In 1908, in Chernyanka, the goals and objectives of the first futurist group, which was called “Gilea,” were outlined.This year is considered the year the group was created.As B. Livshits wrote in his memoirs: “We didn’t even notice how we became Gilaeans. This happened by itself, by general silent agreement, just as, having realized the commonality of our goals and objectives, we did not take Hannibal’s oaths to each other inloyalty to any principles." The group did not have a permanent composition, but the backbone of the association was the Burliuk brothers.But the foundation was laid by David, Vladimir and Nikolai Burliuk, Alexey Kruchenykh, Benedikt Livshits, Vladimir Mayakovsky, Velimir Khlebnikov."Gilea" openly declared itself in St. Petersburg at the beginning of 1910.The group then included D. and N. Burliuk, V. Khlebnikov, V. Kamensky, A. Guro, V. Mayakovsky, A. Kruchenykh, B. Livshits.
At the end of 1912, on December 18, the first program collection of “Budetlyans” was published - “A Slap in the Face of Public Taste” with the manifesto of the same name by V. Khlebnikov, V. Mayakovsky, D. Burliuk and A. Kruchenykh.
In 1920, David Burliuk left his homeland.This, in fact, was the end of the existence of the Gileya group.
Publishing activities of the association "Gileya"
The first book of Russian futurists, “The Tank of Judges,” was published in 1910 and was depicted on the wallpaper as a symbol: “we will go through our whole life with the fire and sword of literature, under our wallpaper there were bugs and cockroaches, let young, vigorous poems live on them now ours." (D. Burliuk). The authors of the book “Zadok of Judges” Veniamin Khlebnikov, David and Nikolai Burliuk believed that with this book they were laying “a granite stone at the foundation of a new era of literature...”
This publication had no source data, the word “futurism” was not yet mentioned in it, but it was the first book by Russian futurists.And it was with the publication of the book “Zadok of Judges” that the core of the future group “Gilea” was formed. The members of the group called themselves “Gileans”, “Futurists”."Cubofuturists".Their movement was based on the “spontaneous inevitability of the collapse of old things” and the desire to predict and realize through art the future “world revolution” and the birth of a “new man.”
In August 1913, in Kakhovka, in the small printing house of Kahn and Bergart, the first Kherson collective futuristic collection of the “Gileans” - “Dead Moon” - was published.The collection published works by David and Nikolai Burliuk, A. Kruchenykh, B. Livshits, V. Mayakovsky and V. Khlebnikov.
The second low-art Kherson collection of futurists, “Gag,” was published in 1913 in Kherson in the electrical printing house of S. V. Poryadenko.It was a satirical collection of 14 pages.
In December 1913 in Kherson (and in 1914 in Moscow), again in the electric printing house of S.V. Poryadenok, the third Kherson collection “Milk of Mares” was printed.The book had a subtitle: drawings, poetry, prose.The artistic design was done by Alexandra Ekster and David Burliuk.The authors of poetry and prose were V. Mayakovsky, I. Severyanin, V. Kamensky, V. Khlebnikov, A. Kruchenykh, B. Livshits and the Burliuk brothers.
The collections of futuristic drawings and poems “Dead Moon”, “Gag”, “Mares’ Milk” set out the credo of the futurists who sought autonomy, liberation of speech, tried to change the traditional system of literary text, opposed their directions to Italian futurism and persistently asserted the originality of the origin of Russian futurism .
In Kherson, separate books by Gilean poets were also published - V. Khlebnikov, B. Livshits, Alexey Kruchenykh.
D. Burliuk, highly appreciating V. Khlebnikov as a poet and calling him “the true father of futurism,” prepared materials for publication and published his works.In 1912, at the end of April - beginning of May in Kherson, in the steam printing house of the successors of A.D. Khodushina, the book “Teacher and Student” by V. Khlebnikov was published.The book “Creations” by V. Khlebnikov was first published in Kherson at the beginning of 1914 in the electrical printing house “Economy” by F. Narovlyansky and S. Faerman, and then in Moscow.
The collection of poetry by B. Livshits “Wolf Sun” was published by D. Burliuk in the futurist publishing house “Gileya” in February 1914 in Kherson with a circulation of 480 copies. The book was printed in the electrical printing house “Economy” by F. Narovlyansky and S. Faerman. Artists worked on the collectionA. Exter and N. Vasilyeva. The frontispiece of the book was made by A. Exter.
In 1910, the Khodushina printing house published 2 lithographed albums by Cubo-Futurism theorist Alexei Kruchenykh, “All of Kherson in Cartoons and Portraits.”The heroes of the Kruchenykh albums were famous Kherson residents: theater actors, doctors, teachers.
Futurist books were issued quickly, in a cheerful atmosphere of collective creativity.The Gilaeans called their lithographed books “self-writings.”Artists made not only illustrations, but also fonts.The publications were similar to ancient manuscripts.
25.06.2016Who among us has not heard of such an extraordinary and shocking poet, whose name is Vladimir Mayakovsky? We all learned or at least read his famous poem “I pull out a duplicate of a priceless load from my wide trouser legs...”.
But how many of us have heard that Mayakovsky was closely connected with Ukraine, or more precisely, with the Kherson region? The poet even had a poem “Debt to Ukraine,” dedicated to our country. Here are a few lines from it, more relevant than ever:
I say to myself: comrade Muscovite,
There are no jokes about Ukraine.
Learn this language on scarlet lexicon banners,
- This language is majestic and simple:
“You feel it, the surmas have begun, the hour of reckoning has arrived...”
But let’s return to Mayakovsky’s connection with our region. In 1908, in the inconspicuous village of Chernyanka, Kakhovsky district, a group of futurist poets called “Gilea” was created, which included, one might say, the fathers of a new direction in verbal art: David, Vladimir and Nikolai Burlyuk, Alexey Kruchenykh, Benedict Livshits, Vladimir Mayakovsky , Velimir Khlebnikov and others. They called themselves “Cubo-Futurists” or “Budetlyans” (this name was suggested by Khlebnikov).
What does the term “Cubo-Futurism” mean? Cubo-futurism is a movement in the art of the 1910s, most characteristic of the Russian artistic avant-garde of those years, which sought to combine the principles of cubism (decomposition of an object into component structures) and futurism (development of an object in the “fourth dimension”, i.e. in time) . Cubo-futurism is considered to be the result of the mutual influence of futurist poets and cubist painters.
It must be said that the influence of this direction of painting could be traced not only in the poems of the Gilaeans, but also in their appearance, as well as in their behavior: the famous yellow jacket of Mayakovsky, pink frock coats, bunches of radishes and wooden spoons in their buttonholes, faces painted with unknown signs, shocking antics in time of speeches, scandalous manifestos and sharp polemical attacks against literary opponents.
