Of course.

Kasimir Malevich was maybe the most important person in what is known as the Suprematism movement. This is was the creation of art that conveyed a pure feeling, not something that represents a feeling (like Michaelangelo’s David). He said:

The black square on the white field was the first form in which nonobjective feeling came to be expressed. The square = feeling, the white field = the void beyond this feeling.

Yet the general public saw in the nonobjectivity of the representation the demise of art and failed to grasp the evident fact that feeling had here assumed external form.
Rusty Clifton | Email | Homepage | 08.25.04 – 11:13 pm | #

Malevich struggled with this painting, as is evident of many layers of colored paint below the black. Also, the square has spiritual significance (the mathematical and geometrical implications, it’s long symbolic history, and its practicality).

What is most touching to me, however, is how he displayed it. In Russian Orthodox tradition, the religious icons are placed near the ceiling in the corner of the room. Malevich placed this painting near the ceiling in the corner of his installation of the gallery. He wasn’t replacing God, rather he was putting a feeling there rather than an object associated with a feeling.
Rusty Clifton | Email | Homepage | 08.25.04 – 11:13 pm | #

I find that similar to what we do when we hang our Greg Olsen paintings in our living rooms (whose paintings I find embarrasing and objectionable, but that is another post…).

Please don’t misunderstand. I’m not saying that the above-stated LDS artists are bad or are doing a wicked work, I just think that there is SOOOO much better to be found. The Gospel is SOOOO much deeper than the stories through which we learn it.

Yes, I know we might not understand a painting like that immediately. But how much greater is the appreciation and understanding when WE are the ones to connect the dots? When we are not spoonfed the problem and the answer, but rather come up with the answer ourselves? To me, it’s much more rewarding.
Rusty Clifton | Email | Homepage | 08.25.04 – 11:13 pm | #

Rusty,
Philosophically speaking, is their any relationship between “Black Square” and existential nihilism? If so, how does the artist’s assertion related to Mormon theology?
rg
rg | Email | Homepage | 05.08.05 – 7:33 pm | #

Words and language are a form of symbolism. If a person creates their own unique language, they shouldn’t be surprised if others are not speaking it. Especially when their uniquely created language comes with virtually no grammer, dictionaries, etc.
Some of what passes for profoundity in the visual arts of the 20th century (and 21st century), are really poor communication skills, a poverty of significant messages, and a desire to separate themselves from others. I find it rather sad that after artists have worked very hard to isolate themselves, that they then complain that they are isolated from their culture the the world is not beating a path to their door.

Symbolism communicates and connects. Successful symbolism communicates and connects well and with lots of people. Perhaps a more useful model than “Black Square,”" for symbolism in the Church, would be the beehive (check out the Conference Center pulpit as well as much of the hardware on many new temples).
rg | Email | Homepage | 05.09.05 – 10:59 am | #