0:00:29 > 0:00:31And I felt that all these things I discovered
0:00:31 > 0:00:33were through abstraction.
0:00:34 > 0:00:36I could read the abstract drawing,
0:00:36 > 0:00:39but for the first time I realised how my mind worked.
0:01:31 > 0:01:35I was so obsessed with this work when I was studying
0:01:35 > 0:01:41and in my early career that I went over it over and over again.
0:01:41 > 0:01:44I think one of the curious parallels between Malevich
0:01:44 > 0:01:47and Zaha Hadid is this desire from very early on to want to be
0:01:47 > 0:01:50truly modern.
0:01:50 > 0:01:52To question every convention,
0:01:52 > 0:01:53every premise.
0:01:55 > 0:01:58It allowed her to see space differently.
0:01:58 > 0:02:00It made her think of weightlessness in architecture
0:02:00 > 0:02:03and that's really the way she has developed ever since.
0:02:13 > 0:02:17What I think is extraordinary is to be able
0:02:17 > 0:02:20to have energy from a very simple thing like a black square.
0:02:20 > 0:02:25I mean, at the time this came out of nowhere, almost.
0:02:52 > 0:02:55She came to the Architecture Association,
0:02:55 > 0:02:57and some of the people who taught her there
0:02:57 > 0:02:58at the time think that she was
0:02:58 > 0:03:01in some ways looking for something when she arrived.
0:03:01 > 0:03:05And then Suprematism suddenly hit her like an express train.
0:03:05 > 0:03:10And when you are in a bleak economic period, which is what the '70s were,
0:03:10 > 0:03:13when you are being assaulted on all sides by people who
0:03:13 > 0:03:17think your work is somehow wrong and misguided, that sense of going
0:03:17 > 0:03:21back to anything being possible was very liberating.
0:03:35 > 0:03:36The painting behind is called
0:03:36 > 0:03:40The Malevich Tektonik, which was the name of the project
0:03:40 > 0:03:42we did in my fourth year.
0:03:42 > 0:03:45The Tektonik is the one in the middle,
0:03:45 > 0:03:47with shadows around it,
0:03:47 > 0:03:49the pieces which are around the painting.
0:03:49 > 0:03:52So one is seeing it from a planned view
0:03:52 > 0:03:55and one is seeing it from an aerial view.
0:03:55 > 0:03:58Of course it was very influenced by all the paintings by Malevich,
0:03:58 > 0:04:00by the Suprematists and by other abstract pieces,
0:04:00 > 0:04:05the whole idea of block colour and also of fragmentation.
0:04:05 > 0:04:08The actual Tektonik is also fragmented or broken,
0:04:08 > 0:04:13so it is in the process of orbiting
0:04:13 > 0:04:16before it lands on Hungerford Bridge.
0:04:16 > 0:04:19I was very fascinated by abstraction
0:04:19 > 0:04:23and how it could really lead to abstracting plans,
0:04:23 > 0:04:29moving away from certain dogmas about what architecture is.
0:04:29 > 0:04:33And that project really liberated me,
0:04:33 > 0:04:36freed me from all these rules.
0:04:50 > 0:04:52She is trying to think through
0:04:52 > 0:04:55the possibilities of what might happen if there WAS a building
0:04:55 > 0:04:59that Malevich had made... completely speculative architecture.
0:04:59 > 0:05:01And yet in her mind it was always real.
0:05:01 > 0:05:04It was going to get built sooner or later.
0:05:04 > 0:05:07What was very interesting in terms of
0:05:07 > 0:05:09Zaha Hadid looking at Malevich's
0:05:09 > 0:05:13architectons, at the moment that she did. At that stage, really,
0:05:13 > 0:05:15East and West were fully divided
0:05:15 > 0:05:19and this was a deep ideological division.
0:05:19 > 0:05:21So for a very young architect to look back
0:05:21 > 0:05:23at a Russian revoluionary artist
0:05:23 > 0:05:26and say, "This is my elected affinity,
0:05:26 > 0:05:29"this is how I see my work," was a very radical gesture.
