Constructivist Written Study

Despite the underlying
differences in medium
between Rodchenkos
graphical posters and
Gabo’s complex, intriguing
sculptures, there is significant
correspondence between the
two artists. There is especially a
similarity in purpose; it is art for
society and not for themselves,
“to them, all art and design was
a political tool” 8 thus both artists
portray work commissioned by a
third party. Although a vast amount
of traditional artwork, including
some of the most famous baroque
paintings, was commissioned by the
church or monarch, by this period
in the twentieth century, a pivotal
feature of the ‘fine’ art world was its
COMPARISON
focus on the artist’s ideas alone.
The fact that Rodchenko and Gabo were
paid/enlisted to create work (either by
the government or benefactors) gives an
impression they were free-lance commercial
designers, making work to be sold or to
portray the clients ideas, as opposed to using
art as an illustration of their own ideas alone.
Furthermore, looking at the physical
fabrication of the work uncovers more
similarities between the artists.
As evaluated, Constructivism as a movement
used a range of materials, either ones that were
to hand and also new industrial materials and
techniques.
Rodchenko used a limited number of physical
materials in his posters and for good reason;
they were pieces of propaganda to be pasted
up around the streets and needed to be easy
to interpret, but he did use a wide range of
techniques including graphics, photography
and industrial printing.
Gabo also used a wide range of tools and
materials. Plywood was used constantly by
Gabo due to its weight and ability to be cut and
shaped. This was accompanied by everything
from plastic to cast iron to blank space itself
(which should most definitely be counted as a
element within art).
Finally, the perception of the artwork to an
audience portrays similar traits in both Gabo
and Rodchenkos work.
Constructivists believed that the viewer
should play an active part in the final piece
itself, and the aesthetic of a piece of work is up
to interpretation by the audience themselves.
Rodchenkos’ posters are made to be seen by
the ‘non-artistic’ eye and have the sole aim of
portraying meaning to everyone; evidently the
viewer was an important part of the finished
work.
Gabos sculptures, whether he intended it or
not, similarly encourage viewer interpretation
due to the essence of fluidity and movement
which change depending on the angle viewed,
and also his intention for the work to change
the atmosphere of the whole room.
14