And although the Gileya group did not have a permanent composition, there were “three pillars,” or rather, the “holy trinity” on which it was based. Burliuk was, so to speak, the “FATHER”, the managing director of futurism.
The seer of the group, its “priest,” the invisible “SPIRIT” was, of course, Khlebnikov. He did not like foreign words and called himself not a futurist, but a “budetlyanin”, striving to find roots in the Russian language for every concept. Thus, he turned his name Victor into Velimir. Khlebnikov was obsessed with the idea of time. He wanted to reveal the rhythm of history and learn to predict future events.
The youngest member of the group, Vladimir Mayakovsky, became “SON”. Having become close to Gileya, Mayakovsky came prepared with everything.
The first book of the futurists, “The Tank of Judges,” was published in 1910 and was depicted on wallpaper as a symbol: “We will go through our whole life with the fire and sword of literature, under our wallpaper there were bugs and cockroaches, let our young, vigorous poems live on them now”. (D. Burliuk).
At the end of 1912, on December 18, the first program collection of “Budetlyans” was published - “A Slap in the Face of Public Taste” with the manifesto of the same name by V. Khlebnikov, V. Mayakovsky, D. Burliuk and A. Kruchenykh.
The idea of the exhaustion of the cultural tradition of previous centuries was the starting point of the aesthetic platform of the Cubo-Futurists. The manifesto declared a rejection of the art of the past, and there were calls to “throw out Pushkin, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, etc., etc. from the steamship of modern times."
Then the poets worked very fruitfully, publishing collections of their creations literally one after another. In August 1913, in Kakhovka, in the small printing house of Kahn and Bergart, the first Kherson collective futuristic collection of the “Gileans” - “Dead Moon” - was published.
The collection published works by David and Nikolai Burliuk, A. Kruchenykh, B. Livshits, V. Mayakovsky and V. Khlebnikov. The second low-art Kherson collection of futurists, “Gag,” was published in 1913 in Kherson in the electrical printing house of S. V. Poryadenko. It was a satirical collection of 14 pages. In December 1913, the third Kherson collection “Milk of Mares” was printed in the same printing house in Kherson.
In the spring of 1914, the “Publishing House of the First Journal of Russian Futurists”, created by the Burliuk brothers, published “The First Journal of Russian Futurists”. But the publication stopped after the first issue - the war began.
It was the war that put an end to the existence of "Gilea". At the end of 1914 the group disappeared. Its members each went their own way. Many futurists either hid from conscription or, on the contrary, ended up at the front.
Natalia ROZHKOVAN
In the photo: Shemshurin, David Burliuk, Vladimir Mayakovsky
4823
Cubofuturism- a direction in the art of the 1910s, most characteristic of the Russian artistic avant-garde of those years, which sought to combine the principles of cubism (decomposition of an object into component structures) and futurism(development of an object in the “fourth dimension”, i.e. in time).
When it comes to Russian futurism, the names of the Cubo-Futurists - members of the Gileya group - immediately come to mind. They are remembered for their defiant behavior and shocking appearance (Mayakovsky’s famous yellow jacket, pink frock coats, bunches of radishes and wooden spoons in their buttonholes, faces painted with unknown signs, shocking antics during speeches), and scandalous manifestos and sharp polemical attacks against literary opponents , and the fact that their ranks included Vladimir Mayakovsky, the only futurist “not persecuted” in Soviet times.
In the 1910s of the last century, the fame of the “Gileans” really surpassed other representatives of this literary movement. Perhaps because their work was most consistent with the canons of the avant-garde.
"Gilea"- the first futuristic group. They also called themselves “Cubo-Futurists” or “Budetlyans” (this name was suggested by Khlebnikov). The year of its foundation is considered to be 1908, although the main composition was formed in 1909-1910. “We didn’t even notice how we became Gilaeans. This happened by itself, by general tacit agreement, just as, having realized the commonality of our goals and objectives, we did not take Hannibal’s oaths of allegiance to any principles to each other.” Therefore, the group did not have a permanent composition.
At the beginning of 1910 in St. Petersburg, Gileya announced its existence as part of D. and N. Burlyukov, V. Khlebnikov, V. Mayakovsky, V. Kamensky, E. Guro, A. Kruchenykh and B. Livshits. It was they who became representatives of the most radical flank of Russian literary futurism, which was distinguished by revolutionary rebellion, oppositional sentiment against bourgeois society, its morality, aesthetic tastes, and the entire system of social relations.
Cubo-futurism is considered to be the result of the mutual influence of futurist poets and cubist painters. Indeed, literary futurism was closely associated with avant-garde artistic groups of the 1910s, such as the “Jack of Diamonds”, “Donkey’s Tail”, and the “Youth Union”. The active interaction of poetry and painting, of course, was one of the most important incentives for the formation of Cubo-Futurist aesthetics.
The first joint performance of the Cubo-Futurists in print was the poetic collection “The Judges’ Fishing Tank,” which actually determined the creation of the “Gilea” group. Among the authors of the almanac are D. and N. Burliuk, Kamensky, Khlebnikov, Guro, Ek. Niesen and others. Illustrations by D. and V. Burliuk.
The idea of the exhaustion of the cultural tradition of previous centuries was the starting point of the aesthetic platform of the Cubo-Futurists. Their manifesto, which bore the deliberately scandalous title “A Slap in the Face of Public Taste,” became the programmatic one. It declared a rejection of the art of the past, and there were calls to “throw out Pushkin, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, etc., etc. from the steamship of modern times."
However, despite the rather harsh tone and polemical style of the manifesto, the almanac expressed many ideas about ways to further develop art and bring poetry and painting closer together. Behind the external bravado of its authors there was a serious attitude towards creativity. And the famous shocking phrase about Pushkin, which seemingly does not allow other interpretations, was explained by Khlebnikov, to whom, in fact, it belonged, in a completely different way: “Budetlyanin is Pushkin in coverage of the world war, in the cloak of the new century, teaching the right of the century to laugh over Pushkin of the 19th century” and no longer sounded shocking. In another declaration (1913), Khlebnikov wrote: “We are offended by the distortion of Russian verbs with translated meanings. We demand that Pushkin’s dams and Tolstoy’s piles be opened to the waterfalls and streams of the Montenegrin sides of the arrogant Russian language... In addition to the howling of many throats, we say: “Both there and here there is one sea.” A.E. Parnis, commenting on this statement, states: “Khlebnikov’s declarative thesis, outwardly directed against the classics - Pushkin and Tolstoy, against their linguistic canons, is in fact dialectically addressed to their own authority, primarily to Pushkin: Khlebnikov’s metaphor" “one sea” clearly goes back to Pushkin’s famous “Will Slavic streams merge into the Russian sea?”