0:05:57 > 0:06:00What is very easy to forget when you see these
0:06:00 > 0:06:01works today in a gallery
0:06:01 > 0:06:03is the context of the time in which they were made.
0:06:03 > 0:06:07As Malevich began to push towards abstraction, this coincides
0:06:07 > 0:06:10with the outbreak of the First World War.
0:06:10 > 0:06:12It's very interesting then that the artists
0:06:12 > 0:06:15are the ones who are the first really to push forward,
0:06:15 > 0:06:18who express their desire for something new,
0:06:18 > 0:06:20for building a new world.
0:06:41 > 0:06:43The Black Square is radical only because
0:06:43 > 0:06:46the time it came out it was such an amazing thing.
0:06:46 > 0:06:48Suprematism was to achieve total simplicity
0:06:48 > 0:06:52and also the whole movement was very mystical.
0:06:52 > 0:06:56That's why it comes with such amazing power, the square.
0:06:56 > 0:07:00When it was done at the time, the move from figurative art
0:07:00 > 0:07:03and Cubism to this abstraction was an amazing leap.
0:07:03 > 0:07:07And to achieve that was really incredible.
0:07:07 > 0:07:10He called it The End and the Beginning.
0:07:10 > 0:07:11What he is doing is saying
0:07:11 > 0:07:13the old regime is collapsing,
0:07:13 > 0:07:16and we need to find a means of
0:07:16 > 0:07:18understanding the world differently.
0:07:18 > 0:07:22Malevich set out to really question what is painting
0:07:22 > 0:07:23and what is art.
0:07:23 > 0:07:26I think that holds huge inspiration for an architect
0:07:26 > 0:07:30like Zaha Hadid, who, it also seems to me, with every project again
0:07:30 > 0:07:34sets out to question the fundamental parameters. How does a building
0:07:34 > 0:07:38function, how does it need to relate to its environment?
0:07:38 > 0:07:42I only respond to the Malevich work through how I saw it
0:07:42 > 0:07:45translated into architecture.
0:07:45 > 0:07:48I am obviously not an art historian, nor a specialist in Suprematism
0:07:48 > 0:07:51or any of the Russian work,
0:07:51 > 0:07:55but I think it was the way it impacted for me
0:07:55 > 0:07:57on architecture, on other artwork.
0:08:07 > 0:08:11I do like a lot the one I've seen in Russia many years ago which
0:08:11 > 0:08:15has all the cracks of all the layers of the painting.
0:08:15 > 0:08:18And this actually happened with many abstract artists
0:08:18 > 0:08:21when they decided as they painted on what their painting is.
0:08:21 > 0:08:24So you see the cracks of other colours underneath, which was
0:08:24 > 0:08:26which was white with red.
0:08:26 > 0:08:28And that is really what I find very exciting, that they
0:08:28 > 0:08:32painted as they thought about these things.
0:08:32 > 0:08:33I remember people at the time saying,
0:08:33 > 0:08:35"Malevich is not a great painter
0:08:35 > 0:08:37"because his stuff is not well painted."
0:08:37 > 0:08:39But that was not the point.
0:08:39 > 0:08:42It is not like a traditional painting where it has to be
0:08:42 > 0:08:45perfection of painting technique.
0:08:51 > 0:08:54In the top corner of the room
0:08:54 > 0:08:55he showed the Black Square.
0:08:55 > 0:08:58Now, that was a very particular choice.
0:08:58 > 0:08:59That spot usually in a traditional
0:08:59 > 0:09:02Russian household was reserved for an icon,
0:09:02 > 0:09:03for a religious painting
0:09:03 > 0:09:06which was seen not as a painting, not as an art object,
0:09:06 > 0:09:08but as an object of devotion.
0:09:08 > 0:09:12And even if Malevich himself didn't outrightly intend it as such, it was
0:09:12 > 0:09:14immediately read as that by the critics.
0:09:14 > 0:09:17So they immediately commented on that and said,
0:09:17 > 0:09:20"This is blasphemy, this is outrageous."
0:09:29 > 0:09:32Suprematism, for Malevich, was a very important step.
