Soviet Graphics Arts
Exhibitions Review
Jonathan Mekinda


The graphic arts of the early Soviet Union have long been cele-
brated in western design circles. Although scholars have paid vary-
ing degrees of attention to the difficult history of the Communist
regime, Soviet artists, architects, and designers such as El Lissitzky,
Kazimir Malevich, and Vladimir Tatlin are consistently featured in
histories of modern design both for their innovative aesthetics
and for their efforts to put their work at the service of the new
regime. In this telling, the details of the ideology that inspired these
designers matters less than their profound faith that their work
could serve that ideology effectively. As such, Soviet design is
celebrated not only because of its avant-garde formal qualities, but
also because of its exemplary figures’ deep commitment to trans-
forming everyday life. From this point of view, Soviet design offers
a model of practice as well as aesthetic inspiration for designers
working today.

For those interested in the history of modern art, architec-
ture, and design, the graphic arts of the Soviet Union are also
notable because they demonstrate with particular power the com-
plicated process by which the international trends of modernism
were shaped by local conditions and joined with regional tradi-
tions as they spread across Europe. Designers working in the
Soviet Union explicitly aimed to craft a new Soviet identity
through their work. As the long debate over the appropriate
“style” for Communist art wel il ustrates, however, the nature of
that identity was vigorously contested, with the debate focusing in
large part on the proper balance between native traditions and
modern techniques imported from abroad. While the imposition
of Socialist Realism under Stalin established some specific
guidelines, this question continued to be debated throughout
the twentieth century as the regime itself evolved.

Three exhibitions in the Chicago area recently brought these
aspects of Soviet design powerfully to light: “Tango with Cows:
Book Art of the Russian Avant-Garde, 1910-1917” (September 23,
2011–December 11, 2011) and “Views and Re-Views: Soviet Political
Posters and Cartoons” (September 20, 2011–December 4, 2011) both
© 2012 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
78
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 4 Autumn 2012

---

Figure 1
“Tango with Cows: Book Art of the Russian
Avant-Garde, 1910-1917.” Courtesy of Block
Museum of Art, Northwestern University.
at the Mary and Leigh Block Museum at Northwestern University
in Evanston, IL, and “Vision and Communism” (September 29,
2011–January 22, 2012) at the Smart Museum at the University of
Chicago. Spanning the twentieth century, these exhibitions offered
an expansive sampling of graphic art that il uminated the complex
relationship between Russian and Soviet designers and the interna-
tional avant-garde and invited viewers to think more deeply about
the relationship between design and ideology. In each case, the
exhibitions not only presented a compel ing selection of work, but
also aimed to explain how these works embody traditions of
making and ways of seeing distinct to Russian and Soviet cultures.
This ambition is notable precisely because, under the label of pro-
paganda, Soviet design is so often removed from the broader visual
culture in which it operated and instead celebrated purely for its
formal characteristics. Although they were quite uneven in their
intellectual framing, together these three exhibitions provided a
much-needed and insightful examination of several key aspects of
Soviet design culture.
Tango with Cows: Book Art of the Russian Avant-Garde,
1910-1917
A relatively compact exhibition, contained in a single small room,
“Tango with Cows: Book Art of the Russian Avant-Garde, 1910-
1917” presented an elegant selection of books, magazines, and other
printed matter produced in the years leading up to the Russian
revolution (see Figure 1). With more than 50 works on display,
including pieces by such renowned artists as Natalia Goncharova,
Kazimir Malevich, and Vladimir Mayakovsky, as well as figures
lesser known outside Russia, such as Alexei Kruchenykh and Olga
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 4 Autumn 2012
79

---

Rozanova, the exhibition offered a tightly focused and penetrating
glimpse into avant-garde circles in pre-revolutionary Russia. In par-
ticular, the exhibition effectively illustrated Russian artists’ intimate
awareness of the broader European discourse on modern art and
design and their efforts to devise avant-garde practices that would
be both rooted in their native Slavic culture and at the same time
would overthrow the routines of contemporary life.