Another futurist, S. Tretyakov, speaks in the same spirit: “Mockery of idols: Pushkin and Lermontov, etc. is... a direct blow to those brains that, having absorbed the spirit of lazy authoritarianism from school, never tried to give to imagine the truly futuristic role that, for his time, was played by at least the cheeky Pushkin, who brought essentially the most common folk ditty to French salons, and now, a hundred years later, chewed up and familiar, he has become a yardstick of elegant taste and has ceased to be dynamite! Not the dead Pushkin, in academic volumes and on Tverskoy Boulevard, but the living Pushkin of today, living with us a century later in the verbal and ideological explosions of the futurists, who continue today the work that he did on language the day before yesterday...”
The publication of “The Slap” was perceived by the public mainly negatively, as a fact of immorality and bad taste. But the cubo-futurists believed that the publication of this book officially approved futurism in Russia (although the word “futurism” itself was never mentioned in the text).
In February 1913, the same publishing house published (also on wallpaper, but in an enlarged format) “Tank of Judges II.” If in the first manifesto we were talking mainly about the ideology of the futurists, then here we are talking about poetic techniques that can put these ideas into practice.
One of the founders of the movement, V. Khlebnikov was actively involved in revolutionary changes in the field of the Russian language. He wrote: “To find, without breaking the circle of roots, the magic stone of transforming all Slavic words into one another, to freely melt Slavic words - this is my first attitude towards the word. This is a word of its own, outside of everyday life and life’s benefits. Seeing that the roots are just a ghost<и>, behind which stand the strings of the alphabet, to find the unity of world languages in general, built from units of the alphabet, is my second attitude towards the word.”
Khlebnikov, trying to expand the boundaries of language and its capabilities, worked hard to create new words. According to his theory, the word is deprived of its semantic meaning, acquiring a subjective coloring: “We understand vowels as time and space (the nature of aspiration), consonants - paint, sound, smell.”
The very concept of the meaning of a word has now moved from the level of sound association to the levels of graphic constructions and connections within one word according to structural features. Lexical updating of literary texts was now achieved by introducing vulgarisms, technical terms, inventing unusual phrases, and abandoning punctuation marks. Some poets produced new words from old roots (Khlebnikov, Kamensky, Gnedov), others split them with rhyme (Mayakovsky), others, using poetic rhythm, gave words the wrong stress (Kruchenykh). All this led to the depoetization of language.
Following syntactic shifts, semantic shifts began to arise. This was manifested in a deliberate inconsistency of phrases, in the replacement of a word that was necessary in meaning with its opposite in meaning.
The visual impact of the poem now played a major role. “We began to give content to words according to their descriptive and phonetic characteristics.<...>In the name of freedom of personal occasion, we deny spelling. We characterize a noun not only with adjectives... but also with other parts of speech, also with individual letters and numbers.” The essence of poetry has shifted from questions of “content” of the text to questions of “form” (“not what, but how”). To do this, the futurists used a figurative construction of verse, where they actively used the techniques of rhyming not the final, but the initial words, as well as internal rhymes or the “ladder” method of arranging lines.
Showing a keen sense of words, the futurists reached the point of absurdity when designing. They attached particular importance to word creation, “the word itself.” The program article “The Word as Such” contained the following abstruse lines:
Dyr bul schyl ubeshshur
skum you and boo
r l ez
The result of such activities of the futurists was an unprecedented surge in word creation, which ultimately led to the creation of the theory of “absent language” - zaumi.
In literary terms, zaum was a kind of action in defense of the “self-contained word” against the subordinate meaning that the word had in the poetics of symbolism, where it played only an auxiliary role in the creation of a symbol and where poetic vocabulary was extremely strictly separated from the vocabulary of colloquial speech.
In an article by L. Timofeev, characterizing this phenomenon, it is said that “Acmeism had already significantly expanded its vocabulary boundaries, ego-futurism went even further. Not content with including the spoken language in the poetic dictionary, Cubo-Futurism further expanded its lexical and sound capabilities, following two lines: the first line - the creation of new words from old roots (in this case the meaning of the word was preserved), the second line, i.e. zaum - the creation of new sound complexes devoid of meaning - which brought this process of returning the word its “rights” to the point of absurdity.”
Zaum was one of the main creative principles of Russian cubo-futurism. In the “Declaration of Transrational Language”, Khlebnikov, G. Petnikov and Kruchenykh defined the essence of zaumi as follows: “Thought and speech do not keep pace with the experience of the inspired, therefore the artist is free to express himself not only in a general language... but also in a personal one... and in a language that does not have a specific meaning (not frozen), abstruse. A common language binds, a free language allows you to express yourself more fully. Zaum awakens and gives freedom to creative imagination, without offending it with anything specific.”
Zaum, therefore, appears to be either a combination of sounds that have no meaning, or the same words. The innovation of the futurists was original, but, as a rule, it was devoid of common sense. M. Wagner notes that “from one verbal root, the futurists produced a whole series of neologisms, which, however, did not enter the living, spoken language. Khlebnikov was considered the discoverer of the verbal “Americas,” a poet for poets. He had a subtle sense of words<...>in the direction of searching for new words and phrases. For example, from the stem of the verb “to love,” he created 400 new words, of which, as one would expect, not a single one entered into poetic use.”
Khlebnikov's innovative poetics was in tune with the aspirations of the Budutans. After the release of “The Judges’ Cage I”, other collective and individual collections of equally shocking properties began to appear, where the futurists’ poems were published and discussed: “Dead Moon”, “Roaring Parnassus”, “Tango with Cows”, “Blown Up”, “I!” , “Gag”, “Trebnik of Three” and others.
However, the movement that was gaining strength immediately had a mass of epigones and imitators, trying in the wake of the fashionable literary movement to turn their opuses into a hot commodity, not alien to this kind of “modernity,” and forgetting that imitation is only useful for study. And one can fully agree with O. Rykova’s statement that “the futurist poets, despite the commonality of the manifestos presented, certainly differed in their creative quest and depth. The mediocrities enjoyed only shocking effect, but the true poets over time “outgrew” the existing movement and remained specific individuals in the literary process - it couldn’t have been any other way”?..
In the spring of 1914, an attempt was made to create an “official” cubo-futurism, which was to become the “First Journal of Russian Futurists”, published in the “Publishing House of the First Journal of Russian Futurists” created by the Burliuk brothers. But the publication stopped after the first issue - the war began.
This most directly affected Gilei, which by the end of 1914 ceased to exist as a single group. Its members each went their own way. Many futurists left Moscow and Petrograd, hiding from conscription, or, on the contrary, ending up at the front.