0:09:32 > 0:09:38Broadly speaking, it involved using geometry in painting,
0:09:38 > 0:09:41mostly oil on canvas,
0:09:41 > 0:09:46carefully painted up to the edges in geometric forms.
0:09:46 > 0:09:48Interesting he chose to show the individual paintings
0:09:48 > 0:09:49in a way that mirrored
0:09:49 > 0:09:52the arrangements of the colours and shapes
0:09:52 > 0:09:53within the individual painting,
0:09:53 > 0:09:55so they were scattered all over the walls.
0:09:55 > 0:09:58There was am incredible sense of movement and dynamism.
0:10:04 > 0:10:08I think he intended also to show it as a whole world.
0:10:08 > 0:10:10Obviously in that show in Russia
0:10:10 > 0:10:13it was much more dense, there were more pieces.
0:10:13 > 0:10:15There was a consistent randomness.
0:10:15 > 0:10:19They were not displaced as curators show things now, evenly spaced,
0:10:19 > 0:10:23but they were shown all together, almost haphazardly, and I think
0:10:23 > 0:10:26that was definitely very intentional.
0:10:26 > 0:10:29I like the whole composition
0:10:29 > 0:10:34because it implies also that these are part of a universe.
0:10:34 > 0:10:37They work together, and when you zoom in,
0:10:37 > 0:10:41you see certain clusters together like a galaxy or whatever.
0:10:41 > 0:10:45I particularly like the one up there -
0:10:45 > 0:10:48not just The Black Square but the one next to it.
0:10:48 > 0:10:51I like this one, The Red Square, I like The Black Cross.
0:10:51 > 0:10:57Those also floating red fragments or pieces as if something is moving.
0:10:57 > 0:11:00Also the scale could be very different.
0:11:00 > 0:11:02It could be on a massive urban scale
0:11:02 > 0:11:04or it could be very small.
0:11:16 > 0:11:18What I think it taught me is composition.
0:11:18 > 0:11:21It looks very fragmented and very chaotic,
0:11:21 > 0:11:25but there was always a kind of equilibrium to the composition.
0:11:25 > 0:11:28And I felt that all these things I discovered
0:11:28 > 0:11:29were through abstraction,
0:11:29 > 0:11:34because I understood...like, I could read the abstract drawing,
0:11:34 > 0:11:38but for the first time I realised actually
0:11:38 > 0:11:42how my mind worked and how I can resolve a problem.
0:11:42 > 0:11:46Because before that, like most students, and I would do the same,
0:11:46 > 0:11:50would stare at a board for days to have an idea.
0:11:50 > 0:11:52And I realised you really have to organise your thinking.
0:12:10 > 0:12:14He had become increasingly interested in outer space.
0:12:15 > 0:12:19In rockets, or the idea of rockets, a trip to the moon.
0:12:19 > 0:12:22Some of these things coming from HG Wells and Jules Verne,
0:12:22 > 0:12:24who were read in Russia.
0:12:24 > 0:12:28But the idea was catching on.
0:12:29 > 0:12:31A man called Tsiolkovsky, for example,
0:12:31 > 0:12:34was the first of the great rocket theorists.
0:12:34 > 0:12:36He became very popular,
0:12:36 > 0:12:38and he wrote stories about revolution in space
0:12:38 > 0:12:42and the idea that mankind was born to live in space.
0:12:42 > 0:12:46It was all a bit mystical, but he was in the air at the time.
0:12:46 > 0:12:50He was very interested in the idea of
0:12:50 > 0:12:52leaving earthbound reality behind,
0:12:52 > 0:12:56of not being confined by the laws of logic.
0:12:56 > 0:13:00Sometimes he would rotate an individual painting sideways
0:13:00 > 0:13:01or even 180 degrees.
0:13:01 > 0:13:03But sometimes, I think, he could even
0:13:03 > 0:13:06imagine that you could put them up on the ceiling or down on the ground
0:13:06 > 0:13:11and they would take on a different notion of either of these shapes
0:13:11 > 0:13:12rising into infinity.
0:13:12 > 0:13:15Or very quickly when you put them on the ground,
0:13:15 > 0:13:18you could see quite easily how you could turn them
0:13:18 > 0:13:21into an architectural plan or an architectural drawing.
