Boris Stoyanov
The Orthodoxy of Malevich
Columbia GSAPP
Spring 2024
Professor Nader Vossoughian
Protestantism’s impact on Modernism in Western Europe is a well-studied phenomenon.The work ethic associated with Protestantism is entrenched in the very Ethos of Modernism. The stripped-back, bare-essentials approach to Christianity that Protestantism is so strongly associated with was applied to the architecture, art, and product design of that epoch. Religion had, in these Western European societies, laid the cultural framework which defined the societies these early modernists arose from for centuries. Even if themselves atheistic, their context defined much of their eventual approach to design. Protestantism, emerging during the 16th-century Reformation, is characterized by its stripped-down theological and ecclesiastical structure, a stark contrast to the ritualistic and hierarchical nature of Roman Catholicism, from which the original Protestant schism occurred. This movement emphasized direct access to the scriptures, simplified worship practices, and rejected the opulent art and architecture typical of Catholic settings. These same tropes are imbued in the modernism of the countries which were entrenched in these traditions.
In the same vain as this, the Avant-Garde movements in the USSR, specifically before 1929 (Stalin reverted to an Authoritarian Neo-Classicism after this era) were greatly influenced by Orthodox Christian traditions. Whereas the associated religion in North-Western Europe at the time was largely Protestantism, in the lands of the Soviet Union, Orthodoxy was the predominant religion. The use of past tense was is in the fullest degree, as state-mandated Atheism was instated immediately after the revolution. However, the millennium of Orthodoxy was seeped deep in the Russian psyche, far too deep for one decade of Atheism to hope to overcome. This was a society that has molded entirely by the beliefs of Orthodoxy, and even the most vehement Atheists were massively impacted by its philosophy.
The forms and themes explored by early Soviet Avant-Garde artists and architects were intrinsically linked to themes, morals, and truths present in the Orthodox faith. These were in no small part represented through the cross, although many other Orthodox tropes and symbols are explicitly utilized. Although these symbols are present in a significant portion of early Soviet Avant-Garde art, especially in the work of Wassily Kandinsky, the parallels between Kazimir Malevich’s philosophical underpinnings and those of the Orthodox Church are, in my opinion,stronger than in any other artist of his epoch.
The origins of Orthodox Christianity in Russia trace back to the late 10th century. The conversion of the Grand Prince Vladimir of Kiev in 988 AD is a cornerstone event, often referred to as the “Baptism of Rus”. Prince Vladimir, after sending envoys to various neighboring civilizations to explore different religions, was deeply impressed by the beauty of the Divine Liturgy in Constantinople, at Hagia Sofia. This led to his decision to adopt Eastern Orthodox Christianity from the Byzantine Empire as the state religion.
The formal Christianization of Kievan Rus', initiated by Vladimir’s baptism and his subsequent order for the mass baptism of the Kiev populace, laid the foundation for the widespread acceptance and integration of Orthodox Christianity throughout Russian territories. This event not only unified the diverse Slavic tribes under a single religious and cultural framework, but also aligned Russia culturally and politically with the Eastern Orthodox world.
The Byzantine influence profoundly shaped the religious, artistic, and architectural development of Russia. The Cyrillic script, developed by the missionaries Saint Cyril and Saint Methodius, became essential for religious texts and liturgy, facilitating the spread of Orthodox doctrine and literacy among the Slavic peoples. Through these transformative processes, Orthodoxy became deeply ingrained in Russian identity, influencing its history and culture for centuries to come. The strongest symbolic association to Orthodox Christianity is the Orthodox Cross.
In Orthodox Christianity, the symbolism of the cross is profound and multifaceted, reflecting its theological depth and cultural significance. Unlike the simple Latin cross commonly used in Western Christian traditions, the Orthodox cross is often depicted with three horizontal crossbars. These are the most notable and commonly represented differences, although there are others. The top bar represents the sign that Pontius Pilate nailed above Jesus’ head, inscribed with "INRI" (Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews).
The middle bar- present in all iterations of the cross from all denominations- is the largest and holds the body of Christ, highlighting the centrality of the Crucifixion in Orthodox soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). This bar symbolizes the balance between divinity and humanity- one of the core tenets in Orthodox theology. The presence of Christ's body, often depicted in a realistic style, serves as a stark reminder of His suffering and the sacrificial nature of His death for humanity's redemption.