Young people, who in peacetime constituted the main fertile audience of the futurists, were mobilized. Public interest in “futuristic audacity” began to quickly decline.
Despite all the cardinal external differences, the history of Cubo-Futurism in Russia is strikingly similar to the fate of Russian symbolism. The same furious non-recognition at first, the same noise at birth (among the futurists it was only much stronger, developing into a scandal). Following this was the rapid recognition of the advanced strata of literary criticism, triumph, and enormous hopes. A sudden breakdown and fall into the abyss at the moment when it seemed that unprecedented possibilities and horizons had opened up before him in Russian poetry.
Exploring futurism at the dawn of its inception, Nikolai Gumilyov wrote: “We are present at a new invasion of barbarians, strong in their talent and terrible in their disdain. Only the future will show whether they are “Germans” or… Huns, of whom not a trace will remain.”
Well, today, after almost a century, we can say with confidence that the art of many “Budetlyans” has stood the test of time.
(cult of the future and discrimination of the past along with the present). Cubism arose in France (Picasso and Braque), futurism in Italy (Italian poet Filippo Marinetti), and cubo-futurism received its greatest development in Russia, and here it was especially popular both in painting and poetry. Cubo-futurism had other names: New aesthetics, Russian cubism. Cubo-futurism lasted only a few years - from 1911 to 1916. and represented eclecticism (a combination of heterogeneous, internally unrelated and possibly incompatible views, ideas, concepts, styles). Cubo-futurism became, as it were, a transitional stage to the largest trends created by the Russian avant-garde - the Suprematism of K. Malevich, the constructivism of V. Tatlin, the analytical art of P. Filonov, etc. Russian cubo-futurism became a completely original phenomenon, distinguished by radicalism, which constantly shook its own foundations and brought out art on new and new paths.
Cubo-futurism in painting
Artists K. Malevich, D. Burliuk, N. Goncharova, O. Rozanova, L. Popova, N. Udaltsova, A. Ekster, A. Bogomazov and others worked in the style of cubo-futurism in different periods of their work. We will tell you about some of them in articles about relevant trends in painting.
In 1910, in Moscow on Vozdvizhenka, in the house of the Economic Society of Officers, the exhibition “Jack of Diamonds” was held, which gave the name to the artistic association. The exhibition enjoyed great interest among the public, but caused a mixed reaction in the press: many cartoons, feuilletons and caustic reports about the exhibition appeared.
Mikhail Larionov “Portrait of Natalia Goncharova” (1907)
The artistic association “Jack of Diamonds” included artists R. Falk, A. Lentulov, I. Mashkov, A. Kuprin, P. Konchalovsky, N. Goncharova, M. Larionov, V. and D. Burlyuk, N. Kulbin, K. Malevich et al.
The name of the association was invented by M. Larionov in contrast to the main artistic movements of the early 20th century. – Art Nouveau and Symbolism. It seemed to the members of the new association that the excessive aestheticism and meaningfulness of Art Nouveau and Symbolism did not correspond to their artistic style. What was the peculiarity of the creativity of the “Jack of Diamonds” association? Their style combined cubism, fauvism and the traditions of Russian folk art, and above all - lubok, in which it was possible to convey the volume of forms on a plane with the help of color. Members of the “Jack of Diamonds” believed that their work was not intended for sophisticated art connoisseurs, but for everyone. Therefore, their still lifes were simple, like signs in grocery stores, and so were portraits, landscapes, and everyday scenes.
K. Malevich “Harvesting the rye”
At the exhibitions of the “Jack of Diamonds”, not only the works of members of the association were exhibited, but also those of V. Kandinsky and A. Jawlensky who lived in Munich, foreign artists J. Braque, A. Derain, A. Matisse, P. Picasso, A. Rousseau, P. Signac et al.
“Jack of Diamonds”, without a doubt, brought together very talented and unique artists. Subsequently, each of them went their own way, forming their own directions and establishing their unique principles of creativity. For example, M. Larionov developed the theory of Rayonism, V. Kandinsky - abstractionism, K. Malevich - Suprematism. There were other, less well-known concepts. “Jack of Diamonds” ceased to exist in 1917.
But already in 1911, some of the members of the association (Goncharova, Larionov, Malevich, etc.) organized an independent association “Donkey's Tail”, which lasted for about 2 years. Members of the "Donkey's Tail" tried to combine in their work all modern achievements of painting with Russian folk art: lubok, icon painting, primitivism.
D. Burliuk “In the Church” (1922)
In March-April 1913, a major exhibition “Target” was held in Moscow at the Art Salon on Bolshaya Dmitrovka, organized by M. Larionov. The exhibition featured works by N. Goncharova, M. Larionov, M. Le Dantu, K. Malevich, M. Chagall, A. Shevchenko and others. Paintings by self-taught artists were also exhibited, including N. Pirosmanishvili, for whom this The exhibition was the only one held during his lifetime, children's drawings, signs, works of unknown primitivist artists. The program provisions of the group were formulated by M. Larionov: “... Recognition of all styles that were before us and have been created now, such as cubism, futurism, orpheism; We proclaim all kinds of combinations and mixing of styles. We have created our own style “Rayism”, which refers to spatial forms<...>We strive for the East and pay attention to national art<...>We protest against slavish subordination to the West, which returns to us our own and Eastern forms in a vulgarized form and levels everything...” At this exhibition, the first painting in the spirit of cubo-futurism by K. Malevich was presented - a semi-abstract composition depicting geometric shapes close to “machine” rhythm (cylinders, cones, etc.).
Painting by K. Malevich
The art of the Cubo-Futurists was most fully presented at two avant-garde exhibitions: “Tram B” in February 1915 and “0.10”, held in December 1915-January 1916, where Malevich exhibited paintings in the spirit of Suprematism for the first time.
K. Malevich “Morning after a thunderstorm”
The artists actively collaborated with the futurist poets from the Gileya group (A. Kruchenykh, V. Khlebnikov, E. Guro), adopted many innovative artistic and aesthetic ideas from them, for which they received the nickname “abstruse realists.” Sometimes their paintings were distinguished by absurdity and alogism, but K. Malevich considered this a specific feature of Russian Cubism, arguing that “logic has always put a barrier to new subconscious movements and, in order to free ourselves from prejudices, the current of alogism was put forward.”
K. Malevich “Musician”
D. Burliuk “The Coming of Spring and Summer” (1914)
Thus, Cubo-Futurism in painting can be considered a predecessor of Dadaism and Surrealism.
Contemporary artists also paint in the style of Cubo-Fututrism.