“Tango with Cows” originated at the Getty Research Insti-
tute, where it was curated by Nancy Perlof , Associate Curator of
Modern and Contemporary Collections. At the Block Museum, the
works were displayed both on the wall and in free-standing
vitrines, with little wall text aside from a brief introductory para-
graph. To allow the viewers to engage the material more fully, the
exhibition included numerous facsimiles that visitors could page
through, as well as several computer terminals and “sound sticks,”
which played recordings of the works being read aloud.1 This range
of display techniques was very successful and at least partially sur-
mounted the differences in language and experience that often
make such material difficult to engage. The sound sticks were espe-
cially effective in this regard, as they made manifest the fact that
much of the material in the exhibition was intended to be presented
publicly rather than studied quietly at home.

Through its content, the show vividly conveyed how con-
nected Russian artists were to the European avant-garde in the
years before World War I, even as they were committed to develop-
ing a distinctive Russian modernism via the selective revival and
appropriation of Slavic culture. These two conceptual forces,
which sometimes aligned neatly and at other times worked in
opposition to one another, could be seen clearly in the most com-
pel ing works in the exhibition, such as Explodity (1913), a col abor-
ative book project lead by Alexei Kruchenykh with work by
Kazimir Malevich, Natalia Goncharova, Nikolai Kulbin, and Olga
Rozanova; Victory over the Sun (1913), a book written by Velimir
Khlebnikov with illustrations by Kazimir Malevich, Alexei
Kruchenykh, David Burliuk, and Mikhail Matiushin; and Tango
with Cows (1914), a book by Vasily Kamensky with il ustrations by
David and Vladimir Burliuk.

This last work, from which the name of the exhibition was
taken, presents a series of short free-word poems, which the
authors called “ferro-concrete poems,” devoted to various modern
subjects such as the cabaret and airplanes. The poems are each laid
out in a different arrangement inspired by Futurist typography,
and the volume as a whole is printed on wallpaper. It also includes
several lithographic prints that combine irregular abstract composi-
1 Much of the digital material from
the exhibition is still available on a
tions with a crude, figural quality, reminiscent of traditional
website hosted by the Getty Research
popular prints. It is through works such as this that exhibition
Institute: http://www.getty.edu/art/
introduced visitors to the complex and sometimes uneven synthesis
exhibitions/tango_with_cows/
(accessed June 19, 2012).
80
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 4 Autumn 2012

---

Figure 2
of international trends and local culture that was the aim of the
“Views and Re-Views: Soviet Political Posters
Russian avant-garde in the days before WWI. Although narrowly
and Cartoons.” Courtesy of Block Museum of
focused, the exhibition offered a clear, concise, and engaging intro-
Art, Northwestern University.
duction to the subject.
Views and Re-Views: Soviet Political Posters and Cartoons
On display at the same time at the Block Museum was “Views and
Re-Views: Soviet Political Posters and Cartoons,” a much larger
exhibition in both size and scope (see Figure 2). Organized by
Jo-Ann Conklin, Director of the David Winton Bell Gallery, and
Abbott Gleason, Professor Emeritus of History, the exhibition origi-
nated at the David Winton Bell Gallery at Brown University. In its
manifestation at the Block, the exhibition presented approximately
110 works spanning almost the entire history of the Soviet Union;
represented were a number of well-known artists and designers,
including Viktor Deni, Gustav Klutsis, and Victor Koretsky. As the
title suggests, the aim of the exhibition was to reevaluate Soviet
poster design in light of the historical distance separating the pres-
ent day from the collapse of the regime in 1989. In this effort, the
exhibition was of mixed success. By virtue of its broad chronologi-
cal scope, the exhibition presented some important Russian prece-
dents for Soviet designers and gave visitors a sense of their
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 4 Autumn 2012
81

---

evolving concerns—both aesthetic and political. The exhibition
failed, however, to address in any depth how the posters were used
and viewed within the Soviet Union.

“Views and Re-Views” was set almost entirely in a single
large room divided with several three-quarter height walls. Given
that all of the works were hung for display, this design was obvi-
ously a practical requirement, but the curators also used the walls
to define a number of smaller areas devoted to specific themes
within the chronological structure of the exhibition. At the entrance,
for example, viewers confronted a section exploring the influence of
lubki, traditional Russian popular woodcut prints portraying both
religious imagery and scenes addressing contemporary political
and social mores. Other areas considered themes such as “Women
Artists and Workers” and “Cults of Leadership.” In addition to
introducing particular thematic concerns, these areas effectively
disrupted the otherwise continuous walls of the gallery to demar-
cate zones more amenable to looking closely at the posters. This
was done to particular effect for works such as “We Will Repay the
Country’s Coal Debt” (1930) by Gustav Klutsis, and “Workers of
the World, Unite! For a World-Wide October!” (1932) by Nikolai
Dolgorukov. The presentation of these works in the exhibition
made clear their tremendous power—both as graphic compositions
and as images of the world that do not simply re-present reality to
the viewer but re-define it.