The most distinctive feature of the Orthodox cross is the slanted lower bar. This bar is said to represent the footrest of Christ during His crucifixion. Its slant is symbolic, with the upper side pointing towards Heaven and the lower side pointing to Hell. This configuration is interpreted as a symbol of the balance between good and evil, and the final judgment, where Christ's descent into Hell and subsequent Resurrection led to the salvation of those who believe in Him. Further complications often include additional writing and symbols, with the Cavalry Cross adorning more complications than any other (Figure 1).
Contrasting this, the Western Christian traditions often utilize a plain cross, focusing on the resurrection more than the crucifixion. The stark, unadorned Latin cross emphasizes the victory of Christ over sin and death, reflecting a theological emphasis on redemption and grace that differs from the Orthodox focus on the mystical and sacrificial aspects of Christianity.
The Orthodox cross, with its complex symbolism and detail, reflects a deeply sacramental worldview where every element of faith and worship is imbued with meaning, pointing towards a mystical participation in the divine life. It is precisely these little details that were exploited by Malevich in his Suprematist works, precisely because they were so loaded in the minds of all Russians.
In the early Soviet Union, Orthodox Christianity, which was integral to Russian identity and culture for centuries, faced severe repression under the atheist Communist regime. The Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 marked the beginning of a systematic campaign to marginalize and suppress religious institutions, including the Orthodox Church, which was seen as a powerful symbol of the old tsarist regime and an antagonist to the new Marxist-Leninist ideology. The Marxist idea of religion serving as the cyanide of the masses was taken in full legal consideration.
The suppression began with the nationalization of church properties and the confiscation of valuables under the pretext of combating famine. Churches, monasteries, and religious artifacts of immense cultural and spiritual significance were either destroyed or repurposed for secular uses. The Soviet government also enacted laws that severely curtailed public expressions of faith. Religious education was banned, and the teaching of atheism became a mandatory part of the school curriculum, aiming to eradicate religious beliefs from the minds of the young.
Clergy and devout laypeople faced intense persecution, including arrests, torture, and execution. Many were sent to gulags where they suffered and were often killed. The state security apparatus, including the notorious NKVD (later the KGB), kept tight surveillance on religious activities, and any form of religious resurgence was quickly and ruthlessly quashed.
In addition to physical suppression, the Soviet regime launched an extensive propaganda campaign against the Orthodox Church (Figure 2). The Church was portrayed as an enemy of the people, backwards and corrupt, in contrast to the supposedly enlightened and scientific Communist ideology. This propaganda was disseminated through all available media, including print, radio, and later television, to instill an anti-religious sentiment among the populace.
Parallel to this mass eradication of religion, the Soviet government before 1929 actively promoted the Avant-Garde. They viewed their governmental system so deeply revolutionary, and were so critical of anything considered bourgeoise, that a new visual language had to be constructed to communicate their ideals- one free of the weight of history and from tyranny. For this, all cultural vernacular was immediately rejected, and there became something akin to an arms race between the artists and architects of the time for who could mint the visual language of this new Union. To be clear- there was already an Avant-Garde movement brewing in Russia for quite some time. The shift is that is became coopted by the party, actively promoted at every turn.
From this rose to prominence the likes of Kandinsky, El Lissitzky, Tatlin, Chernikov, Malevich himself, and many others. Along with them, in this short window really beginning in 1920, arose all their corresponding artistic movements, including Constructivism, Suprematism, Cubo-Futurism, and Za-um. This narrow window of only a decade of innovation yielded some of the most influential works in modern architectural and art history, such was the acceleration of experimentation.
Unfortunately, the speed of acceleration in this new artistic realm coincided exactly with the swift destruction of that which had been entrenched in the hearts and souls of a people for a millennium. What does a society do for spiritualism once the source has been destroyed? One could not possibly hope to create a tabula rosa from something so ingrained, so essential. Despite their best efforts, the Soviets proved this to be an impossibility. After all the persecution and propaganda, three generations of communism did not shake this strong and deep set belief. There was a yearning, almost primal desire for spiritual fulfillment amongst the people- this is not unique to the Russians, rather a common thread through all humanity.
Born in 1879 in Kyiv, within the milieu of the Russian Empire, Malevich was raised in a setting where Orthodox Christian traditions were a pervasive aspect of daily life. This upbringing in a devoutly religious family introduced him to a world where religious rituals and the visual culture of icons were commonplace. These icons, characterized by their vivid symbolism and spiritual abstraction, undoubtedly left a mark on his young mind.