V. Krotkov “Portrait of V. Mayakovsky” (2012)
Cubo-futurism in literature
The first Russian futurist group was the Budetlyane group, which later turned into the Cubo-Futurist movement.
The term was formed from the word “will” by Velimir Khlebnikov. Initially, this term emphasized the originality of Russian futurism, which did not completely repeat the position of Filippo Marinetti, the ideologist of European futurism. Budelism considered itself an independent phenomenon dictated by time.
The Budutans included poets Velimir Khlebnikov, David Burliuk, Vasily Kamensky, Vladimir Mayakovsky, Alexey Kruchenykh, as well as artists Nikolai Kulbin, Kazimir Malevich; composers Mikhail Matyushin, Arthur Lurie.
Benedict Livshits
In the summer of 1910, the Byudelians, led by David Burliuk, began to call themselves the “Gilea” group, this name of the Russian literary and artistic group of Cubo-Futurists was proposed by the poet Benedict Livshits.
David Burliuk
The Gileya group was the loudest of all the futurist groups. It had its own publishing house "EUY", its representatives participated in many literary debates, promoting left-wing art. The group published almanacs: in 1913, “A Slap in the Face of Public Taste”, “Zadok of Judges 2”, “Trebnik of Three”, “Three”, “Dead Moon”; in 1914 “Mares’ Milk”, “Gag”, “Roaring Parnassus”, “The First Journal of Russian Futurists”; in 1915 “Spring Contract of Muses”, “Took”.
Elena Guro
Cubo-futurist poets included Velimir Khlebnikov, Elena Guro, David and Nikolai Burliuk, Vasily Kamensky, Vladimir Mayakovsky, Alexey Kruchenykh, Benedikt Livshits. Many of them also worked as artists.
D. Burliuk “Portrait of the futurist poet Vasily Kamensky” (1917)
The work of "Gilea" was in many ways close to the artists of "Jack of Diamonds", "Donkey's Tail", and "Target". “Gileya”, together with the association of artists “Youth Union”, organized the “Budetlyanin” theater, where they staged the tragedy “Vladimir Mayakovsky” with the author in the title role (artists P. Filonov and O. Rozanova) and the opera “Victory over the Sun” by A. Kruchenykh ( artist K. Malevich, music by M. Matyushin).
Members of the literary and artistic group “Gilea” stood out for their defiant behavior and appearance. Here you can remember Mayakovsky’s famous yellow blouse, bunches of radishes and wooden spoons in buttonholes, painted faces, shocking antics during performances. Their manifestos caused a scandal, and they were harsh and irreconcilable with their literary opponents.
V. Mayakovsky
The title “A Slap in the Face of Public Taste” was especially deliberately scandalous. It contained calls to “throw out Pushkin, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, etc., etc. from the steamship of modern times." But at the same time, this manifesto expressed ideas about ways to further develop art. In some ways, their bravado was purely external, because... Khlebnikov explained the phrase about Pushkin this way: “Budetlyanin is Pushkin in the coverage of the world war, in the cloak of the new century, teaching the right of the century to laugh at Pushkin of the 19th century.”
But the publication of “The Slap” was perceived by the public mainly negatively, as a fact of immorality and bad taste.
M. Larionov “Portrait of V. Khlebnikov”
V. Khlebnikov was actively involved in revolutionary changes in the field of the Russian language. He wrote: “To find, without breaking the circle of roots, the magic stone of transforming all Slavic words into one another, to freely melt Slavic words - this is my first attitude towards the word. This is a word of its own, outside of everyday life and life’s benefits. Seeing that the roots are just ghosts behind which stand the strings of the alphabet, finding the unity of the world languages in general, built from the units of the alphabet, is my second attitude towards the word.”
Khlebnikov sought to expand the boundaries of language and its capabilities, and worked to create new words. According to his theory, the word is deprived of its semantic meaning, acquiring a subjective coloring: “We understand vowels as time and space (the nature of aspiration), consonants – paint, sound, smell.” Some poets produced new words from old roots (Khlebnikov, Kamensky, Gnedov), others split them with rhyme (Mayakovsky), others, using poetic rhythm, gave words the wrong stress (Kruchenykh). All this led to the depoetization of language.
Behind the syntactic shifts, semantic shifts began to appear. This was manifested in a deliberate inconsistency of phrases, in the replacement of a word that was necessary in meaning with its opposite in meaning.
V. Khlebnikov “Grasshopper”
Wings with gold letter
The finest veins
The grasshopper put it in the back of the belly
There are many coastal herbs and ver.
“Ping, ping, ping!” - Zinziver rattled.
Oh, swanlike!
Oh, light up!
The futurists used a figurative construction of verse, where they actively used the techniques of rhyming not the final, but the initial words, as well as internal rhymes or the “ladder” method of arranging lines. Sometimes this construction of words reached the point of absurdity. They attached particular importance to word creation, “the word itself.” The program article “The Word as Such” contained the following abstruse lines:
Dyr bul schyl ubeshshur
skum you and boo
r l ez
Their author, A. Kruchenykh, argued that “there is more Russian nationality in this five-line poem than in all of Pushkin’s poetry.” There was a surge in word creation, which led to the creation of the theory of “abstruse language” - zaumi.
Zaum was one of the main creative principles of Russian cubo-futurism. In the “Declaration of Transrational Language”, V. Khlebnikov, G. Petnikov and A. Kruchenykh defined the essence of zaumi as follows: “Thought and speech do not keep up with the experience of the inspired, therefore the artist is free to express himself not only in a general language... but also in a personal one... and language that does not have a definite meaning (not frozen), abstruse. A common language binds, a free language allows you to express yourself more fully. Zaum awakens and gives freedom to creative imagination, without offending it with anything specific.”
Futurists created a whole series of neologisms, which still did not enter the living spoken language. Khlebnikov created 400 new words from the stem of the verb “to love,” but none of them entered into poetic use.
And here is his poem "Spell of Laughter":
Oh, laugh, you laughers!
Oh, laugh, you laughers!
That they laugh with laughter, that they laugh with laughter,
Oh, laugh merrily!
Oh, the laughter of the laughing ones - the laughter of the clever laughing ones!
Oh, laugh with laughter, the laughter of the laughing ones!
Smeyevo, Smeyevo,
Laugh, laugh, laugh, laugh, laugh,
Laughers, laughers.
Oh, laugh, you laughers!
Oh, laugh, you laughers!
In 1914, World War I began and the Hylea group ceased to exist as a single group. Its members each went their own way. Many futurists left Moscow and Petrograd, hiding from conscription, or, on the contrary, ending up at the front. Interest in futurism began to decline. But now we can say with confidence that this art has stood the test of time.