Confronting the power of these posters reveals the failure of
the exhibition to engage the matter of how these works functioned
in their own time. This failure is especial y notable given that, in the
American context, these posters are too often dismissed as propa-
ganda—a label that serves effectively to sever their aesthetic quali-
ties from their political content. The shortcomings of the American
notion of propaganda for explaining how these posters would have
operated within Soviet culture are well illustrated by works such as
“Capitalism Devours Everything” (ca. 1920) by Dimitri Moor and
“Get Him Out of Vietnam!” (1973) by Alexander Zhitomirsky. Nei-
ther the remarkable sparseness of form, powerful use of line, and
sophisticated play of shapes of Moor’s work, nor the harsh juxtapo-
sition of imagery in Zhitomirsky’s photo-collages can be separated
from the critical ideological impulse of these works. Indeed, it is
impossible not to be caught up in the powerful sense of opposition
and conflict that powered Communism as both a political and a
social project when viewing these works.

Unfortunately, the exhibition did not explore the broader
visual culture that determined how these works would have been
seen at the time they were made, nor how their content would have
been understood within Soviet culture. Without addressing these
questions, “Views and Re-Views” was limited in its impact.
82
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 4 Autumn 2012

---

Figure 3
Although the exhibition afforded the opportunity to see a wonder-
“Vision and Communism.” Photo by Michael
ful selection of work and offered visitors a real taste of the remark-
Tropea. Courtesy of Smart Museum of Art,
able power of much Soviet design, it only hinted at the very
The University of Chicago.
different world in which the posters and cartoons were actually
produced and disseminated. As a result, visitors were left to see the
work through contemporary terms far removed from their original
context. In this sense, the curator’s ambition for historical distance
was perhaps too successful.
Vision and Communism
2 “Press Release: Vision and Communism”
It is precisely this issue of different ways of seeing that was
(Smart Museum of Art, The University
of Chicago, 2011). This conception
taken up by “Vision and Communism” at the Smart Museum at
likely reflected the unusual composi-
the University of Chicago—the most provocative and ambitious
tion of the large curatorial team, which
of the three exhibitions (see Figure 3). Designed to “emphasize
comprised Robert Bird, Associate
the experiential over the informational,” the exhibition gave visi-
Professor in the departments of Slavic
Languages and Literatures and Cinema
tors an immersive introduction to the visual culture of the Soviet
and Media Studies at the University of
Union.2 Focused on the posters of Viktor Koretsky, the exhibition
Chicago; Christopher Heuer, Assistant
included more than 80 of his works along with a smal number of
Professor in the Department of Art and
other pieces, including films and songs by Aleksander Medvedkin,
Archaeology at Princeton University;
Matthew Jesse Jackson, Associate
Chris Marker, and a number of South African singers and
Professor in the departments of Art
political leaders. (The films were screened outside the exhibition
History and Visual Arts at the University
while the songs and other audio recordings were played continu-
of Chicago; Tumelo Mosaka, Curator of
ously within the exhibition space.) This eclectic combination of
Contemporary Art at the Krannert Art
Museum at the University of Illinois at
material was intended to articulate the critical power of Koretsky’s
Urbana-Champaign; and Stephanie Smith
work in social terms rather than artistic ones, just as the exhibition
and Richard Born, Chief Curator and
Senior Curator, respectively, at the Smart
Museum of Art at University of Chicago.
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 4 Autumn 2012
83

---

itself aimed to construct an environment through which visitors
would engage the work on display not from outside Soviet visual
culture, but from within it by sharing Koretsky’s way of seeing
the world.

