The interim verdict: your preferences lie with futurism. Futurism is very close to cubism in terms of rejecting the representational quality of painting. Neither style aimed at depicting people or objects as they truly are. Cubists, on the one hand, chose to convey the interior inherent construction, the essence of the objects or people.

For that purpose cubists analyzed them, broke down into basic elements, discarded the variable and unstable attributes and assembled the remaining stable pieces back. Futurists, on the other hand, pursued the objective of representing movement. Thus anything presented in their paintings – be it people or objects – cannot be viewed as the final objective. Their presence is necessitated by the purpose of conveying the bursting energy, dynamics and movement. The cult of movement that underlies the futurist subjects emerged from the philosophy of anarchists and negativists who rejected the traditional values (both humane and artistic), and considered the legacy of the past to be a cancer that stands in the way of progress, science and liberty. Futurists announced love and romance to be outdated – a person of the future shall be hard-boild, cynical, dynamic, mechanistic and emotionless. They advocated for the world ruled by technology and scientific progress rather than morals and traditions. They glorified the war as a way to purify the world from old mindsets and philosophy that hold back and thwart the progress of the humanity. Futurism saw its rapid growth in 1910-1920s – well, and eventually they all got the war they were looking for.