The content of the article
FUTURISM(Italian futurismo from Latin futurum - future) - an avant-garde artistic movement of the 1910s - early 1920s of the 20th century, most fully manifested in Italy (the birthplace of futurism) and Russia. There were futurists in other European countries - Germany, England, France, Poland. Futurism made itself known in literature, painting, sculpture, and to a lesser extent in music.
Italian futurism.
The birthday of futurism is considered to be February 20, 1909, when T. F. Marinetti’s writing appeared in the Paris newspaper Le Figaro Manifesto of Futurism. It was Marinetti who became the theorist and leader of the first Milanese group of futurists. The manifesto was addressed to young Italian artists (“The oldest among us are thirty years old, in 10 years we must complete our task until a new generation comes and throws us into the trash basket.”). The manifesto denied all spiritual and cultural values of the past. (A few years later, the Russian futurist poet V. Mayakovsky formulated this briefly and expressively: “I put “nihil” over everything that has been done.”).
It is no coincidence that futurism arose in Italy, a country-museum. “We have no life, but only memories of a more glorious past... We live in a magnificent sarcophagus, in which the lid is screwed tightly so that fresh air does not penetrate,” Marinetti complained. Introducing your compatriots to the Olympus of modern European culture is what undoubtedly stood behind the shockingly loud tone of the manifesto. A group of young artists from Milan, and then from other cities, immediately responded to Marinetti’s call - both with their creativity and their own manifestos. 11 February 1910 appears Manifesto of Futurist Artists, and on April 11 of the same year - Technical Manifesto of Futurist Painting, signed by U. Boccioni, J. Balla, K. Carra, L. Russolo, G. Severeni - the most prominent futurist artists. Marinetti himself published over 80 manifestos during his life, relating not only to the most different types of artistic creativity, but also to the most different aspects of life. In all his works, both theoretical and artistic (poems, novel Mafarka the futurist) Marinetti, like his associates, denied not only the artistic, but also the ethical values of the past.
Pity, respect for the human person, and romantic love were declared obsolete. Intoxicated by the latest achievements of technology, the futurists sought to cut out the “cancer” of the old culture with the knife of technicism and the latest achievements of science. A racing car, “rushing like shrapnel,” seemed to them more beautiful than the Nike of Samothrace. Futurists argued that new technology also changes the human psyche, and this requires a change in all visual and expressive means of art. In the modern world, they were especially fascinated by speed, mobility, dynamics, and energy. They dedicated their poems and paintings to the car, train, and electricity. “The heat emanating from a piece of wood or iron excites us more than the smile and tears of a woman,” “New art can only be violence, cruelty,” Marinetti declared.
The worldview of the futurists was strongly influenced by the ideas of Nietzsche with his cult of the “superman”; Bergson's philosophy, which states that the mind is capable of comprehending only everything that is ossified and dead; rebellious slogans of anarchists. A hymn to strength and heroism - in almost all the works of Italian futurists. The man of the future, in their view, is a “mechanical man with replaceable parts,” omnipotent, but soulless, cynical and cruel.
They saw the cleansing of the world from “junk” in wars and revolutions. “War is the only hygiene of the world,” “The word “freedom” must submit to the word Italy,” declared Marirnetti. Even the names of poetry collections Pistol shots Lucini, Electric verses Govoni, Bayonets HELL. (apostrophe) Alba, Airplanes Buzzi, Song of Motors L. Folgore, Arsonist The palazzeschi speak for themselves.
The key slogan of the Italian futurists in literature was “Words are free!” - do not express the meaning in words, but let the word itself control the meaning (or nonsense) of the poem. One of his contemporaries described how he read his poem about the war by Marinetti: “Boom, boom... and explains: - these are cannonballs. Boom, boom... tararh - shell explosion. Peak, peak, peak - a swallow flies over the battlefield. Oooh, Marinetti growls so loudly that the frightened face of the footman appears at the door of the office - it’s a wounded mule dying.” Onomatopoeia, drawings, collages, playing with fonts, mathematical symbols - all this, according to futurists, should destroy the traditional, unambiguous connection between words and meaning and create new, modern, meanings inexpressible only in words and generally accepted graphics.
In painting and sculpture, Italian futurism became the forerunner of many subsequent artistic discoveries and movements. Thus, Boccioni, who used a variety of materials in one sculpture (glass, wood, cardboard, iron, leather, horsehair, clothing, mirrors, light bulbs, etc.), became the harbinger of pop art. Striving in his futuristic sculpture-constructions to combine plastic form, color, movement and sound, Balla anticipated both kineticism and later synthetic forms of art.
The Italian Futurists introduced (or at least tried to introduce) sound into their paintings and sculptures. (“Our canvases,” wrote K. Carra, “will express the plastic equivalents of sounds, noises and smells in the theater, in music, in the cinema hall, in a brothel, at a railway station, in a port, a garage, a clinic, a workshop, etc.” etc. For this, the artist must be a whirlwind of sensations, pictorial strength and energy, and not a cold logical intellect.”
For the Italian futurists (as well as the Russians later), direct contact with the public was very important. Artists attended their exhibitions, shocking the public with their appearance and speeches.
The poets tried to ensure that the people who came to their performances were not only spectators, but also participants in some action. “We will throw the locomotives of our inspiration into the future,” Marinetti proclaimed, and the public began to imitate the whistles of the departing locomotives. A. Mazza called for the destruction of museums, libraries and all kinds of academies, and to anathematize all professors. “Yeah! Surely I failed the exams,” they shout from the audience. “Futurists are not afraid of whistles, they are afraid only of slight signs of approval,” another futurist speaker proudly proclaims. Orange peels flying from the audience to the stage, a police outfit at the end of the performance... - all this was an almost obligatory and welcome part of the performances of the “people of the future”. It is with futurism that the tendency of the artist to consistently go beyond the boundaries of art begins.
On the eve of the First World War, Marinetti openly subordinated artistic interests to political ones: he created futuristic circles of nationalist-minded youth, and traveled around Europe with propaganda lectures. He campaigns for Italy's entry into the First World War and himself participates in it as a volunteer. In 1918, Italian futurists created a political party that began to move closer to the “fascists” of B. Mussolini. In the 20s, many futurists praised the fascist regime, considering it the embodiment of the dream of a great future for Italy.
Italian Futurism in Russia.Italian futurism was well known in Russia almost from its birth. Manifesto of Futurism Marinetti was translated and published in the newspaper “Evening” on March 8, 1909. The Italian correspondent of the newspaper “Russian Vedomosti” M. Osorgin regularly introduced the Russian reader to futuristic exhibitions and speeches. V. Shershenevich promptly translated almost everything that Marinetti wrote. Therefore, when Marinetti came to Russia at the beginning of 1914, his performances did not create any sensation. The main thing is that by this time, Russian literature had its own futurism, which considered itself better than Italian and independent of it. The first of these statements is indisputable: in Russian futurism there were talents of such a scale that Italian futurism did not know.
