The fact that Moscow construction has reached a certain point is quite obvious - just walk in the center. The gray skeletons of new buildings sprouting everywhere are adjacent to the green-mesh facades of the following victims. The gaps are densely packed with assorted cars; in the courtyards, as in the 17th century, there are bars that cannot be passed. In some places, neo-constructivisms and pseudo-histories built five to seven years ago are crumbling and turning into ruins, just like their prototypes, only at a triple speed, and next to it another "demolition reconstruction" shines with fresh paint. It is not surprising that a relatively “simple” Muscovite will not seek out worthy representatives of modern architecture among all this, but rather will consider all of it as evil, without figuring out for whom the next concrete frame is being built. So, perhaps, everyone who loves good architecture and is inclined to see it as an object of art, and not just square meters, suffers.
According to statistics compiled by MAPS, over 1000 buildings have been destroyed in Moscow over the past 5 years, and more than 200 of them are monuments, including "newly discovered" ones, which are also subject to protection. Among those is Voentorg, which is now being rebuilt in the form of a concrete dummy. The Planetarium has been roughly reconstructed, underground floors have been arranged under the Manege, the Moscow hotel is also being built anew.
However, the presented report is an attempt not only to state the appalling situation, but also to understand it. It is a symbiosis of a brief history of Moscow architecture, a collection of analytical articles, a catalog of destruction and practical recommendations for the public fighting against this or that construction. There is something to see and read in it - for those who are ready to delve into the problem. Essays on Moscow estates and the avant-garde side by side with stories of the destruction of the Moskva hotel and Voentorg, the completion of the Tsaritsyn ruins of Catherine, articles about the house of Konstantin Melnikov, next to which a foundation pit was dug, and even about the Cathedral of St. Basil the Blessed, which was restored, but not quite - the brick vaults of the bypass gallery are on the verge of collapse. The background for the articles is photographs accompanied by brief comments, turning the collection into a kind of catalog, although its creators do not claim to be complete lists of lost and destroyed buildings.
The texts have been selected in such a way as to simultaneously cover the maximum problems of the Moscow heritage and at the same time serve as an overview of its value in general. Among historical reviews, the role of the "shock" emphasis is taken by an article on the architecture of the Russian avant-garde, written jointly by Professor Francisca Bolleri from Delft and the German specialist in the history of industrial architecture Axel Fol. Its authors, in particular, are of the opinion that bunk apartments, known throughout the world as part of Le Corbusier's "residential unit", were first used in the building of M. Ya. Ginzburg and I. F. Milinis, and from there they were borrowed by the famous Frenchman. The article expresses confidence that the preservation and professional restoration of the house is possible, and moreover, the authors hope that future investors will find ways to preserve the original function, leaving at least a few residential apartments.
Judging by the texts of the report, church architecture is now the most protected in Moscow - it is only threatened by minor additions. All civil architecture is under attack, and it is even difficult to say what is being lost faster - constructivist buildings, on the side of which the entire world community, even if they do not really listen to it, or chambers of the 17th-18th centuries, some of which are hidden in the thickness of the layers of the late urban buildings - they barely have time to be discovered by scientists, as developers are demolishing. No less risky in modern Moscow are the positions of manor houses, especially wooden ones - although the report cites a famous case of a successful struggle for them - when, thanks to the performance of the project “Moscow, which does not exist”, the “Polivanov's house” in Arbat lanes was professionally restored. Also under threat are monuments of industrial architecture, and even successful examples of adaptation, such as the Art Play center, may disappear in the near future - a multi-storey construction is already planned on the site of this building; the Shukhov tower, deprived of its function, is also on the verge of emergency. However, of course, the so-called ordinary buildings remain the most defenseless - if there is at least someone to protect the monuments, and you cannot close all the ordinary houses at once, and it is especially difficult to convince others of their value. But with the loss of the unwise and dilapidated city buildings, houses and sheds, we can say that old Moscow will cease to exist, but will turn into a city like Novgorod and Pskov, becoming like the victims of Nazi bombings, with faceless urban fabric occasionally encrusted with priceless masterpieces. The most uncompromising position in this respect was the position of A. I. Komech, to whose memory the report is dedicated - in an interview with Aleksey Ilyich, reprinted in the report, he directly erects Moscow dummies of recent decades to the restoration of the Amber Room and the Cathedral of Christ the Savior.
