Allergy to citrus fruits

Architectural critics weigh in on today's construction boom

Vremya Novostei, together with the P-Arch agency, presents the Architectural Criticism Club. Despite the construction boom, architectural processes are unfairly on the periphery of public attention. To rectify the situation a little, we decided to survey architectural critics working in specialized Russian mass media in order to identify the positive and negative of Russian architectural life. Any events, projects, buildings that became known in the first four months of 2008 could be positive or negative.

In the “negative” section, the leading story is the project of the multifunctional center “Orange” on the site of the Central House of Artists. The joint idea of ​​the architect Norman Foster and the Inteko company (as well as the way it was presented) caused disapproval from the professional community, and not only the architectural one. Architectural events in the Russian regions caused a great response - critics called the results of the competition for the new building of the Perm Art Gallery the most controversial. Critics, of course, regarded the change in the height regulations of St. Petersburg as negative.

Almost all surveyed observers noted certain stories related to Soviet architecture, while the situations with two monuments of the Russian avant-garde were mainly cited as negative and positive. The positive is the announcement of plans for the restoration of the Narkomfin communal house, the negative is the extremely complicated story with the planetarium.

As for new buildings, the interviewed critics named a variety of projects - from chamber buildings to infrastructure facilities, and not a single object was named twice! This fact suggests that, despite the gigantic wave of commercial hackwork, many good, interesting buildings are being built and designed in Moscow. So the club will have something to talk about in the future.

Natalia ALEXEEVA, Interior + Design magazine:

— It seems to me that the most important event of the beginning of the year is the announcement of the results of the PermMuseumXXI competition for a new gallery building in Perm. It’s just difficult to understand whether it’s positive or negative. Because, on the one hand, this is, of course, an interesting and important competition, a representative jury, unusual, bright projects. Indeed, our best and Western architects sent their works. This is cool. But, on the other hand, the results are such that it is unclear how events will develop further and whether anything will be built in the end. The jury chose two projects that were opposite in style and concept, Moscow conceptualist Boris Bernasconi and Swiss Valerio Olgiati, which put the organizers in a difficult position. It is unclear how all interested participants in this story will come to an agreement. It will be a shame if another large-scale project turns into nothing. Then this event is purely negative, confirming that normal architectural life is not being established in Russia.

The scandal with the Moscow Planetarium made a negative impression. I don’t think anyone knows what’s really going on there, not even the direct participants in the project. The conflict between shareholders led to the fact that the reconstruction was stopped again, and again there were rumors that the monument would be converted into another entertainment complex. This story has been dragging on for 14 years, and now it has suddenly become clear that the work is being carried out in an unclear way, and the billions allocated for reconstruction have gone to no one knows where. It’s trite, but this once again confirms that no culture in Moscow is valuable in itself. The building is a masterpiece of constructivism, and the planetarium itself is an interesting and prestigious object for any city. But if there is no direct and quick financial return, no one is interested in it. Legal and financial confusion traditional for Moscow.

Maria FADEEVA, Vedomosti newspaper. Friday":

— I would call an excursion to the communal house, designed in the late 20s by a team of architects led by Mikhail Barshch, Ignatius Milinis and Moisei Ginzburg on Gogolevsky Boulevard, a positive event. The excursion was organized for the press and architects by AD magazine. It was not only interesting to go inside and walk up all these stairs, but also to talk with the new residents who bought apartments in the building in the last three years. A conversation with them showed that the ideas of Moses Ginzburg (and the building on Gogolevsky is called the younger brother of the Narkomfin Ginzburg house) remain in demand today, and among people of different specialties. Otherwise, we are used to saying that the value of constructivism and its ideas is realized only by people involved in architecture or art history, but here we met ordinary citizens. It's funny that thanks to this event, the neighbors themselves were able to get to know each other and by the end of the evening they had already begun to agree on who would go to visit whom, thus maintaining the communal status of their home. I hope that the exhibition of photographs from these apartments, which opens at the Museum of Architecture on May 27, will appeal to everyone.

The most negative event of recent months for me was the announcement of the results of the competition for the design of a new building for the Perm Art Gallery. More precisely, the negativity was caused by the projects announced as winners and by the turbulence within the jury, whose representativeness melted before our eyes. But the main thing is that the victory of Valerio Olgiati’s project once again demonstrated that in the eyes of foreign architects, brutalism with oriental motifs, which has long outlived its use in other countries, is suitable for Russia. However, the greater drawback of the project is that it is in no way connected either with the location on the banks of the Kama River or with the collection that will be located inside. I would also address my last complaint to the second winning project - the architect Boris Bernasconi, although in general I like him much more.

