yego.me
💡 Stop wasting time. Read Youtube instead of watch. Download Chrome Extension

Why is this painting of a black square famous? - Allison Leigh


3m read
·Nov 8, 2024

On December 19th, 1915, an exhibition of radical artworks opened in what’s known today as St. Petersburg, Russia. Many of these pieces pushed the boundaries of form and style, but one was particularly controversial. Hanging in the room’s corner—symbolically occupying a space traditionally reserved for religious icons—was Kazimir Malevich’s “Black Square.” One attendee scoffed at the painting’s simplicity, claiming that even a child could have done it. Another went further, writing that the “Black Square” would “lead us all to our doom.”

Such critiques have plagued paintings like Malevich’s ever since, their outward simplicity inspiring outrage and confusion. But a closer look reveals that not only is Malevich’s work more complicated than it first appears—it may not even be a painting of a black square at all. Despite its name, you’ll find the painting’s central form is neither perfectly black nor perfectly square. Its sides aren't parallel or equal in length, and the shape isn't quite centered on the canvas. Instead, Malevich placed the form slightly off-kilter, giving it the appearance of movement and the white surrounding it a living, vibrating quality.

Technical analysis has revealed that Malevich already used the canvas for two other paintings. Today, cracks in the aging paint—known as craquelure—reveal fragments of dusty yellows, vibrant reds, and faded emeralds, hinting at all the stages Malevich went through before arriving at the painting’s final form. His creative process is also evident in the vigorous brushstrokes, which are displayed proudly and move in a multitude of directions. Fragments of hair and Malevich’s fingerprints are also ingrained in the paint, adding both metaphorical and literal texture to the work.

In many ways, Malevich’s whole history is embedded in the “Black Square.” Born to Polish-speaking parents in Ukraine, he lived there until he finally saved enough money to afford the trip to Moscow. Upon arrival in 1904, he plunged into all the avant-garde styles swirling around the city. He painted in the style of Impressionism and absorbed Post-Impressionism. He passed through a Futurist phase and then became influenced by the Cubists. And by 1913, he was on the verge of a breakthrough.

Malevich realized that even the most cutting-edge artists were still just painting objects from everyday life. But he was irresistibly drawn to what he called the “desert, where nothing is real except feeling.” And so, feeling became the substance of his work. The result was the “Black Square” and a new style he named “Suprematism,” where feeling alone was made supreme. This would be achieved through what he called non-objectivity—a departure from the world of objects so extreme it went beyond abstraction.

Malevich believed the simplification and distortion that characterized abstract art was ultimately meaningless, since these styles were still focused on depicting real world objects. To him, only the completely non-representational would truly be new. While this radical approach alarmed critics, Malevich was undeterred. He spent the next decade explaining his Suprematist works in essays, and teaching his ideas to a new generation of artists.

But after Stalin's rise to power in the 1920s, avant-garde approaches like Suprematism were deemed unproductive to the Communist state. And eventually, it became dangerous to produce any art outside Socialist Realism—an enforced artistic style celebrating Soviet leaders and heroic workers. In 1930, Malevich was arrested by Soviet authorities for spreading subversive ideas. Under severe pressure, he returned to figuration, painting peasants standing robotically in barren spaces.

But even these later paintings retained glimmers of his earlier ideas. Gradually, the figures lost their arms and faces—disintegrating as mechanization gripped the countryside. During this time, Malevich also painted a self-portrait that seemed to have abandoned Suprematism completely. But his open hand formed a quadrilateral, and in the painting's corner was a tiny black square.

This was the symbol of a man who suffered through wars and revolutions, but never stopped pushing to create a new art—a refuge of pure feeling that lay beyond the burden of objects and the suffering of a divided world.

More Articles

View All
High Tech or No Tech: Should You Unplug in National Parks? | National Geographic
How much more I spend on my phone than what I used to is ridiculous. I look at my little brothers and stuff. There are definitely weekends where me and him will sit inside and play on our computers. All they do is sit on video games and the computer. I te…
Shouldn't We Just Copy Warren Buffett's Portfolio?
I could not come up with these ideas on my own. I came up with this idea from Warren and Charlie, and I copied it. So, one of the most important models that you can adopt is the model of cloning. When you see someone doing something smart, uh, just incorp…
15 Things You Didn't Know About LONGINES
This is Fashion Fridays! Every Friday, we present you with a fashion icon or topic. Today, we’re looking at 15 things you didn’t know about Longines. Welcome to a Luxe, the place where future billionaires come to get informed. Hello, a Luxors! Today, we’…
How Not to Get Eaten by a Polar Bear | Expedition Raw
Ber is going to show us how to put the trip wire, which is supposed to protect the camp from polar bears. Nowadays, you see more polar bears on the glacier because of climate change. There is less sea ice, and they use the glaciers to transport themselves…
Interpreting the meaning of the derivative in context | AP Calculus AB | Khan Academy
We’re told that Eddie drove from New York City to Philadelphia. The function ( d ) gives the total distance Eddie has driven in kilometers ( t ) hours after he left. What is the best interpretation for the following statement: ( d’ ) of 2 is equal to 100?…
Introducing a Yearlong Celebration of National Parks | National Geographic
[Music] National parks are part of our DNA. It’s who we are at National Geographic. For more than 100 years, National Geographic has been committed to national parks. In 1916, we devoted an entire issue of National Geographic magazine to parks. We called…