that was “built, rather than cast or carved [Rickey p. 7]” which used geometric shapes and prominent use of empty space; furthermore, constructivism wasn’t medium discriminate; paintings, sculptures, clothing, and architecture at the time drew from constructivist aesthetics and ideals.

The objects brought together here are extremely varied in style, form, intention and content, yet they do possess several common characteristics. First, while none of these works may be defined as strictly two dimensional, all are constituted of two dimensional components or plane. [Margit]

Varvara Stepanova, a Russian constructivist artist and a founding member of the First Working Group of Constructivists gave a statement of the movement during a discussion on January 1921, close to when the movement began:

Only construction demands the absence of both excess materials and excess elements, in composition it is just the reverse - there, everything is based precisely on the excessive.

Stepanova’s philosophy on constructivism was that it wasn’t about the excessive of traditional representation, it was about reducing the work to what was necessary. She felt that this way, if one element from a constructivist work was removed, it destroyed it’s construction, but if one element was taken from a traditional composition, it would only result in a “rearrangement of the remaining elements. [Stepanova 3]”

Figure 1: Construction, Collage on paper.
H: 35.9 cm, W: 22.9 cm
Artist: Varvara Stepanova
Source: Lodder, Christina. Russian Constructivism.
p. 89. New Haven: Yale UP, 1983.

Construction (see Fig. 1) by Stepanova uses various paper materials from consumer packaging and photographs. The elements on the paper are placed in a very particular way which is very reminiscent of the constructivist aesthetic, from the straight rectangular lines and the ‘put together’ appearance. It’s true that if an element was taken out of this piece, it would cause more disruption than if an element was taken out of a more elaborate “excessive” work. Her artwork is the barebones, the essence of construction and put together in a precise way using only elements that aid to the construction, leaving nothing unnecessary.

When constructivism departed Russia and into western culture, it shed it’s skin of theoretical philosophies and became reborn with a Western understanding as an “approach to space, movement, material and processed geometric (forms). 8” Tatlin’s ideologies were lost in translation and a new generation of constructivist art was created.

Canadian artist Haydn Llewellyn Davies used the integration of the materials and the exploration of space as the basis for his philosophy on his Constructivist work:

Over the next decade I explored this concept in large scale commissions, replacing the medium of wood with brakeformed aluminum. This allowed for more slender forms and, thus, enlarged spaces. By manipulation of the metal beams it became possible to produce mass/void relationships that would change as the viewpoint changed, to achieve predetermined results.

For Davies, the practice of constructivism was as much about the empty space as the physical sculptures he was making. Through use of cables and the gravitational pull of weights he established a functioning relationship between the objects in his constructions which “[pushed] past the enthralling equipoise of tilting, shifting planes to their ‘letting-go’, their release, their breaking apart.” 1

Figure 2: Construction No. 3
Steel weight, grating; aluminum, cable.
H: 11’6”, W: 12’6”
Artist: Haydn Llewellyn Davies
Source: Davies, Haydn L., comp. Haydn Llewellyn Davies. Ed. Bryce Kanbara. Burlington, Ontario: Burlington Cultural Centre, 1991.

Davies’ Construction No. 3 (see Fig. 2) is an industrial construction using cables, a steel weight, aluminum grating and other types of metals. The colours are particularly bright, consisting of mostly primary colours, and some secondary and a few pieces have a reflective brass aesthetic. The steel weight in the lower left corner is attached to a collection of the metal pieces by cables and a spring, acting as an anchor; or perhaps it acts contrary to a weight and is instead pulling the artwork through space.

The constructivist visuals are clearly apparent in Davies’ work, from the cut out half circle and rectangular grooves, to the industrial materials and ‘built’ quality but with the Russian philosophies removed leaving his work reduced to an “aesthetic practice ... [that] conjures more of the past than of the future [Bryce, from Davies p. 4 1].” During the 80s when this piece was exhibited, critics claimed that his work came now “without power ” and that the work was more an afterthought of constructivism and “1960s minimalism. 1” Regardless, Davies’ constructions are relevant in the sense that they show a radical diffusion of Russian constructivist intentions and provides a “commentary on the divestment of ideology in art.”

Constructivism was born full of philosophy and ideology and lost it’s core values in the late 20th century under a Western reinterpretation. The idea that there is a divestment of ideology in art is not true, but there certainly has been a change in the ideology of art. Perhaps it’s not the ideologies which affect the artwork anymore but the reverse - that artwork is what creates the ideologies, a byproduct of societies influence on an artist’s subconscious mind. There has always seemed to be a great pressure on artists to say something with their work and that meaningless art or art for arts sake is fake aestheticism, yet a lot of things we consider reality have yet to be understood completely and seem to exist without meaning; to sound fairly trite, life for example.

Perhaps meaning can be found in anything, or maybe meaning can be constructed out of anything. Regardless, constructivism started as a powerful response to socialist ideologies and ended up as an abstract art that removed it’s shackles of heavy philosophy and idealism to lead to contemporary means through art and commercial practices such as graphic design.

↑

Works Cited

1 Davies, Haydn L., comp. Haydn Llewellyn Davies. Ed. Bryce Kanbara.
Burlington, Ontario: Burlington Cultural Centre, 1991.

2 Margit Rowell, The Planar Dimension, Europe 1912-1932.
Colomon R. Guggenheim Foundation, New York, 1977.

3 Lodder, Christina. Russian Constructivism. New Haven: Yale UP, 1983.

4 Rickey, George. Constructivism: Origins and Evolution.
New York: George Braziller, 1967.

5 Lora, Dominique. "Varvara Stepanova." Museo de Arte Thyssen-Bornemisza.
(Paseo del Prado, 8. Madrid-Espa. 08 Apr. 2009
[ www.museothyssen.org/thyssen_ing/coleccion/obras_ficha_biografia742.html ].

6 Hordynsky, S. "Constructivism." Encyclopedia of Ukraine. 08 Apr. 2009
[ www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/pages/C/O/Constructivism.htm ].

7 "Constructivism Movement." Art History & Periods. Art History Guide. 08 Apr. 2009
[ www.arthistoryguide.com/Constructivism.aspx ].

8 Rickey, George. Constructivism: Origins and Evolution. Revised edition.
New York: George Braziller, 1995