Orthodox Christianity's abstract representations of the divine and its use of a non-naturalistic, spiritual aesthetic can be traced in the evolution of Malevich’s work, particularly in his movement towards Suprematism. This echoes the Orthodox icon’s emphasis on spiritual essence over realistic depiction. Thus, Malevich's Orthodox upbringing not only shaped his ethical and philosophical worldview but also deeply informed his revolutionary approach to modern art, where he sought to express higher spiritual realities transcending the material world.I will reemphasize this- the primary aim of both Orthodox teachings and Suprematism is the Transcendence over the material.
The icons, with their flat planes and disregard for naturalistic representation, offered a visual precedent for Malevich's Suprematist compositions, which similarly eschewed realistic portrayal in favor of spiritual expression. This foundation is evident in works like his famous Black Square, which can be seen as an abstract, modern reinterpretation of the profound simplicity and the profound depth found in Orthodox iconography. Thus, the spiritual and aesthetic currents of Orthodoxy were integral to shaping the perspectives and sensibilities of the young Malevich, steering his artistic journey towards abstraction.
The Black Square is, as Malevich described it in 1922, the “embryo of all possibilities”.This very specific wording is the most accurate translation. This quote, in its original Russian, almost identical to the wording of Genesis in Old Church Slavonic. This similarity is too close to be considered coincidental.
Suprematism is based on this notion of “nonobjectiveness”, which is essentially the notion that world, when boiled down to its base components, is nothing but sensation. Every “object” that we interface with only interacts with us through the medium of our sensations, otherwise it might as well not exist. Through this mental framework, one can begin to transcend the material, Malevich argued.
Malevich imagines Black Square as the ultimate abstraction. In the context of oil paint and canvas, a square in a square is simplest move one could make while still making a move.From this one move, one could imagine the Black Square growing, splitting, shifting, rotating, accelerating, intersecting, etc. It is the basis for all creation. It is Genesis.
It was also the basis of Malevich’s 1915 0, 10 Exhibition, in which Malevich explores these manipulations (Figure 4).
There is an obvious question to be begged from Malevich here, which we can see more in his writings even that in his art, because it requires two or three further degrees of abstraction from his already incredibly abstract art.
Suprematism is advocating that in the world, there is “nothing but sensation”. That is the fundamental claim. However, in a world of “nonobjectiveness” (that is, a world stripped away from anything material whatsoever), what is there to sense? Without the material as a medium through which to experience, how exactly does one experience? What can one possibly experience as an output if there is no input? In which manner, if there is no external material stimulation? Even the intrinsic is informed, in a large degree, by the external. To admit that there is external stimulation kills the entire notion of nonobjectiveness.
Kazimir Malevich's 1922 book "God is Not Cast Down" articulates his philosophical and theoretical ideas on these questions, particularly in relation to art and spirituality. Written during the period when Malevich was deeply engaged with abstract and avant-garde art, this book explores his thoughts on the role of art and the artist in transcending the material world and connecting with spiritual truths.
Malevich delves into the idea that true art transcends the physical and reaches into the realm of the spiritual, an approach that aligns with his creation of Suprematism. Malevich’s writings often discuss how the artist can access and represent spiritual realities through the medium of abstract forms, and he argues that these forms, free from the burden of representing the physical world, can better express the ineffable qualities of human experience and spiritual reality. "God is Not Cast Down" extends these ideas, suggesting that despite the materialist focus of contemporary society, the divine or the spiritual is not diminished.
The title itself implies a defiance against the nihilism that can come with overly materialistic viewpoints, affirming the existence and relevance of the spiritual or divine in the modern world. This work is significant not only for its insight into Malevich’s art but also for its contribution to the broader discourse on art and spirituality in the 20th century.
