Page 257 - Uros Todorovic Byzantine Painting Contemporary Eyes

Chapter V
Thus, we argue that it was the peculiar process of reinventing the Russian icono- graphic tradition as well as the aesthetics of Late Byzantine painting that drastically in- fluenced the ultimate formation of Malevich’s abstract expression. It is worth noting that in spite of reproving the Futurists for being interested in the external appearance of natural objects or even cultural artifacts, Malevich approved of the way the Futurists have succeeded through their depiction of movement, in destroying the “wholeness of things.”13
That said, if we take into consideration the second of the four basic aspects of the aes- thetics of Byzantine art formulated by Gervase Mathew, in particular, the fact that the Byzantines developed “an essentially mathematical approach to beauty, which led to an emphasis not only on exact symmetry but on the eurhythmos and balanced movements,”14 the relationship between Malevich’s rather sudden progress towards abstraction and the aesthetic principles of Late Byzantine painting becomes theoretically plausible. For ex- ample, in his work The Knife Grinder: Principle of Flickering completed in 1913 (image 4), Malevich places the emphasis on rhythmical and balanced movement through a mathe- matical-like and geometric fragmentation of the human figure. Certainly, in this work, through the particularly cinematic depiction of motion the impact of Futurism on Ma- levich’s artistic practice and development is strongly felt, but simultaneously, a sense of Byzantine aesthetics is inconspicuously retained.
Before we proceed with our next case-study, we note that the 15th century icon of The Shroud of the Virgin which we have discussed earlier in relation to Malevich’s work, was one of the favorite and often repeated themes of the icon painters of the Novgorod school.15 This iconographical theme, as also observed by Angelina Smirnova, depicts the appearance of the Virgin as well as the ideal image of Orthodoxy: a heavenly temple, Heavenly Jerusalem, where everyone stands in front of the Virgin while She prays to Christ for all.16 The various versions and reproductions of this theme are often seen in Russian churches as well as private houses. Therefore, this theme is one of those which are deeply embedded within the Russian religious consciousness.
We are of the view that the fact that Malevich had a predilection for Byzantine icono- graphical stereotypes would not in itself constitute a phenomenon of major significance had he not reinvented these archetypal images according to his originality, which, con-
13 John Golding, Paths to the Absolute: Mondrian, Malevich, Kandinsky, Pollock, Newman, Rothko and Still (Thames & Hudson, 2000), 60.
14 Gervase Mathew, Byzantine Aesthetics (London: John Murray, 1963), 1.
15 Jevsjejeva Lilija, Natalija Komaško, Mihail Krasilin, Luka Golovkov, Jelena Ostašenko, Olga Popova, Angelina Smirnova, Irina Javzikova i Ana Jakovljeva. Istorija Ikonopisa od VI do XX Veka. (Beograd: Akademija SPC za Umetnost i Konservaciju, 2007), 151.
16 Ibid., 152.
255