0:13:21 > 0:13:25They are almost like floating worlds.
0:13:25 > 0:13:29But in this case they form kind of galaxies or worlds.
0:13:29 > 0:13:32That is why the compositions are interesting,
0:13:32 > 0:13:34because they are not static.
0:13:34 > 0:13:37They reach an equilibrium through this motion and movement.
0:13:37 > 0:13:40And I find that really very exciting.
0:13:40 > 0:13:43And one thing which has been fascinating for me
0:13:43 > 0:13:45for the last 30 years
0:13:45 > 0:13:49is how through a structure, and very ingenious kind of engineering,
0:13:49 > 0:13:53you can make buildings almost like floating about.
0:14:14 > 0:14:16When Malevich explained his theory of colour,
0:14:16 > 0:14:20he talked about white, the white background as symbolising infinity.
0:14:20 > 0:14:23And in the early stages of Suprematism,
0:14:23 > 0:14:26the colour rests atop of white.
0:14:26 > 0:14:29Interestingly, in 1916 he gets called up to arms.
0:14:29 > 0:14:32In 1917 there is the October Revolution.
0:14:32 > 0:14:35After that, when he returns to making abstract paintings,
0:14:35 > 0:14:37white becomes far more dominant.
0:14:37 > 0:14:40I think there is a sense that slowly the shapes disappear,
0:14:40 > 0:14:43and with the shapes disappears the whole notion of
0:14:43 > 0:14:46art-making as we had known it until then.
0:14:55 > 0:14:58What I like about it is that it has one very hard edge
0:14:58 > 0:15:03as a geometrical form, but it whooshes to the edge.
0:15:03 > 0:15:06So it goes almost to infinity.
0:15:06 > 0:15:10The space beyond on the right, you don't know where it's going,
0:15:10 > 0:15:12it could go at infinite space.
0:15:12 > 0:15:16So the idea of this gradation is also very interesting.
0:15:16 > 0:15:20It's not a pure form, but a gradated form.
0:15:20 > 0:15:22I find that very exciting.
0:15:29 > 0:15:33It's very difficult to paint white on white.
0:15:33 > 0:15:35And it's almost now you see it, now you don't.
0:15:35 > 0:15:38So these compositions are very interesting
0:15:38 > 0:15:40because they are very faint.
0:15:40 > 0:15:46But when you come closer you can see more clearly what they are.
0:15:52 > 0:15:55Of the two bits of film I've seen of him,
0:15:55 > 0:15:57he's pushing people out of the way and saying,
0:15:57 > 0:16:01"Look, I'm here, I've arrived. "Follow me."
0:16:01 > 0:16:02He did say on one occasion,
0:16:02 > 0:16:07"First there was the Old Testament, then the New Testament,
0:16:07 > 0:16:09"and here's the testament of Suprematism."
0:16:14 > 0:16:16Personally, I think
0:16:16 > 0:16:19he was very interested in mythical ideas, a certain degree of mysticism.
0:16:19 > 0:16:23I'm sure that he was aware that the cross is one of those forms,
0:16:23 > 0:16:27geometric shapes, that is highly ambiguous.
0:16:27 > 0:16:30So even if you said it's nothing more
0:16:30 > 0:16:35than a simple bold geometric shape, it is impossible to read it as such
0:16:35 > 0:16:38because the cultural determinism is too strong.
0:16:38 > 0:16:43When we see a cross, we will have certain associations.
0:16:43 > 0:16:46I think there was a fascination with the cross,
0:16:46 > 0:16:50but also at the bottom of the cross there are other Suprematist lines.
0:16:50 > 0:16:52But this could be seen in many different scales.
0:16:52 > 0:16:56It could be the scale of a very large globe.
0:16:56 > 0:16:58It could be a scale of a moving spaceship
0:16:58 > 0:17:01or a moving object in space.
0:17:01 > 0:17:03Or it could be seen as a domestic scale where
0:17:03 > 0:17:06the lines are a wall or a desk or a chair.
0:17:06 > 0:17:09So you can actually domesticate these compositions.
0:17:23 > 0:17:26Architects who also paint are an unusual breed.