The point is that, ultimately, Malevich’s argument falls apart entirely and immediately when analyzed through the lens of Atheism. Malevich’s ideal could never manifest in a lack of a spiritual framework. The ideas outlined in suprematism predispose the necessity of a belief in a higher power, and this necessity was expressed by Malevich through the borrowing of Orthodox symbol. The context in which Black Square was originally presented explicitly appropriates the common Orthodox icon corner and perverts it to signify the creation of a new spirituality(Figures 4 and 5). Malevich’s Black Square takes the place of Mother Mary in the corner, which is fitting representationally. Much like Malevich intended Black Square to be, Mary too is the Genesis of all creation in the Orthodox view. Mary is explicitly and almost exclusively referred to as “Богородица“ in all Slavic Orthodox languages, which directly translates to “God-birther”.This is an important distinction to most other forms of Christianity, where Mary is believed to be the Birther of the Son, in the context of the Holy Trinity. This has been a contested point of theological debate since the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. As Mary is the birther of God directly, she is also the birther of all creation. Mary herself is embolic of Genesis- she is the physical manifestation of the origin of the world through an Orthodox lens. In Suprematism, the ultimate abstraction, embodied by Black Square, takes on the same poetics. Icons of saints surround the icons of Mary and Christ in a traditional icon corner. Because all saints are of God, in service to God, and derivatives of aspects of the ideals of God, it is fitting that the placements of Malevich’s iterations and manipulations surrounding Black Square- allowing the ideas of creation to manifest, grow, and shrift- mirror traditional Orthodox iconography. As “abstract” and “nonobjective” as Malevich fancied himself, he was a masterful user of symbol.
To further exacerbate this connection, Malevich himself referred to Black Square as“Holy” in his personal writings- which he never intended to be published, likely because they would have landed him in a gulag. Additionally, in his 1915 0, 10 Exhibition, there are signs at the bottom which read “СУПРЕМАТИЗМ ЖИВОПИСИ”, which directly translates to “SUPREMATIST LIVING DRAWINGS”. “Living drawings” is a colloquial term for the frescos adorning Orthodox Churches. All of this indicates that Malevich was very intentional with all his decisions coopting the traditional spiritual symbols into Suprematism.
This is even further reinforced through his fixation of painting crosses. These crosses were not a phase of his artistic career, as Suprematism would prove to be. Rather, this symbol proliferates all epochs of his work, with examples spanning all four decades of Malevich’s production. Malevich seemed to use the form of the cross as a medium through which he himself grappled with the ideas of God, and God’s role in a Godless society.
Each of the hundreds of crosses Malevich has drawn is rich with the symbolism not only associated with the complications of an Orthodox cross, but makes further references still to icons, liturgical hierarchies, and the interplay between a cross, a circle, and a triangle. Malevich was familiar with the liturgical hierarchies. He nearly attended Clerical school at age 16, stopping short only because of a familial emergency. Clerical school was not a traditional route, and involved a highly selective process from the side of the Clergy. Malevich was at the very least familiar, and likely intimate, of the structure within the church.
The interplay between the forms of the cross, circle, and triangle are a uniquely Orthodox fascination. The Cyrillic script was preceded by the Glagolitic script, created by Saint Cyril and Saint Methodius. Whereas the Cyrillic script borrows a great deal from both the Greek and Latin characters, the Glagolitic script was based entirely upon the interplay of the three aforementioned symbols. The cross is obvious in what it represents. The triangle is representative of the Holy Trinity. The circle represents the infinity and perfection of God- both He and a circle have no beginning or end, resulting in an omnipotent perfection of sorts. All three of these forms are taken to represent different ideas about God, or are different philosophical iterations of God, depending on interpretation. The Glagolitic script was developed for the sole purpose of the translation of the Bible to a Slavic vernacular, and its creators felt that a Holy script ought to be of a sort of meta-Holiness, where each character is entrenched with meaning far beyond just the sound it represents. The interplay of the three forms in each character was carefully crafted by Saint Cyril and Saint Methodius, and each character therefore had a double, if not triple meaning- all due to the forms used and their interrelationship.
Almost all representations of the cross by Malevich, whether developed or sketched,emphasized its importance through an interplay of triangles, circles, or fragments of both.Mystical Suprematism, originally conceived of in 1918, and fully painted in 1922, is perhaps the most obvious example of the interplay of the aforementioned forms (Figure 6). The primary move of this composition is a massive red cross, slightly askew to the right, in the center of the composition. Behind it, an even more askew black circle takes on the secondary position. Most subsidiary to the primary gesture are a series of diagonals near the bottom of the composition, suspiciously angled just as the lower bar of an Orthodox cross. Their mutual interplay creates a sort of triangulation at the bottom, although not explicit, as in other compositions by Malevich.
