---

Main differentiating characteristics of Analytical Art

What differs Analytical Art from all the preceding art forms is the move from existing imagery to inventing new shapes, form-creating with the involvement of subconsciousness. This actually changes the function of painting.

“Old” function is to picture the existing reality; “New” function is to present the inner world of the author (not even known by him/her).

Analytical Art teaches its students a secure and productive way to overcome the barrier of consciousness (without being insane, a drug addict or alcoholic).

Analytical Art combines principles of abstractionism and figurativity, which never comes across in any other art school.

“Free-forming” drawing is a complete contradiction to the academic drawing.

This is an active, not a passive process (as opposed to drawing from life and copying it).

---

 

Differences in:       Aesthetics    |     Teaching    |   Thinking (the most important)

The main specifics of Filonov’s aesthetics

1. Anti-Impressionism! From the surface, external illusions are directed to the inner essence of processes.

2. Tension of painting structure. The highest visual concentration of shapes and content.

3. An attack on the viewer. Aggressiveness of visual means, deformations, visual riddles, contrast colors, estrangements – all of these are aimed at capturing the viewer’s attention.

Pavel Filonov was convinced that there are no talented individuals, that everybody can be a master and was willing to offer his time and efforts.The problem with that was that while being a great artist, Filonov tried to convince his pupils that he was on higher plane than them only thanks to his experience. He was in favor of students and against pride, since snobbery was the root of many evil deeds.

---

Teaching difference

1. Mastering of the technique, “technology” of Filonov’s painting.

Teaching took place in basically one session. Filonov or someone of the group leaders inculcated the others with “madeness”, explained the difference between made line, the shape, made at every point, made color, tensely processed on the edges, and the rest – in free improvisation.

2. Training of the mind, freeing of the constrained imagination.

Next, the most important step was the training of mobility, freedom of the imagination. One had to learn to think, analyze, juxtapose and evolve ideas based on many meanings. Everything depended on sensitivity, intuition, creative initiative of the student. Those who had mastered this system individually were named “Masters”.

3. The concluding work was conducted in realistic, primitivist or abstract manner. The artists worked in different genres. Sketches were prohibited, because it was the artwork that should have dictated the direction of the conclusion!

Pavel Filonov tried to show his students the senselessness of ordinary composing. He drew a head on paper. Then he cut it into several pieces, and then repositioned them into something different, yet interesting. He didn’t take one thing into consideration: thanks to his own talent he cut the picture perfectly to make another composition, but students could not always come up with good compositions despite their efforts to work from the particular to the general. The same thing applied to intuition. By having a very well-developed intuition in visual art, Filonov assumed everybody had the same.

The most important of education process was actually the third, concluding part, in which the student/painter learned to think freely, bravely, analytically, from different points of view and sides, and juxtaposing meanings. If there was a “crafty”, traditional, shallow attitude present, then previously created multidimensional “mess” would transform into superficial, flat, pretty technical image. The whole point was to listen to that ‘mess” and develop it into something it already has inside, but is hiding.

The Heads of the Academy of Art tried to convince Filonov many times that he should be appointed to be a professor at the Faculty of Painting. These attempts were to no avail due to his reluctance, since he demanded a refusal of traditional educational programs for the youth based on the “artistic waste”, such as etudes, sketches and any kind of preliminary work.

---

Thinking difference

Filonov viewed the creative process as analytic in nature, rejecting the notion that it depends on emotional or intuitive inspiration, and insisting rather on its intellectual and even physical aspects. Filonov’s artistic aims demanded exhaustive attention to detail (a “control” and “exactness” in the handling of the minutely worked surface of the painting) in order to realize the goal of “completeness” which he strove to achieve. The physical presence of the work of art, and the deliberateness of the craft involved in its production, were intimately bound up with Filonov’s notion of content. The lapidary detail of his intricately build-up forms, and the actual physical process of creating them on the canvas were – in Filonov’s eyes – both a part of the actual substance of his art.

Filonov viewed the art of analytical painting as a complex process involving highly self-aware analysis and an emphasis on the understanding and interpreting of the subconscious flow of occasional shapes. The goal in this case was an integration or fusion of the intellectual and the irrational in order to achieve new ways of creation.

Synthetical Art

Analytical Art

The specifics of psychological state: maximum relaxation.
Stopping “inner dialog”, drawing without thinking of anything special, draw as if it is drawing itself. Analyzing of what was inside your mind will happen when “evolving” the picture and having the meaningful conclusion out of accidental shapes.