0:17:26 > 0:17:29Or at least paint things that you might actually want to see.
0:17:29 > 0:17:32Le Corbusier did it. He spent his mornings painting,
0:17:32 > 0:17:34his afternoons designing buildings.
0:17:34 > 0:17:38And Zaha's career did start in losing herself in drawing
0:17:38 > 0:17:41and paint, and these were not representations of buildings,
0:17:41 > 0:17:45they WERE in some ways the designs.
0:17:45 > 0:17:50You can see the power of them to suggest free-floating space,
0:17:50 > 0:17:52jagged forms,
0:17:52 > 0:17:57the excitement of buildings that lose the sense of gravity.
0:17:57 > 0:18:00I think it is particularly interesting in her case,
0:18:00 > 0:18:03because most people would probably associate her architectural
0:18:03 > 0:18:06vision with computer design, and yet she has always been very adamant
0:18:06 > 0:18:11about the importance of drawing and the importance of painting.
0:18:11 > 0:18:17So, manual design development to really develop an idea.
0:18:24 > 0:18:28Zaha won it with an absolutely extraordinary
0:18:28 > 0:18:32series of giant paintings that showed a hilltop
0:18:32 > 0:18:35turned into a building as if
0:18:35 > 0:18:37a geological survey had been carried out on
0:18:37 > 0:18:41that hill and turned into a painting which was somehow also a building.
0:18:41 > 0:18:43This drawing, obviously, is one of
0:18:43 > 0:18:46the most important drawings we've done -
0:18:46 > 0:18:51the slabs, which shows the whole story of the Hong Kong Bay.
0:18:51 > 0:18:54This was another of these drawings
0:18:54 > 0:18:57which is like a confetti drawing where
0:18:57 > 0:19:03all the elements of the interiors of The Peak is floating...
0:19:03 > 0:19:08These are on the rooftops of...these.
0:19:08 > 0:19:12They are quite abstract, the rooftops,
0:19:12 > 0:19:14but what you see is the interiors
0:19:14 > 0:19:17of all the slabs here.
0:19:17 > 0:19:19How the slabs, which are very abstract,
0:19:19 > 0:19:23fly over the landscape and then they begin to engage with
0:19:23 > 0:19:28the landscape, and then they compose what I call Suprematist geology.
0:19:30 > 0:19:34We try to draw architecture in a different kind of way.
0:19:34 > 0:19:38- The drawings which are scientific to build from are still there.- Mm-hm.
0:19:38 > 0:19:40But I think the drawings are so important
0:19:40 > 0:19:44that they have a different value to them.
0:19:44 > 0:19:48But looking at them as an object in itself,
0:19:48 > 0:19:51a lot of people will say this is a very artistic drawing
0:19:51 > 0:19:52and something that they would consider art.
0:19:52 > 0:19:55- Yeah, well... - But you don't like that term?
0:19:55 > 0:19:57I don't care. It doesn't bother me.
0:19:57 > 0:20:00But I think they were done to explore architecture.
0:20:00 > 0:20:04Of course they do have an artistic quality,
0:20:04 > 0:20:08but that is not the intention.
0:20:08 > 0:20:09That's me saying that as a gallerist.
0:20:09 > 0:20:12- They certainly do. - That's not the intention,
0:20:12 > 0:20:17the intention is to make a perfectly stunning drawing which gives
0:20:17 > 0:20:20ideas or stories about the project we are showing.
0:20:20 > 0:20:24If you go and look at something like the Olympic Pool,
0:20:24 > 0:20:26which is the largest thing she's done in London,
0:20:26 > 0:20:28it has that painterly quality.
0:20:28 > 0:20:30There's no sense of structure.
0:20:30 > 0:20:32There's an awful lot of steel holding up that roof,
0:20:32 > 0:20:34but you don't see it, she denies it.
0:20:34 > 0:20:36She's the opposite of a hi-tech architect,
0:20:36 > 0:20:39she does magic with space.
0:20:40 > 0:20:42You wouldn't mistake her work for Malevich
0:20:42 > 0:20:44but there is this dynamism.
