 | This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 January 2019 and 24 February 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ytutu.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignmentbyPrimeBOT (talk) 18:22, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Is it just me, or does this page do an awful job of actually describing Constructivism? It gives a fairly good history and describes certain interactions with other movements and developments, but unless you already know about Constructivism, it would appear to me that this page would be of little help in describing exactly what Constructivism is all about... --patton1138 (talk) 15:13, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The introduction now states:
This definition is completely different from the german WPs and other european ones. Our understanding is that the "construction" in the term is not aimed at some political idea but at the construction of the respective work _out of basic elements_. In terms of graphical works these were for example circles, triangles, squares. Please, have a look into a wider range of literature and consider correcting the introduction. --Bernd-vdb 20:39, 10 November 2007 (UTC) from Berlin, Germany[reply]
this page is primarily on Russian Constructivism, and accordingly stressed the social rather than graphical aspect of 'construction' - see Christina Lodder's book Russian Constructivism for an explanation of the differences between the two - roughly, between Constructivism as understood by Naum Gabo, or as understood by Tatlin, a difference that is actually highlighted in this article. Owenhatherley 15:35, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any sources for the assumption that because it started in Russia around 1919 it would be connected to "social purpose"? Plenty. Read any of the following:
or pretty much any monograph on Rodchenko, Mayakovsky or Tatlin.
All of which go into meticulous detail on exactly this question. On the other hand there's no objection to the introduction being changed to mention the aspect which stressed construction in the purely material sense (as did Gabo, as the article makes very clear) but I do object to any removal of the mention of 'social purpose', as this is an extremely well documented and crucial element of Russian, and frankly, in the case of say, Hans Richter or Hannes Meyer, Karel Teige or Moholy-Nagy, 'western' Constructivism. Owenhatherley 19:06, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
HI, a painter from London here. I concur with the gentleman above. Constructivism is concerned with plastic elements and not with social issues any more than it is concerned with ALL modes of building worlds using simplified, agreed upon signs. In this respect it could be conceived that it would have political implications but not just specifically socialist ones. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.200.113.77 (talk) 17:06, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Constructivism (art). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to trueorfailed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:39, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:53, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 14 March 2023 and 28 April 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): NikkiArt (article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Ceiap (talk) 20:42, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The redirect Constructivism (art has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 3 § Constructivism (art until a consensus is reached. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:47, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
