Disclaimer: I felt like each of these readings were pretty long. Yet, you the professor said they were short. Except for Rodchenko’s manifesto(Regardless if that one was a little shorter than the other 2 manifestos). I think it’s from your understanding of it, maybe someone told you that you’ll get the meanings for these reading selections. Or both I don’t know. But if someone told you, these reading pdfs are short, in which you might’ve agreed on that statement, then they’re kind of lying, from what I think. No disrespect to them. But still.

These authors were pretty hard to understand in my opinion and these passages were so confusing to me, that I’m giving it my best guess. If you don’t lower my grade because of these answers, I would appreciate it.

So, according to the 3 readings and my own opinion:

The possibilities or advances that the authors envision for their immediate futures were like this. According to Marinetti’s manifesto, he somewhat talks about society and how it was in ancient times. As if he was giving some sort of speech, to the people, he was talking to. In some sort of way. For El Lissitzky, his manifesto was referring to how inventions are and how they’re actually made. In Rodchenko’s manifesto might entail being what a true constructivist is. Which is, to him, by being a constructor. Which could be why the 2 words constructor and construct are in the word constructivist.

The roles in which they imagined technology would play in shaping their futures, would be like this. Marinetti would base it on how life should be from an ancient cultural opinion. Even as the futurist he was. Which most likely led him in living his rest of his days, until he died. El Lissitsky’s beliefs could be based on what a true inventor was. He even had his quote saying: “The cinema and the illustrated weekly magazine have triumphed. We rejoice at the new media that technology has placed at our disposal.” This means that, he really loved what technology has brought to the world. He was truly thankful to it, even way back in the day, it was evident that he still respected it. Based on that, he lived his life then died. Aleksandr Rodchenko knew the essence of being what a true constructivist meant. He had this quote to say, which was: “We didn’t create technology.
We didn’t create man. We organize technology. Previously—Engineers relaxed with art. Now—Artists relax with technology. Technology is—the mortal enemy of art.” This could mean that technology is not invented by people like anyone like myself. People didn’t form mankind into it’s masterpiece. We put technology together. Before engineers put less effort on art, probably without being lazy. But fast forward to the present, back in his time, people who express their creativity so well that are the same people who less effort on tech. So basically it’s vice versa in some sort of way. All from what he most likely, wants us to understand. Based on that, he lived his life then passed away. So in a sense, they all viewed technology in their own ways, to live their lives before they were gone for good.

The ways that these artists anticipated the art and design that would follow comes from how Marinetti is a poet. At least, that one of the things he’s best known for. He didn’t say anything about design specifically. He thinks that art in general, is something that should be hated. The reason is because he had his quote saying: “For art can only be violence, cruelty, injustice.” Thus proving my point, for his statement. El Lissitsky also probably also knew the art that would follow with his quote by saying: “Every invention in art is a single event in time, has no evolution.” “The energetic task that art must accomplish is to transmute the emptiness into space, that is, into something that our minds can grasp as an organized unity.” As for design on the other hand, he said his quote about it, which is: “Our best artists take up the problem of book design.” That is back when the reconstruction period happened. Rodchenko also probably knew that art and design would follow. Regarding art alone he said his quotes which are: “Technology is—the mortal enemy of art.” “We are not dreamers from art who build in the imagination.” “ships of left art.” and “irreconcilable war against art.” As for design on the other hand, he had these quotes to say: “He embraced, redefined, and elevated graphic design as an essential force in society.” He probably loved design and art so much that he was an inspiration to other people while possibly watching them in his afterlife.

The common views that these authors share and where might they disagree, comes from how they all like art and design which is something they might share. They all might disagree with each other where Marinetti might talk about life in his times. El Lissitsky talks about how to be an inventor, in the right ways. Followed by Rodchenko talking about being a constructivist. In which those things they talk about in each of their passages, could be based on their different opinions. Everyone’s different after all, so it kinda makes sense.

The elements of these texts remain relevant for the present, are from how(i guess): “Every invention in art is a single event in time, has no evolution.” “Yet in this present day and age we still have no new shape for the book as a body; it continues to be a cover with a jacket, and a spine, and pages 1, 2 and 3.” Elements that are problematic can be from(i guess): all 3 manifestos combined and how they were pretty confusing to understand for me.