The religious connotations seem incredibly strong in this piece. To reiterate, the name of the piece is Mystical Suprematism, and the very forms utilized by Malevich bear an incredibly striking resemblance to those found in the Orthodox cross. Therefore, it is quite intriguing that most sources are almost unanimously adamant to dismiss this connection. Despite this trend, even the most reluctant of sources to engage with Malevich’s art on a Theological level cede,“Without going as far as associating (Malevich's) Suprematist work with some sort of spiritualistic iconography… one cannot altogether ignore the fact that his conjunction of circular or elliptical shapes with cruciform figures is indeed bound up with a cosmic discourse resting on archetypal symbols.”
The interplay specifically in Mystical Suprematism involves primarily the cross and the circle. The circle is the omnipresence of God backing the body of Christ. In a way, it reinforces the belief that Jesus is both God and Son of God. The circle is supporting the human body represented by the cross, yet is also at its very core and at the same level. I believe this painting to be even more powerful when read perspectivally. The circle is in fact centered to the intersection of the cross if one were to interpret the subsidiary diagonal moves at the bottom of the composition as ground, this pseudo-perspectival reading becomes more evident. Almost like an optical illusion, these subsidiary diagonals both ground the cross, yet simultaneously make it feel as if floating.
The distinction in color here is also of the utmost importance. Red is indicative of the Earthly, and black of the heavenly. This further reinforces the reading of subsidiary diagonals as ground in this work.
Perhaps even more spiritually and philosophically charged is Suprematism of the Spirit, which Malevich painted in 1920 (Figure 7). This work is more in line with the philosophical backing of Black Square than the traditional interplay of cross, circle, and triangle. This composition has what appears to be an obviously Orthodox cross with minor complications. The slanted lower bar is painted red, and there is a secondary vertical member, painted in an off-white, reinforcing the primary gesture of the vertical direction of the cross. There is a white square imposed atop this composition, obscuring the intersections of the crucifix form. The only intersection we are left with is that of the red diagonal with the two vertical moves.
The presence and reference of Black Square is substantial in this piece. Black Square is the genesis of all, it is Mary. Mary is both made by God, and she births God, according to the Orthodox faith. She is derived from him, as the black square is derived and subsidiary to the white square that encompasses it. It can be said that the white around the black square in Black Square must represent the chaos from which order was derived- the Genesis of the manifestation of Genesis. If Mary is the black square, God must be the white square from which the black square is derived. Here, a sort of mandala can begin to take place. God begets Mary, and Mary begets God. However, God clearly came first and began the cycle. He creates the outer bounds of the white which no black can exist outside of. An infinite number of permutations can exist internally, but none can externally. So it can be said that ultimately, the white square a representation of God in the canon of Malevich’s Suprematism.
God is on the cross. More specifically, it can be argued that it is most akin to the Holy Spirit, rather than the Father or the Son, who is on the cross. The Father and the Son would both be on the inner rungs of this imagined mandala, existing simultaneously, depending on perception. But the Holy Spirit of the Trinity is the omnipotent force, the one responsible for the initial Genesis. Here, the symbol of the Holy Spirit, one of Malevich’s own creation, is imposed upon the manifestation of the Son, and in place of the Son. This reinforces the Orthodox hierarchy that the distinct Beings of the Trinity are one in the same. The Spirit is also the Son. The Son is also the Father. And the Father is also the Spirit. This interpretation can be extended back to Mystical Suprematism, where the Father is imposed upon the Son, again reinforcing this notion of the three distinct Beings as one in the same.
Malevich’s works are not a rejection of Orthodoxy, rather, a reinterpretation. In a society which abandons its cultural and spiritual roots, this now forbidden yearning is expressed in whichever manner the individual feels is most akin to transcendent. In Malevich’s case, art was both his outlet and his grounds for exploration. Art became his mechanism through which to explore, consciously or otherwise, the faith which had been so thoroughly imbued in his culture for a millennium. Art became the new iconography, which Orthodoxy is so strongly associated with. Art became the philosophical backing which affirmed the very lessons thought in Orthodoxy. Suprematism was not exactly a subversion to the Soviet authorities- but it was pretty close to it. Malevich presents us with an almost guerilla Christianity through his work. The Avant Garde promoted by the Soviet authorities sought to supplant the Church, but it instead afforded fertile grounds for a defiant exploration of its virtues right under their noses.