This aim was hinted at by quotations from Alexander
Solzhenitsyn and Nelson Mandela that greeted visitors at the
entrances to the exhibition. The first, from Solzhenitsyn, repeated
the conventional critique of Communism as a mortal danger to
freedom, while the second, from Mandela, offered a dramatical y
different point of view, announcing that in Africa, the Soviet
Union—and not the United States—was celebrated for its support
of freedom.3 The ambition to open visitors to the critical impulse of
Koretsky’s vision was also made manifest in the design of the exhi-
bition, which comprised a series of relatively compact rooms
arranged in an S-shaped path. The walls of these rooms were
painted shades of dark gray and brown that, when combined with
the low light necessitated by such fragile works, created a somber
mood that matched the dark and violent subject matter of most of
the posters. At the center of the exhibition was a small room with a
dense array of posters and speakers playing South African free-
dom music, which could be heard throughout the exhibition and
heightened the mood, fraught with tension.

Although the exhibition nearly spanned Koretsky’s entire
career, most of the work dated from the 1960s and 1970s and cri-
tiqued American policies or celebrated the South African struggle
for freedom ongoing during those years. In addition to the posters,
3 “For many decades, communists were
the exhibition included original maquettes and photographs that
the only political group in South Africa
Koretsky prepared as he worked toward his final design.4 Among
who were prepared to treat Africans
as human beings and their equals; who
the most compelling works in the exhibition were America’s Shame
were prepared to eat with us, talk with
(1968) and Africa Fights, Africa Will Win (1971). These posters and
us, live with us, and work with us. They
the related photographs and maquettes illustrate Koretsky’s inten-
were the only political group which was
sive process of building up his imagery through photographs of
prepared to work with the Africans for
the attainment of political rights and a
models, collages of those photographs, and lush hand illustrations
stake in society. Because of this, there
to add color and frame the subject more powerfully. They also
are many Africans who, today, tend
make explicit the intimate connection between aesthetic and ideo-
to equate freedom with communism.”
logical concerns in Koretsky’s work and, when seen in person, offer
Nelson Mandela, quoted at “Vision
and Communism” and in Robert Bird,
a palpable sense of the rage and energy that motivated it.
Christopher P. Heuer, Matthew Jesse

Moreover, these two works il ustrate the distinctive intel ec-
Jackson, Tumelo Mosaka, and Stephanie
tual structure of the exhibition, which effectively introduced visi-
Smith, eds., Vision and Communism:
tors to what in the accompanying catalogue the curators called
Viktor Koretsky and Dissident Public
Visual Culture (New York and London:
“dissident public visual culture.” Although Koretsky’s critique of
The New Press, 2011), vii.
American imperialism at home and abroad might be quickly dis-
4 The exhibition’s interest in the process
missed as propaganda, his critique of African colonialism cannot
of design is supplemented by a small
exhibition adjacent to “Vision and
be so easily ignored. By presenting both of these works within one
Communism,” titled “Process and Artistry
exhibition, the curators exposed the ideological link connecting
in the Soviet Vanguard.” This supple-
mental exhibition presents a compact
collection of works illustrating Koretsky’s
working process in greater detail.
84
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 4 Autumn 2012

---

the various struggles for civil rights around the world and carried
visitors into Koretsky’s way of seeing those struggles. Although
some visitors undoubtedly were not caught up by this way of pre-
senting Koretsky’s work, the exhibition at least cal ed into question
the notion of propaganda and made palpable the different way of
seeing the world that inspired these posters and determined how
and where they were originally seen. In this way, “Vision and
Communism” was a success, raising compel ing questions about
how vision itself is structured by ideology and in turn made man-
ifest in design.

With “Tango with Cows,” “Views and Re-Views,” and
“Vision and Communism,” visitors were afforded a rare opportu-
nity to see first-hand an expansive sample of Russian and Soviet
graphic arts, from books and cartoons to prints and posters. The
exhibitions also opened up important questions about this mate-
rial and, in the case of “Vision and Communism,” proposed new
ways of approaching it. As such, these exhibitions offer several
intriguing models for the critical exploration of modern design
more broadly. Indeed, from the tension between local ambitions
and international imperatives manifest in pre-Revolutionary Rus-
sian book arts to the complex relationship between design and ide-
ology brought to the fore in Soviet posters, the issues raised by
these exhibitions are central to understanding not only Soviet
design but also the development of modern design across Europe
and America. Despite their various shortcomings, together “Tango
with Cows,” “Views and Re-Views,” and “Vision and Commu-
nism” offered an engaging, probing, and provocative survey of
Russian and Soviet graphic arts of the twentieth century.
DesignIssues: Volume 28, Number 4 Autumn 2012
85

---