"Black Square" by Malevich: who feels that, looking at this picture

[SAH]

[kr555]

I'm still a little bit, sorry if I have too much

Сообщение от artist

I'm sorry, but this not creeping up. This is a completely different point of application. Why do they compare?
Painting was trying to deal with Malevich. About him we talked. There marriage is better ..

Well, how's that for? Precisely because it is completely different point of application, marriage will never be this and not slumped. He's just painting. But Malevich swung to a larger, and not without success. Cheka is not a painting, and what grew out of it - this is not the painting.

Сообщение от artist

The fact that he was great, he knew without the Cheka. Just thought. Was the era of manifestos. And by the way, the glory of the author of the square was not enough. He wanted to prove that he can ... Hence, the flower.

That's just because he knew that he was great, he did not prove anyone was going to, people with delusions of grandeur do not prove anything to anyone. It's just old age, or maturity, or as anything else can be called. Well, people got carried away painting at the end of life, that's OK, not all the same life revolutions do ...

[Маруся]

It seemed to me that in the heat of debate, discussion and criticism, as usual, forgot about the "hero of the occasion. Therefore, allow me and him to call.
K. Malevich:
"I think quite differently.
The transfer of real things on the canvas - is the art of skillful play, and nothing more.
And between art and create art again - a big difference.
Create means to live forever create new and new.
And no matter how much we have not distributed the furniture in the rooms, we do not increase or create their new form.
And however much the artist wrote of the lunar landscapes or grazing cows and zakatikov: will all the same cow and the same zakatiki. Only in a much worse form.
But the amount written cows determined by the genius of the artist.
An artist can be a creator when the form of his paintings have nothing to do with nature.
And the art - is the ability to create a design not of the relationship of shapes and colors and not on the basis of aesthetic taste beautiful compositions - but on the basis of weight, speed and direction of motion.
It is necessary to give shape to life and right to individual existence ....
This is possible when we deprive our thoughts bourgeois thought - the plot - and trained minds to see everything in nature is not like the real thing and shape, and the material, and the masses who must make the form, having nothing to do with nature.
Then disappear into the habit of seeing pictures of Madonnas and Venus with Cupid flirting plump.
(From Cubism and Futurism to Suprematism. 1915. Moscow)

[SAH]

Сообщение от Maroussia

"I think quite differently.
The transfer of real things on the canvas - is the art of skillful play and nothing more.
and between art and create art again -is a big difference ".

Thanks a lot better and will not say.

Сообщение от kr555

I'm still a little bit, sorry if I have too much

You are simply not enough.

[Art-lover]

Сообщение от uriart

Art-lover, how do you know that Malevich, of course, when painting the box, do not fully understand its symbolic universality. ?
Information is in the memoirs of contemporaries, or in the diaries of Malevich?

And the lyrics of the artist, and memoirs show: the square many times reinvented Malevich. A first version of its machine-stunned the author himself: "Last week I could not sleep, eat, I wanted to understand what I did."

Сообщение от kr555

And in the square of Malevich its geometric importantly its blackness.

The relative importance of color and geometry is also seen Malevich at different times in different ways. At around 1915 the emphasis seems to be placed on color.
However, as in when he thought about Malevich square (and, moreover, whether he knew how to paint like Repin) - this is in our time is a secondary issue. It's not what I wanted to tell an artist, and that affected by it. Powerfully affected - Malevich was passionary type, said at the time - at the height of ideological exploration of modernism, the impact is uncertain enough - not to interfere in the air nosivsheysya idea evolve into an independent from its creator is a myth. This myth is gradually pulled away and the white background, and from interpretations of Malevich, becoming the best expression of the archetype of radical modernism. And today, a black square of Malevich, "sounds like" Newton's Law ": remove the name, but the essence will not be different.

[artist]

To talk and to speak it - class.) Conversation far away from the given topic ("What I feel ...")

