This question focuses on the introduction of Russian Constructivism, the Mexican
Mural movement which were mainly affected by the ideology of Marxism. How they are
different from each other aesthetically, ideologically, conceptually.
Russian Constructivism began right after the Bolshevik revolution against Russian
Empire. Before the revolution, people under the regime of the Empire were abused by the
government which was unwilling to change the old ways of its bourgeoisie rule. Lenin and
the people of Russian wanted to create a fair society for all. Basically the wealth should be
equally distributed to the people. It was a people's revolution rather than a traditional region
change. With the social change, brought upon the change of people's pursuit of art. Traditional
art like oil paintings and iconography were abandoned, because they were overly bourgeois.
In Russian Constructivism the art no longer was for art's sake, it served a social purpose. Art
objects were made out of ready-made materials. They focused on bring different elements
together to make an art whether it is music, architecture or cinema. The purpose of Russian
Constructivism was to serve the people and be practical at the same time.
Much similar to the Russian Constructivism, The Mexican Mural Movement was
people's cultural expression through art towards the Mexican revolution. Led by artists like
Diego Rivera, David Alfaro Siqueriros, the movement was a way to unify the people and
express Mexican's cultural quality in the process. Themes of the murals were often related
...
... middle of paper ...
...mmunist society. On the other, it seems to
focus on the complete abolishing of bourgeoisie society.
We label John Berger as a Marxist critic because in his writings, he talks about
the relationships between art history and capitalism. Goes on to use Marxism to critique
traditional oil paintings and how they are related to the advertising today. “Publicity images,
which are merely momentarily desirable advertisements rule our sad American lives.” (WS)
The book “Way of Seeing” is trying to popularizing Marxism through art. It is a more
interesting way for people to learn Marxism through this book rather than Karl Marx's books.
“Way of Seeing” not only gives us a whole new way of seeing art, but new perspectives of
evaluating our society in general.
Historically, Russia has always been a country of perplexing dualities. The reality of Dual Russia, the separation of the official culture from that of the common people, persisted after the Revolution of 1917 and the Civil War. The Czarist Russia was at once modernized and backward: St. Petersburg and Moscow stood as the highly developed industrial centers of the country and two of the capitals of Europe, yet the overwhelming majority of the population were subsistent farms who lived on mir; French was the official language and the elites were highly literate, yet 82% of the populati...
Jain, Ajit, and Alexander Matejko, eds. A Critique of Marxist and Non-Marxist Thought. New York: Praeger, 1986.
Culture in the Soviet Union possessed many stages as different leaders enforced very different rules in regard to accepted art forms. Under Lenin, many forms and styles of art were accepted as long as they were not overly detrimental to the party mission. Lenin wanted to find a signature style of art that would be unique to the Soviet Union. In order to do this Lenin put very little restriction on the arts. Great experimentation was done in writing and painting and many radical styles were developed during this time. When Lenin died, Joseph Stalin came into power and accepted art that looked drastically different from its previous years. Stalin enforced a much stricter policy on art. Stalin’s policy was named Socialist realism and featured
Though most works of art have some underlying, deeper meaning attached to them, our first impression of their significance comes through our initial visual interpretation. When we first view a painting or a statue or other piece of art, we notice first the visual details – its size, its medium, its color, and its condition, for example – before we begin to ponder its greater significance. Indeed, these visual clues are just as important as any other interpretation or meaning of a work, for they allow us to understand just what that deeper meaning is. The expression on a statue’s face tells us the emotion and message that the artist is trying to convey. Its color, too, can provide clues: darker or lighter colors can play a role in how we judge a piece of art. The type of lines used in a piece can send different messages. A sculpture, for example, may have been carved with hard, rough lines or it may have been carved with smoother, more flowing lines that portray a kind of gentleness.
acceptance and humanitarian motives. I learned that the artists and admirers of art in the
As the twilight of Russian Realism was approaching, Russian modernism was on the way to its awakening. Due to the modernism movement, many different styles of art, and not to mention poetry, came to be. So, what exactly is modernism, one might ask. Modernism is described as breaking up with the past and promoting innovation along with creation; coming up with the next new thing. It is looking for new forms or ways to express one’s self. Modern artists and poets agreed that works of art shouldn’t be created for utilitarian purposes, rather for art’s sake; doesn’t necessarily have to have a purpose or meaning behind it. One shouldn’t have to make art solely to depict the common lifestyle, but rather to experiment with colors, shapes, forms, and textures. Thus, making art that is fresh and new. Ultimately, modernism is the exact opposite of realism, which strictly emphasizes the everyday life, the average, and the typical. Thus, the Silver Age has arose and continued for a couple of decades of the 20th century.
Art, in general, is simultaneously a product of our society, and a way to control it. Members of society, no matter the period, have used various forms of art in order to take charge of the minds of individuals in their community. Art, having the ability to remain in the hearts and minds of the people, has always affected the psychology and emotions of the people. When art gives off a truly understandable message, viewers are captured by the intensity of the piece. Those in power can use this to their own advantage by having the art created in the manner in which they please...
The Russian revolution was made with the goal of creating an egalitarian government that was based off of Karl Marx’s socialism principles. In short, they used Karl Marx’s socialist principles as a basis for their communist government that developed after the revolution.
There were many events that lead up to the Bolshevik Revolution. First off, in 1848, Karl Marx and Fredrich Engels published a thought-provoking book. The Communist Manifesto expressed their support of a world in which there was no difference in class. A world in which the workers and commoners ran the show and there was no high and supreme ruler. Many intellectual Russians began to become aware of this pamphlet as well as the advanced state of the world compared to Russia. Other countries were going through an industrial revolution, while the Czars had made it clear that no industrial surge was about to happen in Russia. The popularity of the Czars further went down hill as Nicolas II’s poor military and political decisions caused mass losses in World War I. Eventually, the citizens could take no more and began a riot in St. Petersburg that led to the first Russian Revolution of 1917.
In Confronting Images, Didi-Huberman considers disadvantages he sees in the academic approach of art history, and offers an alternative method for engaging art. His approach concentrates on that which is ‘visual’ long before coming to conclusive knowledge. Drawing support from the field of psycho analytics (Lacan, Freud, and Kant and Panofsky), Didi-Huberman argues that viewers connect with art through what he might describe as an instance of receptivity, as opposed to a linear, step-by-step analytical process. He underscores the perceptive mode of engaging the imagery of a painting or other work of art, which he argues comes before any rational ‘knowing’, thinking, or discerning. In other words, Didi-Huberman believes one’s mind ‘sees’ well before realizing and processing the object being looked at, let alone before understanding it. Well before the observer can gain any useful insights by scrutinizing and decoding what she sees, she is absorbed by the work of art in an irrational and unpredictable way. What Didi-Huberman is s...
bearThroughout the story, but the kind of Marxism is not like in the 19th century. John Lasseter
Tyson, Lois. "Marxist Criticism." Critical Theory Today: A User-friendly Guide. New York: Garland Pub., 1999. 52-64. Print.
Karl Marx was a brilliant man. He would analyze the thoughts and publications of the philosophers of his time. Intellectuals were not overly impressed by him. It wasn’t until after his death that his political, social, and economic writings and philosophies were sought after. This was especially true in the socialist movement. His peers considered his thoughts radical.
Shlovsky, Victor. "Art as Technique" The Critical Tradition. Ed., David H. Richter, New York: St. Martin's Press,