The joint report of MAPS and SAVE, in addition to the natural protective pathos, is interesting for its analytical approach to the problems of Moscow heritage: some materials are devoted to the topic of dummies - the stories of buildings demolished and replaced with copies. The silhouette of the city and the influence that even relatively small mansard superstructures, and even more high-rise buildings have on it, are also investigated - as soon as one emerges, all the surrounding buildings will inevitably sooner or later "grow up", and most likely will be replaced by larger ones. A separate chapter is devoted to high-quality modern architecture - this is symptomatic and pleasing, because often the protection of heritage and new buildings turn out to be a priori antagonists - in other words, if you are building a new one, then you are already an enemy of the old. Edmund Harris's article mentions Sergei Skuratov's Copper House and Yuri Grigoryan's House in Molochny, and the "new classics" is viewed as a particularly promising, specifically Moscow direction, which has no direct analogs in modern European architecture and is therefore even more interesting.
The most impressive part of the catalog is devoted to practical advice at various levels. For example, an article by SAVE secretary Adam Wilkinson, among the ten factors threatening historical Moscow, names such intractable ones as abuses in the city management system and such seemingly banal as the fact that the vast majority of city buildings after the demise of the USSR have never been overhauled. … However, among the first and most important reasons, the author mentions the oversaturation of the city with motor transport - according to A. Wilkinson, no matter how many garages and roads are built, there will be few of them. Multiplying roads is an American principle, and Europeans have come to the conclusion for a while that historic cities can only be preserved by limiting the access of cars. In addition, the city authorities are now trying to excavate a parking lot under many buildings, and this threatens their safety. The author calls the main reason for Moscow's losses the imperfection of city legislation, which encourages investors to short-term projects. Rustam Rakhmatullin's analysis is devoted to the distribution of the rights and interests of various authorities in relation to architectural monuments, and a detailed article by Sergei Ageev presents a detailed and very professional analysis of Russian forms and methods of heritage protection in comparison with the experience of foreign legislation.
However, as it was said at the press conference, our laws are good and even very, only they are not always implemented. And the specialists are also good, only they are few and no one listens to them in those cases when you want to make a lot of money. According to Adam Wilkinson, the UK also had similar problems during the economic crisis - the presence of foreign, not only positive, but also negative experience, coupled with the practice of overcoming it, is comforting, although at the moment it is still very weak. At the same time, after the post-perestroika lull, a movement in defense of the old city is again growing in Moscow - a review by Clementine Cecil is devoted to its history and structure.
In an emotional speech by Natalia Dushkina, daughter of the famous architect who built the Mayakovskaya metro station, which is being destroyed by groundwater and Detsky Mir, which is threatened with reconstruction with the destruction of interiors, it sounded that now the movement in defense of the Moscow heritage could be accused of having ties with foreigners. However, no matter how you look at it, except, of course, the leavened-patriotic one, it is very good that MAPS managed to attract the attention of international experts and journalists to the problems of the Moscow heritage. Firstly, they are the least engaged, and secondly, they know better from the outside, and besides, many countries have experience of acting in a similar situation, and it is known that in the best periods of its history Moscow very skillfully adapted foreign experience, creating its own, rich and unique culture. Now, maybe it's time to use this talent in order to preserve, at least in part, her material evidence.
***
The report was sent to President Vladimir Putin, Mayor of Moscow Yuri Luzhkov, chief architect of the city of Moscow Alexander Kuzmin, head of the Moscow Heritage Committee Valery Shevchuk. It will not go on sale, but anyone interested can get one free of charge by contacting MAPS.
