Translated material
Dear Story
Pros and cons of the Bolshoi Theater reconstruction project
The Bolshoi Theater has been closed since July until 2008. The resuscitation of his worn-out body will take place according to a reconstruction and restoration project developed by Elena Stepanova, director of the Restavrator-M scientific and restoration center, and Nikita Shangin, an architect working at Kurortproekt. The project proposed by them and approved by the federal scientific and methodological council of the Ministry of Culture and Mass Communications of Russia (methodological council) is attractive due to its minimal intervention in the existing ensemble of Teatralny Square and the historical building of the theater.One of these days, an important meeting is expected with the Minister of Economic Development and Trade German Gref on the problems of budgetary financing of the project. The budget is considerable - $700 million. But when it comes to saving the national property of Russians, bargaining is inappropriate. This is the opinion of the director of the Institute of Art Studies of the Federal Agency for Culture and Cinematography, the first deputy chairman of the federal scientific and methodological council of the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation, Professor Alexey KOMECH, with whom Sergei KHACHATUROV is talking.
— Alexey Ilyich, do you support the project of reconstruction and restoration of the Bolshoi Theater building complex?
— The plot of saving the main musical theater in Moscow is old. Initially, restoration was promised with minor reconstruction in the technical part. When the first project was presented about eight years ago, it turned out that a small reconstruction meant practically demolishing the theater behind the curtain, building it up to the height of the main building up to Petrovsky Lane. The long, tall sausage completely distorted the proportions of the historical building. This project, proposed by architects Mikhail Belov and Mikhail Khazanov, passed the Moscow public council. Architects praised him very much, only Yu.M. Luzhkov was outraged by the distortion of the appearance of Petrovsky Lane. Subsequently, the project moved to the level of the Ministry of Culture and the Federal Scientific and Methodological Council. When it was announced that everything was being demolished, experts began to prove the illegality of the demolition and defend the value of the existing building with Osip Bove’s portico preserved behind the stage. The atmosphere was heating up thanks to the administration of the Bolshoi Theater. She demanded that the issue be resolved as quickly as possible. Arguments: the terrible state of the machinery, rehearsal rooms, and the entire building. An acute contradiction between the interests of heritage and the development of theatrical activities arose. After all, the theater was built with a different audience in mind, the rhythm of life, the scale of productions. In such cases in Russia, the last vote usually remains with the authorities. And experts can only sigh sadly.
But in the case of the Bolshoi Theater, former Minister of Culture Mikhail Shvydkoy decided to follow the legally prescribed path of project approval to the end. Several times the issue was brought up for consideration by the methodological council, and several times the architects reworked the project. There was a search for agreement. It's hard to say that I fully support the project, but I agree with the compromise reached.
- What did you come to in the end?
-- The reconstruction of the stage part will not extend beyond the existing building. The building will not become taller, wider, or longer. The side walls of Beauvais, Kavos, and even the theater of Peter the Great's time are preserved. This urban planning status quo comes at a cost. The most difficult problem is the fate of the northern portico of Osip Bove. This niche portico, a loggia of twin Ionic columns, is no less valuable than the main portico. If not for the reconstruction, no one would have ever been able to see it - it was built at the end of the 19th century. Now this is the inner wall of the rooms behind the stage. We agreed to dismantle this portico. The conditions were the complete liberation of Petrovsky Lane located behind the theater and its transfer to the city, restoration of the Khomyakov house located behind the theater. An underground concert hall was planned in front of the theater at a depth of 17 meters; it was decided to move the Beauvais portico there for public viewing.
I want to emphasize: for reasons of economy, the authorities and the theater management may refuse to preserve the Khomyakov house and create a concert hall with a Beauvais portico. If this happens, the agreement with the scientific and methodological council will be violated. Then the approval will be revoked.
-- The project involves digging deep pits the size of a six-story building. Is there a security threat to the foundations of the Bolshoi Theater?
- I don’t want to discuss problems of hydrogeology and engineering. I don't want to discuss the issue of finances. I was very surprised by the article by the respected architectural historian Grigory Revzin in the Kommersant newspaper. There is a lot written there about the price of the new project and what exactly the money will be spent on (“This is a renovation project, for which they decided to buy new equipment and repair old furniture”). I don’t think Mr. Revzin understands much about this. When an architectural critic writes about something he does not understand, suspicion arises of outside pressure.
- God be with them, with finances... It’s unlikely that you weren’t interested in how “viable” the project is, whether it can be implemented in principle...
- We were told that the hydrogeological situation does not cause concern. It is at a depth of 17 meters that the bedrock begins. Before this comes the sands and those soils that do not threaten anything. You can go through them. Hydrogeologists are fully responsible for this. They provide channels for water flow so that there is no barrier or dam effect. We were convinced that these problems could be solved. There is a general attitude for 21st century technologies: anything is possible. Question: how much does it cost? Any security is purchased. However, specific figures in the work invoice are beyond my area of expertise.
— What parts make up the new underground urbanism of the Bolshoi Theater? In Mikhail Khazanov’s project, I liked the idea of turning an underground concert hall into an exquisite attraction for people walking on the square and under the square.
-- In the final version, there are three underground spaces. The first is the stage part. It is completely utilitarian, subordinated to the tasks of stage maintenance, storage, and machinery. The second space is under the auditorium. It is connected to the foyer, with entrances and exits. The viewer will enter the portico, but exit from the underground space. Everyone who entered the Bolshoi Theater experienced discomfort from the discrepancy between the solemnity of the portico and the narrowness of the space behind the lobby. The Bolshoi has bad conditions for changing rooms and toilets. To eliminate discomfort, underground spaces are created. They will be designed functionally. We can talk about specific architectural design in connection with the third space underground - in front of the portico, under the square with a fountain. This is a new concert hall.
In connection with the reconstruction, I am very concerned about urban planning problems. The Bolshoi Theater is not just one building. This is part of the huge, beautiful ensemble of Theater Square, disfigured, but still a little preserved. It is planned to build three underground garages for hundreds of cars under Teatralnaya Square. There is a danger that Theater Square will be “decorated” with structures with ventilation grilles for new garages. What it will turn into is a big question. There are currently three projects. One of the requests of the scientific and methodological council is to send for approval a complete project of the architecture of small forms of the entire Theater Square.
-- How much is the visual part expected to be preserved?
-- Work is planned in a 100% restoration mode. There are very difficult places there. Let's say the semicircular wall of the main hall is in terrible condition. But everything will be fixed. The replacement will be only partial.
—Where is the line between restoration and reconstruction?
-- There is no concept of reconstruction in the law on cultural heritage sites. In relation to cultural monuments, this term is illegal. There is restoration and adaptation for use. If everything in the project strictly followed the law, we would be forced to designate the surviving historical parts as a restoration zone. We would have to demolish the extensions from the late 19th - mid-20th centuries. Any monument loses its original appearance over time and acquires traces of history. Any restoration project is a balance between preserving an architectural monument and preserving a historical monument. The process of selection and expert assessment is always complicated. Reconstruction means that some original parts will be destroyed. This shouldn't happen. We agreed with the reconstruction for a number of reasons. The first is that individual original parts (Beauvais portico) cannot be saved through restoration alone, because there is neither a customer nor an investor for such a project. Secondly, without partial reconstruction, the use of the monument is unthinkable, ensuring the life of both him and the theater group. Third, the restoration of the Khomyakov house will to some extent restore the environment of Moscow classicism in Petrovsky Lane, and to some extent compensate for the damage of the forced reconstruction of the main building.