Nikolay MALININ, Made in Future magazine:

- Positive. A masterpiece of Russian constructivism is the house of Narkomfin workers on Novinsky Boulevard, designed by the architect Moisei Ginzburg. I really love this house. I was very afraid that it would accidentally burn. I'm glad things took the right turn. Although I slightly doubt the sincerity of Mr. Senatorov (the owner of the MIAN group, who took the initiative to reconstruct the Narkomfin building with the aim of turning it into a hotel).

Negative. Transformation of the Central House of Artists into "Orange". I don't really like this house - the Central House of Artists. In fact, I don’t even like it at all. But (further according to Pushkin) I am disgusted when a foreigner (along with a noble aunt) shares this opinion. Although I don’t doubt the sincerity of Ms. Baturina one bit.

Project. Victory of the architect Boris Bernasconi in the international competition for the new building of the Perm Art Gallery. I won’t confess my love for Bora Bernasconi: he’s been arrogant for a long time already. But I really like his project: simple, honest, strong. A worthy version of our “Postmillennium” - in defiance of all these crooks, rogues and other hadidism.

Alexey MURATOV, Project Russia magazine:

— In principle, what is happening in Moscow in the architectural and construction sphere is one complete negative. However, if we highlight something, then in first place in this “honorable” nomination I will put, so to speak, in totality, the news about the multifunctional complex “Orange” by Norman Foster, which, through the efforts of the Inteko company, should arise on the site of the Central House of Artists. The very idea of ​​demolishing a completely viable building is very questionable both in terms of ecology and in the sense of respect for the work of previous generations. It is even more questionable, if not outrageous, to demolish a building that houses the largest collection of twentieth-century paintings and which functions very, very successfully as a cultural institution. The situation is given additional piquancy by the direct participation of our mayor's wife, Mrs. Baturina. From an ethical point of view, her entire business in Moscow is, of course, extremely questionable. And, finally, the desire to demolish large public buildings of the 70s, the rejection of such architecture indicates a hidden rejection by the capital’s authorities of such concepts as justice and truth. The aesthetics of a smooth wall and honest, i.e. not hidden by any decoration, the construction characteristic of modernist architecture is absolutely alien to this power.

I was pleased with the news that the MIAN company is ready to take on the task of saving the Narkomfin building by Moisei Ginzburg, a masterpiece of Soviet avant-garde architecture. This building has long fallen into a coma, and if someone manages to save it, then honor and praise be to him. Among the recent implementations, I will highlight the so-called “Refined Sugar” by Nikolai Lyzlov. Firstly, this is a very elegant building, simple in geometry, but perfectly drawn. Secondly, it introduces into the Moscow development a scale that had already been forgotten by it - the scale of a medium-sized public facility, making the urban environment more intimate, commensurate with a “little man.”

Larisa KOPILOVA, Domus magazine:

- I'll start with the negative. Changing the height regulations in St. Petersburg is a national disgrace. Quietly, through a survey of members of the government of St. Petersburg, an act was adopted in which the permissible building height was increased from 48 m to 100 m. Obviously, this was done primarily to please Gazprom, which plans to build a skyscraper in the Okhta area. And also to please developers and architects who began construction in the city center (after the resolution adopted in 2005 on the availability of 500 plots for construction in the center). There are already few surviving historical cities in Russia. In those that have survived, the historical fabric is loose, with losses and patches of modern houses. Peter is the only full-fledged ensemble. The developer's business temperament is clear - he always wants to make money. The creative temperament of an architect is also understandable - he always wants to build. Only the authorities can restrain and redirect them (the opinion of the public, the only one who cares and wrote a letter in defense of St. Petersburg, unfortunately, does not solve anything). And the government behaves like a conquistador, treats its own country as a colony, pumping everything out of it: resources, money, and simultaneously trampling the remains of culture. It is clear that the guys have had an island in Spain for a long time, that they need some dusty St. Petersburg. The average level of quality of pre-revolutionary architecture is many times higher than the average level of modern buildings. Therefore, the destruction of the center of St. Petersburg is the worst event of recent years.

Meanwhile, Eric van Egeraat won a copyright lawsuit against the Capital Group company. Without going into an analysis of the specific dispute between Egeraat and Capital Group, we can say that this event is positive. A precedent has been created. Until now, the copyrights of architects were often violated by developers. Now architects have an example by which to act, and they will be able to insist on compliance with the author's plan. It is clear that the quality of architecture will only improve from this.