The first significant exhibition of Italian futurist artists was held in Paris in 1912 and then traveled throughout all the art centers of Europe. Everywhere she was a scandalous success, but did not attract serious followers. The exhibition did not reach Russia, but Russian artists at that time often lived abroad for a long time, and the theory and practice of Italian futurism turned out to be in many ways consonant with their own quests.
The beginning of futurism in Russia.
In Russia, futurism first appeared in painting, and only later in literature. The artistic searches of the brothers D. and N. Burlyukov, M. Larionov, N. Goncharova, A. Exter, N. Kulbin and others became, as it were, the prehistory of Russian futurism (although the word itself was not used in relation to the phenomena of Russian art until 1911).
In March 1910 in the collection Impressionist studio a poem by the then almost unknown poet V. Khlebnikov was published Spell of laughter (Oh, laugh, you laughers!...), which later became almost the hallmark of futurism. A collection was released a little later Judges cage. Among the authors are David and Nikolai Burliuk, Elena Guro, V. Khlebnikov, V. Kamensky. The sound similarity of the words “tank” and “judges” immediately attracted attention. The meaning of the title was unclear to the uninitiated reader (and therefore shocked him). However, the authors “deciphered” the title as follows: a cage is a cage for keeping animals in captivity, the poets of the future are still driven into a cage (cage), but in the future they will become the legislators (judges) of poetic taste. “The main thing is that everyone unanimously understood,” recalled V. Kamensky, “that the essence of our coming is not only in the book Judges cage, but in those huge undertakings of the future, which we energetically took on in the hope of supporting the army of progressive youth.” The book was printed on the back of the wallpaper. According to the recollection of the same V. Kamensky (his poem Churlyu-Zhurl the collection opened) the book “exploded with a deafening roar... on the peaceful, decrepit street of literature.” “Wallpaper poets”, “clowns”, “chickens laughing” - this is how professional critics greeted the collection. But the general public did not notice the collection: it was published in a meager circulation, and, moreover, it was not completely purchased from the printing house.
Hylea = Cubo-futurism.
In the winter of 1911, the young poet Benedikt Livshits came to the village of Chernyanka, Nizhne-Dnieper district of the Tauride province, where the Burliuk family lived, to visit the brothers David, Vladimir and Nikolai - to sort out the papers of Khlebnikov, who had recently visited here. “On quarter sheets, on half sheets, sometimes just on scraps... records of the most varied content scattered in all directions... the understanding of language as an art found its most eloquent confirmation in the works of Khlebnikov, with the only amazing caveat that the process, hitherto thought of as a function of the collective consciousness of an entire people, was embodied in the creativity of one person... - B. Livshits later said, who left quite extensive memories of his stay in Chernyanka: “It was a continuous creative boiling, ending only in a dream.” “David continued to work on complex compositions, in “landscapes with several points of view,” putting into practice his teaching about multiple perspectives... A tender love for material, an attitude towards the technique of reproducing an object on a plane as something immanent in the very essence of what was depicted encouraged Burliuk to test his strength in all types of painting - oil, watercolor, tempera, moving from paint to pencil, etching, engraving...".
The ancient Greek name of the area where Chernyanka was located - Gilea - was chosen as the name of the literary group, which, in addition to Burliuk and Livshits, also included Khlebnikov and V. Kamensky. And the next winter - 1912 - a student at the Moscow School of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture D. Burliuk (by that time already a participant in several exhibitions of “new” painting) and a very young student of the same school V. Mayakovsky spend a “memorable night”: “Conversation .... David has the anger of a master who enriched his contemporaries, I have the pathos of a socialist who knows the inevitability of the collapse of old things. Russian futurism was born,” Mayakovsky wrote.
The program of Russian futurism, or more precisely of that group of it that first called itself “Gilea”, and entered the history of literature as a group of cubo-futurists (almost all Hylean poets - to one degree or another - were also painters, adherents of cubism) were manifestos published in collection A slap in the face to public taste(1912): and Judges' cage II (1913)
Only we are the face of our Time...
In the history of literature, Igor Severyanin is the leader of egofuturism. But for readers - “only a poet.”
Other futurist groups.
After Kubo and Ego, other futuristic groups arose. The most famous of them are “Mezzanine of Poetry” (V. Shershenevich, R. Ivnev, S. Tretyakov, B. Lavrenev, etc.) and “Centrifuge” (S. Bobrov, N. Aseev, B. Pasternak, K. Bolshakov, Bozhidar (B. Gordeev), etc.). Each of these groups considered itself an exponent of “true” futurism. The new “fighters” had to fight not so much with the old literature, but with the leaders of futurism itself and “block” them in terms of their own slogans. “... no longer wishing to encourage the insolence of the presumptuous gang that has appropriated the name of Russian Futurists, declaring to their faces... You are traitors and renegades... You are impostors... You are cowards... You... will be forced to get your hands on the true track record of PASSEISTS" (vol. e. People who are partial to the past and indifferent to the present). Under these words from the Centrifuge manifesto - “Certificate” were the signatures of N. Aseev, S. Bobrov, I. Zdanevich, B. Pasternak.
The Mezzanine of Poetry, whose entire history fits into a few months of the winter of 1913–1914, did not even release its manifesto. It was replaced by articles by M. Rosiyansky (L. Zak) Glove for Cubo-Futurists and V. Shershenevich Open letter to M.M. Rossiyansky. Leaving the meaning to logic and science and not being satisfied with the cubo-futuristic perception of the word, Zak and Shershenevich proposed: the first - “word-smell”, the second - “word-image”, which preceded the understanding of the poetic word in imagism. There was not a single major talent among the participants in the Mezzanine of Poetry.
“Centrifuge”, organized by S. Bobrov in 1914, existed for several years. Among the publications of “Centrifuge” we can note collections of poetry and criticism Armfoot(1914) and Second collection of Centrifuges(1916), collections of poems by N. Aseev Oksana(1916), B. Pasternak Over the Barriers(1917), etc. The books “Centrifuges” were designed by “leftist” artists (A. Exter, A. Rodchenko, El Lissitzky, etc.).
Figures of Russian culture about futurism.
