"Reproduction cannot be art"

I found it very interesting how the Suprematists view on art was very avant-garde, progressive and modern, yet they couldn't allow themselves to accept historical precedents and the reinterpretation of nature and reality as acceptable art. They wanted art to start anew and throw out classicism and the renaissance. Malevich describes reproducing nature and the real world as not creating a new form but only copying what is already seen. He believes that one must break art down into the simple forms and express color, texture, movement and weight. He states that "the artist can be a creator only when the forms in his picture have nothing in common with nature". I agree with others below that the inspiration of even the simplest forms that Malevich writes of, comes from nature and one's own experiences. To exclude nature from affecting art seems like a very dangerous statement that is arguable.

That being said I do think the Suprematist movement had some very innovative ideas and creations of art and it has inspired a large portion of the modern movement. The idea of almost taking a step back from the reproduction of nature and reality and removing the subject and context is very progressive and thought provoking. Malevich writes that color and texture are of the greatest value in painterly creation...I think this new way of viewing art was certainly revolutionary and of great importance, yet their stubborness and strict ideals against art history and reproduction are damaging to their movement.