RHIZOMATIC CONSTRUCTIVISM

The ghost of a revolution with such intensity as the October one will haunt the collective consciousness of our society for a long time to come. It began to be forced out into the spectral space of lost hauntological ideas of the 20th century not only with the fall of the Berlin Wall, but also with the end of the entire cultural and political upheaval that took place in the 20s and its replacement by centralized, culturally reactionary totalitarianism. With the regression of the USSR from a society of experimental philosophers to a degenerate workers' state in every sense, constructivism as the leading direction in art at that time began to be replaced by representational socialist realism.

True revolution always comes with the disconnection of the final cultural-machine unit from the general binary structure. When the root is cut off, the reproduction of symbolism is interrupted. It transformates into an assemblage without an entry point, that is, into a rhizome. It denies unity, denies a static point in space, terrorizes the mind of the fascist logician. In this sense, turning to the classical understanding of art as representation is a cultural counterrevolution. So what about constructivism?

"It arose in the era of primitive cultures, when technology was in the "embryonic state of tools" and economic forms floundered in extreme primitivity.

It passed through the kitchen of the guild artisan of the Middle Ages.

It was artificially fueled by the hypocrisy of bourgeois culture and, finally, hit the mechanical world of our century.

Death to art!" - Alexey Gan, Constructivism

Constructivism refuses to imitate the usual forms as classical art dictates - instead it tears itself out of it, becomes autonomous. The plateau for the reterritorialization of art in its rhizomatic form is the deterritorialized space of industrial society. The coldness and conciseness of the industrial machine have a special place in the works of constructivists. They are sharp, angular, and devoid of aesthetic frills. The constructivist does not try to imitate reality, but instead pragmatically regards forms as tools of production. New art is created by his tools - free from the control structures of the past.

Unfortunately for itself, this kind of art has fallen into the zone where the mind of a quasi-revolutionary draws a clear line. It can dogmatically and directly accept the Communist Manifesto as an instruction manual for the proletariat, but it is incapable of conducting further analysis. Hence comes the useless orthodoxy and socio-cultural absolutism that corrodes one revolution after another.

Cover of the magazine "Technology and Life"