The first response to Russian futurism was an article by V. Bryusov The latest trends in Russian poetry. Futurists. An experienced critic immediately “convicted” the futurists of what they did not want to admit: their manifestos essentially repeated the manifestos of the Italians, and noticed the difference between the St. Petersburg and Moscow futurists, not so much, however, in theory, but in its implementation - “to the St. Petersburg poets I was lucky: among them there was a poet with an undeniably outstanding talent: Igor Severyanin... But an outstanding poet is always higher than the school to which he is classified: his work cannot be a measure of the aspirations and achievements of the school.” (V. Bryusov’s article appeared in 1913, when V. Mayakovsky’s talent had not yet fully revealed itself). At the end of the article, the master of symbolism notes that in the field of “verbal presentation” the futurists have some achievements and one can hope that the “seeds” will someday grow “into real flowers,” but for this, of course, “we will have to learn a lot from ... symbolists "
I. Bunin called futurism “flat hooliganism”. M. Osorgin, who was ironic about Italian futurism, was seriously concerned about the spread of futurism in Russia: “The campaign of young Italians against a frozen, petrified culture may be absurd, but it is understandable, there is an excuse against it. There is no justification for those who oppose a culture that has only just emerged, which still needs a greenhouse and careful care... It’s too early for us to indulge: we don’t have the right, we don’t deserve it.”
Lyudmila Polikovskaya
THEATRICAL FUTURISM
The idea and principles were stated in manifestos of 1914–1915, written by Italian artists G. Balla, F. Depero, E. Prampolini. They relied on the theory of the founder of literary futurism F. T. Marinetti.
Futurist painters turned to the stage to create performances for the artist's theater, using new scenographic means of expression. “The stage,” wrote E. Prampolini in Manifesto of futuristic scenography(1915) - will not be a picturesque background, but an electromechanical neutral architecture, powerfully enlivened by the chromatic emanations of the light source, conducted by electric reflectors with multi-colored glasses - in accordance with the mental essence of each segment of the stage action. The light emission of these beams, these colored light planes, their dynamic combinations will lead to wonderful results - interpenetration, mutual intersection of light and shadow. Empty gaps and jubilant clots of light will be born. These additions, these surreal collisions, this abundance of sensations, combined with the dynamic architectural structures of the stage, which will move, waving metal arms, overturning plastic surfaces, among new, modern noises, will increase the vital tension of the stage action. Prampolini offered his vision of a new, futuristic type of scenery (architectural, lighting, dynamic), in which the actors should play. But to play in a new way: they “will be able to create unexpected dynamic effects that have hitherto been neglected or very little used, mainly because of the old prejudice that calls for imitating and showing reality.”
The new futuristic model of scenography according to Prampolini is the transfer to the theater of the projects of Italian artists, which they developed in workshops and exhibited at exhibitions. Projects of kinetic objects - plastic complexes that combined, as Prampolini wrote, “plastic, chromatic, architectural elements, movement, noise, smell, etc. into a single alloy.”
The manifesto is dedicated to the same idea. Futuristic reconstruction of the Universe J. Balla and F. Depero. As the title suggests, in plastic complexes they saw the possibility of embodying the universal categories of modern artistic perception of the world, which they tried to implement in their practical implementations. They composed and built spatial compositions from dissimilar materials: metal wire and nets, plates, colored glass and foil, paper and fabrics, mirrors, banners, springs, levers, pipes. With the help of special mechanical and electrical devices, individual parts of the structure rotated around an axis (horizontal, vertical, inclined) or around several axes at once, in one or different directions, synchronously or at different speeds. Other parts were divided into volumes, layers, transformed into different shapes (cone, pyramid, ball), made sounds and noises, worked like spray guns, distributing certain chemical compounds and odors. The action involved water, fire, smoke, and other pyrotechnic means, with the help of which the artists created all sorts of magical miracles, which also appeared unexpectedly for the audience, thereby repeatedly activating their perception.
Plastic complexes were an expression of two trends at once at the beginning of the 20th century: the synthesis of different types of creative activity and going beyond the boundaries of easel painting. Self-playing spatial objects were created, which contained the characteristics of a work no longer of fine art, but of new scenography. The artist’s theater was conceived as the last stage of this process, and in it, according to Prampolini, “there will be no place for human actors.” They will be replaced by those elements of the art of the futurist artist, which he himself will be able to control, set into the necessary movement and create from them a performance capable of expressing such emotional content that is inaccessible to literary and acting theater. Prampolini paid a lot of attention to light and color effects. He believed that they could create a performance on their own and create new emotional experiences in the audience.
In a synthetic project Flowers(1916) Depero proposed an action that should be created in the empty blue space of the cube by four “abstract individuals” - in the form of four colored forms: the ovoid Gray, which made shrill whining sounds; dull rattling triangular Red; White, cut into pointed strips, “singing” in a thin, glassy voice; finally, Black, sounding with deep guttural notes. According to the artist’s plan, each of these “abstract individualities” played its musical and color theme in turn and was then replaced by the next “individuality.” However, it was not Depero who succeeded in implementing this model on stage, but Balla - in the production Fireworks to the music of I. Stravinsky, which was shown in 1917 in the Roman enterprise of S. Diaghilev.
Futurists also developed the idea of creating the so-called. "artificial living beings" as characters. They were supposed to act as actors. This idea was born in Depero's manifesto Plastic Complexes – Futuristic Free Game – Artificial Living Creature(1914), although it was not implemented. But it was she who determined one of the main directions in the development of the futurist artist’s theater in 1910–1920, - in Depero’s Plastic dances(1918) and Machine 3000(1924), in Prampolini's play Matum and Tevilar(1916), and in pantomimes he performed in Paris in the mid-1920s.
The stage ideas of the Italian futurists had a significant influence on the development of theater and scenography in the 20th century. In different countries this influence was felt in different ways, to different degrees and in different forms. On the Russian stage it manifested itself in performances staged in 1913 by the St. Petersburg “Futurist Theater”: Victory over the sun which – in K. Malevich’s project – became the first work of the artist's theater, And Tragedy. Vladimir Mayakovsky, where the poet himself played the main role, as well as in the so-called. scenographic cubo-futurism of productions of the Moscow Chamber Theater - sets and costumes by A. Exter for performances Salome(1917) and Romeo and Juliet (1921).
Victor Berezkin
Literature:
Giovanni. Theater futuriste italien. Lausanne, 1976
Giovanni. Futurisme. Manifestes, documents, proclamations. Lausanne, 1973
Giovanni. La Scena futuriste. Paris, 1989
Berezkin V.I. Italian Futurists and Theater. – Theater issues. M., 1993
Russian futurism. Theory. Practice. Criticism. Memories. M., 1999
Poetry of Russian Futurism (New Poet Library), St. Petersburg, 1999
Lekmanov O. Futurism- In the book:
Encyclopedia for children. Russian literature,
Part 2. M., 1999
Petrova E. Russian futurism. St. Petersburg, 2000
Bobrinskaya E. Futurism. M., 2000