File a final remark. In it I thank kr555, SAH, Art-lover, and others.
But I can not deny myself the pleasure to note that bias, it's not bad, but inconvenient for discussion: makes it impossible to hear, but his own reasoning deprives sharpness.
So, dear kr555, trembling from the greatness of the CM next to the Cheka, easily lowers the brakes on "the other" KM: "age, maturity, carried away by saying ..." But this is the same and not an old man!
Enjoyed

Сообщение от Art-lover

" Last week I could not sleep, eat, I wanted to understand what I did. "

I even wrote about it. Nice to find confirmation in the primary source)
They agreed and at the manic, but I would say "chatter," Thank you Maroussia:

Сообщение от Maroussia

transfer of real things on the canvas - is the art of skillful play, and nothing more.
And between art and create art again - a big difference.
Create means to live forever create new and new.

It has everything: a spit in the side who can play, and the banality and assuming the functions of the Lord.

Сообщение от Maroussia

artist can be a creator when the shape of his paintings have nothing to do with nature.

Well this is just a phrase creuse
And here it is:

Сообщение от Maroussia

Is it possible when we deprive our thoughts bourgeois thought - the plot - and trained minds to see everything in nature is not like the real thing and form, but as the material of which the masses to do the form, having nothing to do with nature.
Then disappear into the habit of seeing pictures of Madonnas and Venus with Cupid flirting plump ».

reminder to us already knowing about the "bond" and "flower" that there is no idol in the world, that all will end florist, no matter how much cry a reluctance to portray ... It is very unfortunately, undermines the value of another façade verbale:

Сообщение от Art-lover

And now a black square of Malevich, "sounds like" Newton's Law "

Thank you all) It was very interesting )))))

[SAH]

Сообщение от artist

and the banality and assuming the functions of the Lord

artist, where banality? U Asaph. Psalm 81.: You - the gods and the sons of God - all of you.

Сообщение от artist

But I can not deny myself the pleasure to note that bias, it is not bad, but inconvenient for discussion: makes it impossible to hear, but his own arguments deprives sharpness.

Fight to be biased, here you can not argue. <!--~ A ~-->

[dedulya37]

All I can say that "the specter Malevich was more durable than a" ghost of communism "and is still haunting Russia, calling to Europe.

[tchaika]

"Originally, the square of Malevich first appeared in the decorations for the Futurist opera" Victory over the Sun, "which he made out in 1913," a plastic expression of the victory of the active human creativity over passive forms of nature: a black square instead of the solar cycle. " This was the famous scene of the fifth stage of the 1 st action, which is a square in a square, divided into two areas: black and white. Then the scenery this box migrated to the easel works.
"The work was done by Malevich in the summer and autumn of 1915. According to the artist, he wrote her a few months. "

In the years 1919-1922 Kasimir Malevich taught at the National Art School "a new revolutionary model" in Vitebsk.
"We set ourselves: - wrote Leonid Katsis, -" What could it mean the expression "black square on a black background, black square on a white background", etc., for young artists Vitebsk Jews who have lived all their lives in the Jewish Province ? How were they perceive the subject (and object of it?), If they themselves wrote: "Wear a black square ..."? Nothing at least 5 times a week they had seen, if not used ourselves, it is an object that represents the "black cube on a black square background. This tefillin - a ritual object worn Jews at prayer. Clearly, a black cube on a black background and give us the desired "black square on a black background, - Leonid Katsis in the Ideology of the Vitebsk UNOVIS (affirmative new art), the Temple and the Talmud." The same author records the fact of wearing the black squares "by some participants suprematistskogo movement.
Photo: Traditional Jewish tefillin in the form of 2 black cubes with the sacred texts inside: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A7%...80%D0%B0%D1%82

"Square" played a role in the design of Malevich's funeral. He died in Leningrad in 1935 during a funeral on an open platform of the truck with the image of the black square on the hood was installed suprematic coffin, like a sarcophagus. On the testament of Malevich, his body was cremated in the coffin Suprematism, and then the urn was buried near the village of Nemchinovka. Over the grave was set cubic concrete monument depicting the black square.

[artcol]

Art - the art of illusion. But Malevich made a gesture of rejection of illusions in art (painting). Gesture revolutionary, and therefore ambivalent: thinghood it directly connected to ideology. Hence the significance that attaches to the Cheka, because its predecessors were, or something, or else, more often - neither one nor the other.