0:20:44 > 0:20:49She has a kind of calligraphic flow which is not his.
0:20:49 > 0:20:52She's quite a different person, different architect.
0:20:52 > 0:20:55But it's as if he sprang this release.
0:21:10 > 0:21:12These architectural drawings are very beautiful
0:21:12 > 0:21:15pencil drawings, they're very simple.
0:21:15 > 0:21:17It explores the three-dimensionality
0:21:17 > 0:21:20because here is a connection between some of these works
0:21:20 > 0:21:22and some of the paintings,
0:21:22 > 0:21:25and the different layers or the pieces
0:21:25 > 0:21:28which are next to each other, against a spine.
0:21:28 > 0:21:33So it moves from two-dimensional work to three-dimensional work,
0:21:33 > 0:21:37and these are also indications of his interest in architecture.
0:21:37 > 0:21:40And that is why I find them fascinating.
0:21:40 > 0:21:42I think this one is particularly nice,
0:21:42 > 0:21:44it shows many different compositions.
0:21:44 > 0:21:49But it also shows plan, aerial view, section, elevation, all together.
0:22:03 > 0:22:06They're not really models for concrete buildings.
0:22:06 > 0:22:08They don't have any practical purpose,
0:22:08 > 0:22:10so they don't think about doorways, windows,
0:22:10 > 0:22:15routes of access, all the things an architect would have to think about.
0:22:15 > 0:22:20It's a dream world, it's a notion really of pushing forward
0:22:20 > 0:22:25into an unknown terrain and developing an architectural utopia.
0:22:25 > 0:22:27He called them things like
0:22:27 > 0:22:30Dwelling for Ordinary Earthlings or..
0:22:30 > 0:22:32- HE LAUGHS - ..House in Space
0:22:32 > 0:22:34and this kind of thing,
0:22:34 > 0:22:39so they're a provocation, but they're full of ideas
0:22:39 > 0:22:41and they appear weightless in many ways.
0:22:41 > 0:22:43There's a famous photomontage
0:22:43 > 0:22:46of a view of the New York skyscrapers,
0:22:46 > 0:22:48through which one of these architectons
0:22:48 > 0:22:50goes flying through,
0:22:50 > 0:22:52as if to say, "They're very clever,
0:22:52 > 0:22:55"these Americans, but these are going to fly."
0:22:55 > 0:22:58There obviously was an ambition through him and his students
0:22:58 > 0:23:02to insert Suprematism into architecture.
0:23:02 > 0:23:04I mean, he intended for them to be built,
0:23:04 > 0:23:09but I think they had not yet maybe discovered how to build them.
0:23:09 > 0:23:12There were always ambitions
0:23:12 > 0:23:15in Europe and Germany and everywhere, and in Russia,
0:23:15 > 0:23:16to build a new world,
0:23:16 > 0:23:20so it meant to kind of strip the old world
0:23:20 > 0:23:22from their old traditions and habits, and build
0:23:22 > 0:23:25a new world which deals with the new situation.
0:23:25 > 0:23:28And I just think that it is a shame
0:23:28 > 0:23:34that Modernism, or modernity, let's say, was always aborted by either
0:23:34 > 0:23:38a changing government or a war, or whatever, and so
0:23:38 > 0:23:43these revolutions were always curbed or stopped.
0:24:04 > 0:24:08When Malevich came to Vibesk to work there as a teacher and worked
0:24:08 > 0:24:15with his students, they very rapidly thought about all kinds of ideas.
0:24:15 > 0:24:17How you could translate Suprematism
0:24:17 > 0:24:19into a new language for a new social order.
0:24:19 > 0:24:22So on the one hand they set out to design new objects,
0:24:22 > 0:24:28and in the exhibition we have a cup which is only one half of a cup.
0:24:28 > 0:24:31Or we've got a teapot which looks like an architecton
0:24:31 > 0:24:33translated into a utilitarian object.
0:24:49 > 0:24:52What is interesting about these periods is that they
0:24:52 > 0:24:55had an idea about a whole universe.
0:24:55 > 0:25:00Everything designed. And I think that is really fascinating.
0:25:05 > 0:25:08I think our period is very different.
