Cubism, Futurism, and Constructivism

Of the artistic movements that we have studied, Cubism is by far the most confrontational. Cubism challenges not only the form and techniques used to create art, but what art is suppose to do to the viewer and the artist. Like the other movements, Cubism created a new technique that it could be identified with. Whereas the other movements used tiny dots, large thick brush strokes, or mathematically calculated lines, Cubism used the “facet” and rigid geometric shapes to create a certain aesthetic. However, where the other movements generally follow or attempt to mimic three-dimensionality, Cubism intentionally distorts shape, three dimenensionality, and space into something that is almost unrecognizable. A key aspect of Cubism is its aggressive dissonance and ambiguity. Picasso and Braque often took fairly ordinary objects, disassembled them, and then put them back together in a way that was challenging and “structured in a baffling paradoxical system that defines immediate identification”. (209) Cubism did not attempt to create an inevitably false depiction of reality but instead created a representation of their own reality, which was contestable, subjective, and in their opinion was closer to the truth than the former. The viewer is forced to wrestle with the often uncomfortable, difficult subjects and images. Picasso’s use of African influence in his works also aided in their ambiguity, and created an element of foreignness and diverged from what was considered Western art. The cubist’s art did not attempt to explore or depict the world around them, but was a direct challenge to its contentions and standardizations. For example, Braque’s depiction of the brothel not only depicts a brothel in a fairly controversial manner, but also grossly distorts the bodies and faces of the women in the painting. Some of the body parts and directions of the subjects are unidentifiable, and the artist distorts their eyes and faces, making it nearly impossible to rely on the subject’s gaze or eye-line to interpret the meaning of the painting. The viewer must now rely on other aspects of the work, such as the title, to gain some understanding as to the artist’s intention.