Contemporary Art, 1992), pp. 6–18, at p. 8. See also Victor Margolin, The Struggle for Utopia: Rodchenko, Lissitzky, Moholy-Nagy, 1917–1946 ( Chicago, Ill. : University of Chicago Press, 1997); Christina Kiaer, Imagine No Possessions: The Socialist Objects of Russian Constructivism ( Cambridge, Mass. : MIT Press, 2005); Sally Stein, ‘ The Composite Photographic Image and the Composition of
this function. Impeccable in theory, in practice this path was often prohibitively simplified: function was understood in a crudely utilitarian sense, while form was seen in a mechanical-constructivist sense: a chair is a prop for sitting, a suit is a cover for thermal defence of the body, and a tea service is a system of reservoirs for storing and moving liquids. A house is a machine for living.84 If in the time of the aesthetic turn such sneering allusions to Russian Constructivism and Le Corbusier’s functionalism would have placed Pereverzev in the camp of the