The vast expanses of the Internet no-no and even falls to me to encounter any publication of “Black Square”. With an inexplicable regularity. And since the number of read and seen has already reached, in my opinion, a critical mass, I decided to dare and to make some generalizations, without claiming, however, neither the truth nor to any significant approximation to it. Refer to this attempt to be as private Exercise the mind. No more. But none the less.
Not being an expert on neither square, nor by the blackness, I humbly refrain from analyzing this imperishable artifact and attention worthy of the public on the subject of several other properties, namely: the views of those who boldly rejecting a doubt, no fear with all the directness of ” black box “to speak out.
Those thinkers can be divided into three major groups:
I.
The first (and, I believe, the largest) group appropriate to place the empiricists, far from bookish knowledge. Stunned by the apparent mismatch between the simplicity of form and visibility to the artifact, they hasten to share with others their feelings and not afraid of the word, bits of aesthetic existential experience.
It’s nice guys. If it were not one but clearly observed in most cases. Often they are too categorical and are inclined to consider their own sense of truth.
II.
The second group I would include people who acquire a scholarship. In describing the “Black Square” as an artifact, they invariably rely on the art-historical context, which determines the depth of understanding and reasonable interpretations. These virtuous people are of two types: those based on an objective context, and those who prefer this context re-establish or finish building on shaky foundations scant facts.
Whatever it was, and those and others – nice guys. If it were not one but clearly observed in most cases. Often they are too categorical and are inclined to consider the subjective theorizing Truth.
III.
And finally, the third (the smallest) group, as appropriate, in my opinion, include those who are primarily interested in the author himself and his point of view. I think this category should include himself and Kazimir Malevich, for reasons to believe that he was not interested in myself, I have not. Representatives of this group pripadaet to manifestos and articles Malevich himself, good texts he has written fairly. Their opponents often argue:
- And where did you get the idea that Malevich in his texts is sincere?
- And we do not analyze Malevich – they answer. – We look at his art, but through the prism of the author’s conception.
There is no doubt that these researchers are also nice and full of many virtues. If it were not one but clearly observed in most cases. Often they are too categorical and are inclined to consider their understanding of texts Malevich’s only right.
*
What does that mean? Should live, sewing sundresses and light cotton dresses from …
Which category would you have not identified themselves – you will probably, for sure know the meaning and dignity of the Black Square. From what I’m all of us, the true connoisseurs of Truth, and I hasten to congratulate you. Hooray!
P.S.
If by some weighty circumstances you consider themselves to those to whom truth is not knowledge, then believe me: no you do not open it. Help, perhaps, will help, but the last few steps (most important) you have to do yourself. I believe in you! Good luck!