The End of Paintings is just the Beginning

Pure Color Red, Pure Color Yellow, Pure Color Blue (1921) is a triptych created by Aleksandra Rodchenko, a Russian artist. The work was being first exhibited in ‘5x5=25’, an abstract art exhibition held in September 1921 in Moscow. Three plywood canvas of a single color of red, yellow and blue is presented in the triptych with no other composition. Rodchenko proclaimed the piece as ‘death of art’ by describing ‘it’s all over’. By painting merely basic colors, the idea of anti-representation is being shown in the work, in which overflowing the traditional form of painting with symbolisms included. Without any other representations depicted in the work from the artist’s point of view, the usual norms and practices of a painting are not being seen, hence causing ‘the death’. Yet, even though asserting the anti-representation, as one of the founders of Constructivism, the Russian artist carried the idea in the work to its logical extreme.

Rodchenko believes that the essence of form and function of a painting can be focused when it became ‘non-objective’, he therefore rejects the ‘traditional painterly techniques’. (Lodder 1983, 22) Under such ideology of Constructivism, I personally see such ‘death of art’ piece is indeed a renewal after destruction. The existence of the triptych is justified by having no allegories at all. What Rodchenko doing was a circle, in which by bringing the painting to its logical end, he brought it back to the start – where only basic colors are applied. Hence, Rodchenko’s intention of this creation is already displaying the significance of the monochromatic paintings, especially when the content is at an extreme comparing to traditional paintings. No purpose is a purpose. This is what I could conclude from the work. I believe the functionality within the work and its representation cannot be bounded by its content. The artist’s anti-representational and pointlessness notion put forward to the function of this painting which triggered people to ponder on the new era of modern art forms. This is the essence of the work, as well as the demonstration of Constructivism.

Regarding the functionality, some art critic believed it is a direct response to the 1917 Soviet revolution and the socialist ideal of usefulness. (Akbar 2009) Rodchenko through denying the painting, he acknowledged the purpose of creating things, specifically artworks in the case, under the circumstance he was living in. It seemed to me that the artist was trying to escape from the idea of art as commodity in the socialist society. Without practical usage in daily lives like mechanical tools, the usefulness of an art piece in a socialist society has nothing left but monetary values, especially limiting to those with historical values. Rodchenko creating the triptych in the anti-traditional way reinforces his ‘materialistic faith that new forms could be created’ in which these new forms are only ‘material objects that did not evoke transcendent values’ in his utopia mindset. (Margolin 2009, 10) The three monochromatic canvas are examples that do not carry any significant or down-to-earth value under socialism. Therefore the artist’s introduction of the work is a demonstration of bringing new forms of art to the society, thus giving them importance and meaning towards the public. Again, back to the theory of circle I just mentioned, albeit Rodchenko describes the work as ‘the end of paintings’, he actually gave insights and opened up a new definition to modern arts.

References

Akbar, Arifa. “Drawing a Blank: Russian Constructivist Makes Late Tate Debut.” Independent, 2009.

Lodder, Christina. “Aleksandr Rodchenko.” Chapter. In Russian Constructivism. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983.

Margolin, Victor. “Chapter 1 Visions of the Future: Rodchenko and Lissitzky 1917-1921.” Chapter. In The Struggle for Utopia: Rodchenko, Lissitzky, Moholy-Nagy; 1917-1946. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 2009.