In Moscow, near the Sokol metro station, a residential building for military personnel is being completed. The author is architect Mikhail Filippov. This is a significant event for two reasons. Firstly, the most pressing problem of social housing for Russia is solved here in a non-trivial way. Secondly - and this is the most amazing thing! - here social housing is not a panel house, but a building in the classicist style. Alabyan's house is nearby, so the motifs of Stalinist classics are refracted in the house. There is clearly a lack of beauty in Moscow architecture; only a few architects work in the classics. As a rule, classic houses are luxury construction. Adapting a classic for social needs is a great achievement. For this purpose, Filippov invented some know-how - for example, inexpensive masonry from paving slabs, which, however, looks like the wall of the Roman Pantheon.

Ekaterina BOGDANOVA, Interni magazine:

- I selected the events based on their global impact. Yes, it hurts for the planetarium, the fate of which I have been hearing regularly for many years from the author of its reconstruction and my friend Kirill Anisimov. During this time, our children grew up, who have never seen its starry sky... The air terminal building is painfully pitiful. After all, the first independent “adult” flights are associated with it. I would like to vent my anger at the metro construction workers who built the tunnel from Victory Park to Kuntsevskaya in such a way that I have to write these lines in my apartment to the rhythmic clatter of wheels.

However, most of all I, a Muscovite, who, due to my own inertia, lost my small homeland - my hometown, worries about the fate of St. Petersburg. Listen, let's somehow agree to save it! Moreover, Peter can be killed with one blow: just change the altitude regulations. That's all. The fact is that St. Petersburg is fundamentally horizontal. This is how the builders conceived it, standing on the low shore of Hare Island and looking at the same low opposite shore and at the ridge of clouds crawling parallel to the horizon. And now they admire it while walking along the roof of the Alexander Ravelin. The city was built fundamentally horizontal. Not a single private house could be built higher than the ridge of the Winter Palace. The horizontal line is only occasionally crossed out by vertical strokes of the spiers of the towers of government and church buildings. For many generations this urban planning concept was supported, giving the world an ensemble city. It is measured in steps in one plane. There are not even humpbacked bridges here, as in Venice and Amsterdam, which are close to him. His famous horizontal is a brand as popular all over the world as the Mariinsky Theater and the Hermitage. They, and not oil at all, are, have been and will be the country's most solid foreign exchange reserve. And it can easily be lost with one amendment to the building height regulations. We must prevent this large-scale state crime!

A positive event, which, however, is not news, since this award has been in existence for the third year with the modest name “House of the Year”. This year it was the “Sail House” on Khodynskoe Field (“Mosproekt-4”, architect A. Bokov, B. Uborevich-Borovsky). There are few architectural awards in Russia. And for architects they are important. And with the right development of strategy and financing, it has every chance of becoming a Russian “Pritzker” (The Pritzker Prize is the world's largest award in the field of architecture. - Ed. ). For this there must be one nomination and substantial prize money. Let the principle remain the same - voting on the site. Just explain to everyone that we are voting for our contribution to the future of architecture. And let the innovation house win! There is no such house - we transfer the award to next year, and double the prize fund. In order for this to work, you need to promote the site. So far, the latest voting procedure has shown how few people are interested in architecture on the Internet. So it turns out that architecture and architectural criticism are for the professional cohort.

Grigory REVZIN, Kommersant newspaper, Project Classics magazine:

— I would like to note two positive events at once. Firstly, this is the Zhivopisny Bridge (“Metrogiprotrans”, architect N. Shumakov) on Zvenigorodsky Prospekt. On the one hand, this is an important, socially significant object for the city. And it’s simply beautiful, this structure can be seen from afar. Like a rainbow that goes along the river. The second object is also very large-scale. This is the all-season ski resort of Mikhail Khazanov in the Pavshinskaya floodplain. I like Khazanov as an architect, he builds a lot, but until now he did not have a main, iconic building by which he would be immediately recognizable. And this year he opened two large facilities at once - a huge complex of the government of the Moscow region and this ski slope. It is interesting in architecture, and as a sports facility it is wonderful. Nobody has built anything like this in our country before; he was the first to design such a complex object. In addition, both of these buildings are important for the city.

Everyone talks about Norman Foster's "Orange" as a negative thing, but this is not an architectural topic. There is no point in discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the project itself, since the current situation has nothing to do with architecture.

The strip was prepared by Alexander ZMEUL