Assignment 8

Constructivism came about when art was given a social role for the first time during the revolution in Russia. Many artists, including Lissitzky turned towards applying art in a massive propaganda effort to support the revolutionaries. In 1920 the split between constructivism and suprematism took place as suprematist artists believed art should remain a spiritual activity and reject the social or political role saying that the aim of art was, “to be realizing perceptions of the world by inventing forms in space and time” (301). Constructivists took the opposite stance; that industrial design, visual communication and applied arts should serve the new communist society. They believed artists should stop producing paintings and start producing posters because it was believed by constructivists that the duty of the artist as a citizen is to clear the pallet of the old to prepare for the new life after the revolution. Gan broke this down into three principles that identified constructivism; tectonics (unification of of communist ideology and and visual form), texture (nature of materials and application in industrial production), and construction (the creative process and laws of visual organization). Of the constructivist artists, El Lissitzky had the most profound influence on the movement as a painter, architect, graphic designer and photographer and his broad talents allowed him to profoundly influence graphic design itself.

The De Stijl movement was happening at the same time in the Netherlands. The artist Leo van Doseoesburg was the founder of this movement. Much like the suprematism movement De Stijl artists sought universal laws of balance and symmetry for art, using mathematical structures to layout their designs. De Stijl stripped design back to its simplest form, using horizontal and vertical lines with primary and neutral colors and flat planes. Van Doesburg’s cover for the Principles of Modern Art magazine is a good representation of the De Stijl era of design. Similarly to the constructivists, De Stijl artists sought to incorporate art into life and the every day use and object, believing that the, “every day life would be elevated to the level of art” (314). As the movement continued Van Doesburg introduced a new design principle to the movement, bring back diagonal lines because he believed them to be a more dynamic compositional principle then horizontal or vertical. Color became a structural element and not just a decoration. 

Although I found many similarities in the aesthetics of the constructivist art and the De Stijl art I would like to compare the works of Lissitzky and Van Doesburg, two significant artists in each of their movements. Both men have many similar design principles as they were both inspired by cubism. Both artists show evidence of mathematical grid use but Lissitzky adventures more into the use of diagonal planes, creating lines that your eyes follow exploring the page. His use of colors are also strictly black, reds, and neutrals. This is representative of the political posters that constructivists were pushing artists to participate in, showing support for the revolution and communism. A similarity between Lissitzky and Van Doesburg as artists is their use of type in their designs. San Serif was the typical font for the movements but these men experimented with the font, making it more square in appearance. They were also some of the first to incorporate their type as a part of the design, bending and curving words on different planes to move with aesthetic of the lines and image. Lissitzky experimented far more with the movement of font though, evident when comparing their pieces as he often curved words, and his use of type itself to make objects in Mondrian’s book of poetry that he illustrated. Van Doesberg’s work was far more grabbing to me, with his bold use of primary colors, especially when laid next to black gives his work an eye-popping contrast. He also does a wonderful job of creating a path for your eyes to follow with his placement of squares and lines that flow with his text. Both artists embraced the aesthetics of their movement, Lassitzky having more political relevance, but I still found it interesting that these two artists have so many similarities and it not be recognized until later after the war when art began spreading through Europe again.

Doesburg:

Lissitzky: