Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
If we understand the world of microbes by the basics of life – as it appears to us in the eyepiece of a microscope, for example-then the desire to refute Malevich will disappear, because the world of microbes just shows us a variety of the simplest geometric shapes: circles, parallelepipeds, curves… Compositions of such shapes – and multi-colored ones at that! “they can be very interesting.” Kandinsky and Malevich gave the best examples here. They are classics of Supremacism.
This is the rejection of the image of the shells of objects in favor of the simplest forms-the basis of the universe.
In my plebeian opinion, this is complete bullshit. Draw in the style-stick stick cucumber, that's a little man came out, three-year-olds were able to back in the Paleolithic. this is not art, this is a technical divorce of fools for money. One consumptive draws a black square, the other a can of soup and a cardboard box. Now, in general, it's enough to nail your eggs to the asphalt or sit naked on the toilet in the middle of the hall or stick a banana to the wall with tape – people are shriveling. The main thing is to sell.