К. Malevich characterizing the objectlessness and concluding, that the highest is not in the object, not in the good, but in objectlessness, mentions that everything is sure to have many distinctions in itself. He admits thereby that all the distinctions are in equality [2]. Let’s take this position of distinction equality as the basic one for appearance of the portrayal variations, which are proposed to us just by the objectless art. Malevich writes that a human has created laws due to some reason and looks for them in all displays and causes, and a constructive method has been made organizational, having put one’s aim, one or the other practical system depends on its achievement. Objectless is out of the aim. It cannot have a practical construction, it is aimless. This is the difference between the object practical realism and the objectless suprematism [3]. Malevich defines objectlessness as the only human essence, getting rid of the object sense practicality as the false authenticity [4]. The world is objectless, but a man wants to make it objective, to make its real design.

If any work of art we have a dialogue, a sense exchange between an artist and a spectator. In an object picture a spectator experiences the senses proposed by the author; the object is depicted in a form people used to see it in their usual life. In an abstract paper there is no ready recognizable sense, a spectator is “to decipher”the information, put inside a picture as a content, to determine its sense and meaning. In other words, a spectator should see the text and content, which the author of the work wanted to render.

In the work “Punkt und Linie zu Fläche” W. Kandinsky considers the sentence “Heute gehe ich ins Kino”, putting dots differently, making articulation of the aim in such a way: “Heute gehe ich. Ins Kino”, “Heute gehe. Ich ins Kino”. There is one more variant of reading this sentence, not proposed by Kandinsky, “Heute. Gehe ich ins Kino”. To tell the truth, in this case the word order of the German sentence will be broken (it will be kept in Russian variant), but on the other hand the plane of temporality will be revealed, allowing us to characterize the given example. And we’ll receive “Heute” and “Gehe ich ins Kino”, which are necessary, like in the previous cases, to correlate from the point of time and from the point of compositional putting a dot. But Кandinsky’s task was different. His variant, when there is the sentence “Heute gehe ich ins Kino”, and a dot is under it to the left, rather looks like a black square; Kandinsky explains it in such a way: “So entsteht ein Zweiklang – Schrift Punkt – außer dem praktisch zweckmäßigen Zusammenhang. Es ist Balancieren von zwei Welten, das nie zum Ausgleich kommen kann. Dies ist ein zweckloser revolutionärer Zustand – die Schrift wird durch einen Fremdkörper erschüttert, der in keinen Zusammenhang mit ihr gebracht werden kann” [5]. Kandinsky writes that the dot, torn out of usual state, is making its running start for spurt to the other world, where it begins to live as an independent object. It is the world of paintings.

01 Мар 2016 в 09:05. В рубриках: Арт-заметки. Автор: admin_lgaki

Вы можете оставить свой отзыв или трекбек со своего сайта.