0:25:08 > 0:25:11I like the idea of juxtaposing old things next to
0:25:11 > 0:25:14new things of different periods. I think it works very well.
0:25:14 > 0:25:16It's not a religious belief for me
0:25:16 > 0:25:18that everything should be designed by me.
0:25:18 > 0:25:20I can design everything
0:25:20 > 0:25:22because I think it is nice that you can do that.
0:25:22 > 0:25:25But I don't think everything should be...
0:25:25 > 0:25:31In my house, most of the stuff is by myself, by us, by the office.
0:25:31 > 0:25:36But I think then it was a whole...the whole world, you know?
0:25:42 > 0:25:45It is very Tektonik, that's what is interesting about it.
0:25:45 > 0:25:49So it has the obsession with what I call "tic-tics",
0:25:49 > 0:25:53or small pieces applied everywhere. It even applies to the teapot,
0:25:53 > 0:25:58this is like a painting where there is a big square and a small square.
0:25:58 > 0:26:01These additions, like a Tektonik.
0:26:01 > 0:26:04So it's one ideology applying to everything.
0:26:04 > 0:26:10It's like a signature. They signed everything in the same way.
0:26:21 > 0:26:24What I personally find very touching and moving
0:26:24 > 0:26:27when you look at the late work, is that first you have this
0:26:27 > 0:26:33real desire to invent yet another different type of language.
0:26:33 > 0:26:36So now it mixes figuration and abstraction.
0:26:36 > 0:26:40But what I find very curious is at that point Malevich often
0:26:40 > 0:26:41signed his work with the black square,
0:26:41 > 0:26:43including his own self-portrait.
0:26:43 > 0:26:46So he very clearly seems to be saying,
0:26:46 > 0:26:48"I made this, I'm the author of this.
0:26:48 > 0:26:51"I'm not denouncing this, but now I make something very different."
0:26:51 > 0:26:54I think that it was a symbol.
0:26:54 > 0:26:57It was maybe like a branding.
0:26:57 > 0:27:01Not to say it in a cynical way, but I think it was his sign.
0:27:06 > 0:27:10As he fell ill and knew that he was soon going to die,
0:27:10 > 0:27:13he very carefully began to plan his funeral.
0:27:13 > 0:27:17He instructed one of his students, Sutin, to work on his coffin.
0:27:17 > 0:27:20This was set up - he was laid out on his bed, dying,
0:27:20 > 0:27:24the coffin was standing there. The coffin mimicked Suprematist design.
0:27:24 > 0:27:26There's the black square hanging above,
0:27:26 > 0:27:28there's a circle, there's a cross,
0:27:28 > 0:27:30all the elementary shapes -
0:27:30 > 0:27:35and in the end, as he had died and the funeral procession moved through
0:27:35 > 0:27:39the city, a black square was mounted in front of the car.
0:27:39 > 0:27:43People were waving flags with the black square, and lo and behold,
0:27:43 > 0:27:45his gravestone became a black square also.
0:27:57 > 0:27:59Going back to see all that work again
0:27:59 > 0:28:03reminds you again of the power of that period and that work.
0:28:03 > 0:28:07And it's also great to see it all together in one space.
0:28:07 > 0:28:11I think that my fascination with Malevich many years ago
0:28:11 > 0:28:13is different than it is now.
0:28:13 > 0:28:16I' still very moved by them, but
0:28:16 > 0:28:19they are obviously intended for something else. I now read them
0:28:19 > 0:28:23always as a painting implying an architecture,
0:28:23 > 0:28:26and I'm not sure that that was always intentional.
0:28:26 > 0:28:29They are almost like kind of floating worlds.
0:28:29 > 0:28:33And I think what it implied in architecture is that
0:28:33 > 0:28:35obviously they don't literally float.
0:28:35 > 0:28:38Maybe eventually there will be a time when
0:28:38 > 0:28:43buildings no longer need a kind of gravity to land on the ground,
0:28:43 > 0:28:45they just hover above ground.
0:28:45 > 0:28:50But in this case they form kind of galaxies or worlds.
0:28:50 > 0:28:53And I find that really very exciting.