The meaning of art has changed over the years with the era of neo-plasticism and Suprematism. The two authors argue that the true of creative art has deteriorated over time due to the shift in the meaning and interpretation of the works presented. Malevich explains that the art presented by Suprematists does not consider the significance of “feelings.” Instead, the present materialization that reflects the feelings through a realistic conception medium. He states, “Academic naturalism, the naturalism of Impressionists, Cezanneism, Cubism, etc.—all these, in a way, are nothing more than dialectic methods which, as such, in no sense determine the true value of an art work”. The artistic works do not show any emotional attachment which the author considers is important. Similarly, Mondrian expresses his concern over the new plastic idea that ignore appearance aspects including color and natural forms that communicate true feelings. He states, “the new plasticism is pure painting: the means of expression still are form and color… the straight line and flat color remain purely pictorial means of expression”. This, therefore, hinders the real meaning and interpretation of art.
Both authors propose the appropriate means of art representation that can aid in evoking consciousness and true feelings. By using free art consisting of a “black square” to create a “desert” symbol, artists are able to generate presentations that create sensation. Although critics observe “desert” as dangerous and incomprehensible objectivity, and a hindrance to “likeness of reality,” the form of art creates true feelings. Mondrian also proposes the means to create a balancing relationship between nature and art is the merging of both interiority and exteriority extremes. This way, the author, states, that the new plasticism will be able to unite life and mind. The increase of human consciousness in the viewing of art can, therefore, result in the positive correlation with the artistic theme through the emergent feelings.