Constructivism is a word with two entirely different meanings when referred to Art or learning theory. However, an explanation of what the Russian Constructivism Movement has done for the world can be related and personified as how a person might acquire the knowledge from their experiences. One of the first lessons I learned from my parents was when they selflessly confessed that they did not and could never tell me all the answers I would require reaching my goals. Thus, they encourage me to seek out leadership in fields of my interest and learn from experiences beyond their capabilities. I found my passion and motivations for my goals through experiences I had and overcoming obstacles allowed me to work on my flaws and be continuously be guided through trial and error. Similarly, the Russian Constructivism was similar.
The Constructivism movement in Russia originated when a group of about twenty-five artists renounced creating art simply just for the design. Instead, these artists disciplined their talents into the fields of industrial design, visual communications, and applied arts. These artists wanted to have artists stop producing art without any purpose. With influences from these artists, innovations that would have ceased to exist would not be. For example, Vladimir Tatlin changed his focused from sculpture and the result was a fuel-efficient stove design. This movement gave art direction. However, there was a need to mass produce goods for a communist world which failed. The world learned the lesson of spreading designs too thin.
The way I learn exemplifies constructivism theory which helps personify and explain the Russian Constructivism Art movement through my own triumphs in life. I was taught to observe and respect all and I looked up to those who specialized in what I valued. For example, learning the skill of volleyball was a discipline I never knew that I needed. It gave me a purpose in high school. I was athletic but my coach gave me the gift of refining athleticism to master a completely new skill that would benefit an organization beyond myself. Learning everything under my coach, he guided me so that I could hone my skills. To him, I was no longer “art for art’s sake”. I had a purpose and my coach constructed my values to create the most function out of my form. Along the way, I had to learn valuable lessons through trial and error. For example, a common critique of Vladimir Tatlin’s Constructivism design was that he should “create functional houses and bridges or create pure art, not both.” Here as a theory, I relate this quote as many people do to spreading oneself too thin that without focus, the art cannot reach its full potential. As someone with obsessive passion and a constant desire to make those around me happy, at times I have agreed to too many things not allowing myself to fully complete either to the best of my ability. For the art movement, I see how the Russians wanted to condense the amount of focus to enhance productivity.
All in all the Constructivism Movement was as alive as I am now. It made mistakes through its course as humans do. The way artists learned and were shaped by their experiences relate to the Constructivism theory. However, the influence to have on artists during and after allowed the world to step into the Bauhaus movement.
https://www.theartstory.org/movement-constructivism-artworks.htm#pnt_3
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/50765d99e4b0de5e53f56de4/t/550af449e4b0afd8058acee1/1426781257162/constructivism-3.pdf
Comments
Post a Comment