Anne Popiel

Position paper: Kazimir Malevich, �Non-Objective Art and Suprematism”

In Malevich’s idealism, non-objective art is the freedom of the future. By breaking up the structural framework which the object provides a work of art, pure color is free to exist independently of form. Although this entails painting only abstract images, not representational of reality, the canvas is not without structure. In the absence of the old framework, a new one can be created, a purely cognitive, philosophical system “constructed in time and space,” in which color is both independent and part of a relational whole.

All objects, in his view, are formed from masses of color structured in three-dimensional space. Suprematism itself is manifested in objects as simply an embodiment of space, allowing the object to lose its singularity, or specific utilitarian purpose. From the removal of the object’s singularity, the new system can be created from the pure color masses, the meaningful object/framework thereby “annulled in the artist’s mind.” This newly created system must therefore be non-representational, or non-objective, since mere imitation of reality, the painting of objects, is just “dead representation pointing back to life.”

Yet eventually surpassing even his ideal of painting pure colors, Malevich ultimately breaks free from the confines of the aesthetic interrelation of colors, to the “true actual representation of infinity,” the unadulterated color white, the “semaphore of Suprematism.”

Does Malevich’s concept of embodied space relate to Einstein’s explanation of filled space, that of a three-dimensional continuum? Is the fourth dimension implied in his system which is “constructed in time and space”? How are these dimensions accessible from the flat plane of the canvas? Does the painting of pure white, the “abyss,” in his words, provide a depth cognitively perceptible to the viewer? By referring to pure white as both an abyss and infinity, four dimensions are implied, but what can explain the perception of infinity one obtains from seeing all-white? Can infinity be purely spatial, or is the concept of time intrinsically involved? What is the temporal aspect to Malevich’s art?

What can help us answer these questions? Malevich’s call to the world, “Follow me, comrade aviators,” connects with his description of his re-discovery of white: “I have overcome the lining of the coloured sky, torn it down and into the bag thus formed, put colour, tying it up with a knot. Swim into the white free abyss, infinity is before you.” Can we understand the modern fascination with aviation as an inspirational factor in Malevich’s philosophy? Does his language ring of aeronautic imagery? Does the airplane conquer space in a related way to Einstein’s theoretical physics? Is Malevich’s art then consequent of these scientific advancements?

Finally, in the annulment of the object, in seeing objects as mere color masses structured in space, does Malevich mirror Bergson’s conception of matter as mere image? What are the implications of this connection, if any, and is Suprematism doomed to fail in reality? How could his idealism, in the general sense, be tempered with realistic application? What relevance do his abstract canvases hold for the modern viewer?