Orientation (Proper)
Basic Idea:
When looking at a painting, the viewer sees something. Perhaps it is something they can clearly point out, or it may be more difficult for them to articulate, but they at the very least garner some kind of interpretation when presented with a work of art. However, this interpretation is subject to differentiation based upon the orientation of the piece. What is considered to be proper is only one iteration of many that may develop when the orientation is manipulated. This is especially true in Kazimir Malevich's Suprematist works of the mid 1910s. Upon first glance, the majority of Malevich's Suprematist paintings appear to be an incoherent jumble of shapes and colors, but regardless, a viewer would still come to some kind of conclusion. This conclusion is not complete, however, because the viewer was looking at the painting not the right side up. In fact, it is impossible to do so because there is no single correct orientation. Each turn of the piece changes it and together, these different interpretations paint a complete story, a visual poem. Malevich's experimentation with visual poems in the form of paintings can be traced back to the early Russian Futurist poets and their experiments textually altering and manipulating their poems so that they are read differently. Malevich employs similar methods, but just completely visual without any basis in sounds or text.
Media I plan to use:
OUTLINE:
First Page - introduction to malevich and Suprematism
Black square
Explanation of suprematism
Perhaps reference of malevich link to futurist poetry
Second Page - introduction of thesis of orientation
Definition of orientation
Thesis: orientation is left purposefully vague in malevich’s works of suprematism and the further assertion that there is no correct orientation
Triangle and square
Third Page - Examples to support
Airplane flying - 1915
Suprematism painterly realism of a football player
With these two, talk about the appearance of the sudden figure and how this appearance relies on orientation being flipped, which suggests that the original orientation is not correct, or at the very least not the only correct one.
Then transition to Suprematist Painting - 1915 and talk about how there is no sudden figure, but the feeling that the painting evokes is much different as orientation changes.
Fourth Page - The reason for the lack of proper orientation
Malevich’s overall goal of creating visual poems, a story that is yearning to be told, but requires the cooperation of the reader and quite literally a different viewpoint (and occasionally all 4, as in the example of Suprematist Painting. Self Portrait - 1915)
In the case of Suprematist Painting. Self Portrait - 1915, talk about each of the different stories told depending on the orientation as well as the natural progression of the stories and how even though there is not a proper orientation, there is a proper path
Fifth Page - Relation of Malevich’s visual poetry to the more traditional, textual of the Futurist poets
Look at how Futurist poets broke traditional rules of reading and text such as uniform font, size, and process of reading from left to right. Compare this with how Malevich’s Suprematist paintings broke traditional rules of painting in their complex simplicity and lack of a proper, single orientation. The ambiguity he uses is just like Zaum poetry of the time, which eventually gave way to concrete poetry.
Suprematist Painting. Eight Red Rectangles - 1915
Suprematic Painting - 1916
Conclusion Page
Supremus No. -58
The new view of Malevich’s art that is gained when looking at his works from all orientations in order to experience all iterations.
- How this may be applied to other art work, especially that by artists inspired by Malevich