I. A. Puni as an Art Critic (Based on the Texts from 1914–1919)

Abstract

This study examines the artistic and critical activity of I. A. Puni, a Russian avant-garde master and organiser of futurist exhibitions in the framework of his first creative period, preceding emigration. The opportunity to look from a historical distance at the time of the emergence of Russian avant-garde from the inside makes the study relevant. The researchers focus on valuable information about the time, the worldview of a curator/artist/critic (I. A. Puni being all of them) and the “pain” points of art. The conclusions are based on the multidimensional textual material (critical articles, letters, lecture materials), which helps immerse in the context of artistic life in Petrograd and Vitebsk at the beginning of the century. Using structural and semiotic analysis, the authors draw parallels with I. A. Puni’s painting and curatorial experience. Puni’s focus is on the theoretical aspects of the new art that concerned him as an artist. His texts raise polemical questions about the importance of “material culture”, the role of the artist, futurism, and curatorship. In an era dominated by production art and the principles of utilitarianism, Puni emphasises the value of the artist’s individuality, their understanding of aesthetic tasks, and the intellectual content of the visual narrative. For Puni, the beauty of art lies in its uselessness for life: it is utilitarian production that influences art, not the other way around. Through coloured materiality, peculiarities of composition and form, the artist emphasises the essence and the inner construction of the depicted object. The study notes the special stylistics of Puni’s texts, based on the neutrality of tone, reasoned judgments, which was not typical of theorists in the era of “poster language”. The artist’s curatorial activity, manifested by the landmark exhibitions “Tram B” and “0.10”, gives an example of a “critic in action”. The materials analysed show the complexity of the choice of objects capable of driving the narrative and the importance of one’s own position in the aspect of the rivalry between K. S. Malevich and V. E. Tatlin.