The architectural competition of student works, it turns out, is now an extinct phenomenon - in any case, such dynamics are noted by the students of the Moscow Architectural Institute themselves. All romanticism and the desire to make architecture for the sake of architecture have gone somewhere from young architects. A dozen works from all over the institute are hardly recruited for student competitions. The competition "Old Age in Joy", organized by two students Nikolai Pereslegin and Mikhail Beilin, is no exception to this unpleasant tendency. A total of 15 entries have been submitted. The maitres who sat on the jury (Dmitry Shvidkovsky, Yuri Grigoryan, Alexandpa Pavlova, Alexander Brodsky, Alexander Skokan, Andrey Nekrasov, Ilya Lezhava, Alexander Tsybaikin), many of whom belong to the generation of “paper architects,” such student inertia is incomprehensible.
“If such prizes were given in our time, and even if without them at all,” noted Alexander Brodsky, “the whole institute would still participate”. Which is true, however, the competition "Old Age in Joy" was recognized by those present as the most successful this year - "each of the participants found their own way to solve such a complex object." True, according to Ilya Lezhava, "the contestants left the program for lyrics, in the poetic atmosphere of an ideal village, which is probably better than doing some kind of" contextuality "on this site opposite the Synagogue."
Two sites were submitted for the competition - one in the Krasnodar Territory, where not so long ago there was a tragic fire in a nursing home. And another in Moscow in Spasoglinischevsky lane. Participants could choose one of two proposed design situations.
Characteristically, the majority of young architects interpreted the nursing home theme as a kind of village. The first two places were awarded to projects that interpret rural images. The works that received the largest number of votes divided them equally: these are projects with "floating houses" (Artem Sumakov and Daria Listopad) and "houses on stilts" (Artem Kitaev) - both, each in their own way, interpret village images.
Speaking about the “floating village”, Ilya Lezhava noted that the jury liked the clarity of the image in it. “… Of course, to dig a hole in Moscow and run a house into the resulting reservoir is complete nonsense,” but poetically, to live in “waterfowl” huts, swim up to old women… Alexander Brodsky called this project cinematic, Alexander Skokan - romantic. The only one who did not vote for him was Yuri Grigoryan and this is why: “There is a technology for winning contests and“floating houses”is exactly the project that immediately catches the eye and conquers with its imagery. Meanwhile, when I found out that there was a real site, all this seemed to me completely frivolous. From a conceptual point of view, space and real surroundings are important in architecture, therefore the most professional project seemed to me "with red houses". They are busy with what is boring, but necessary. In general, I would put more realistic projects in the first place, and I would give incentive prizes for artistry."
"Long-legged", in the words of Ilya Lezhava, houses on stilts of the second project-winner "House of Eternal Youth", also aroused sympathy among many. There were many interesting considerations regarding the sewage system, but the very idea of awakening in the old people a feeling of "childish delight", making them climb the ladders to their houses on kurnogs and generally overcome themselves at every step and do some impossible things - in all this has a kind of humanity.
There were five winners in total, with two, as already mentioned, tied for the first place, and three more - the second, also having managed to get an equal number of votes, but already by three.
The second prize was awarded to: another “village” interpretation of the theme (Alexander Korobov, Alexandra Golovanova, Mikhail Orlov), where everyone lives in individual houses, connected by a covered street corridor. And also the "cube house" (Valeria Pestereva) and the "red village" (Anna Belugina and Sergei Pereslegin). Alexander Brodskiy especially noted the fantastic project with moving cubes for its "unsociability and dissimilarity from the others, where the theme of the village runs like a red thread." Moreover, "with these old men spinning in this multi-colored turret, the project is incredibly optimistic and fun."
Many were interested in the project with "eggs" - the authors suggested to fantasize again on the theme of the village and saw a future object like a rural hangar, under the roof of which there are "space" eggs-houses of future residents. "Funny, handsome," as Brodsky remarked, "although there are few explanations." Ilya Lezhava also noted the "very stylish" project with a black background, although he noted that "there are no old people in it." And Aleksandr Skokan singled out the idea of one of the teams - to turn a nursing home into a fire station, which, in his opinion, is "a very accurate reaction to past tragic events."
Of course, the inertness of the Moscow Architectural Institute students observed today towards the opportunity to show themselves at one of such competitions in front of the jury, consisting of the stars of our architectural school, is a sad thing. Meanwhile, Nikolai Pereslegin and Mikhail Beilin, starting such a competition for the first time for themselves, hope that it is possible to invite novice architects to dialogue, arouse their interest and revive the tradition of student competitions. In any case, there are all conditions for this: the rector's readiness to oversee these events, and sponsors (all expenses for the current competition were covered by the Moscow Government, the Department of Urban Development and Reconstruction Policy of Moscow and personally V. Resin, as well as the charitable foundation "Civic Duty"), and most importantly, our leading architects who are ready to participate in his refereeing.
CLARIFICATION.
It turns out that the contestants were offered a choice of 2 sites - a nursing home, recently burned down in the Krasnodar Territory, and a site in the center of Moscow in Spasoglinischevsky Lane. In the Krasnodar Territory, buildings were required no higher than 1 floor, in Spasoglinischevsky (probably as an experiment), there was no limit on the number of storeys. This was the natural reason that the projects were divided into multi-storey and "village" projects.
We have made changes to the text and regret the mistake made, but we hope that a partial justification can be the fact that many members of the jury also did not pay attention to the two-part task - which, in fact, led to the discussion of the issue of "a village in the center of Moscow" during the presentation of the winning projects.
