Julia Tarabarina:
It is known that you founded one of the first private workshops during the perestroika period, which later grew into a large architectural company. How did you get started?
Sergey Kiselev:
A very important role was played by a trip to America - it was the first delegation of Soviet architects to the United States after 1935. Let's go: Yuri Platonov - President of the Union of Architects, recently elected "from the parterre", rector of the Moscow Architectural Institute Alexander Kudryavtsev, academician Jim Torosyan and I, as a representative of young architects. We were literally carried in our arms from New York to San Francisco, received with great honor. This trip literally turned the minds over, the outlook on life changed dramatically. Then I met the architect Sidney Gilbert, who was the vice president of our host organization, Architects, Designers, Planners for Social Responsibility. This acquaintance had a very strong influence.
Yu. T.
Were you so influenced by the American architecture of those years?
S. K.
No, not architecture, but rather the organization of the process. Sydney was not a "star", the stars then did not pay attention to the Russians. But he was a brilliant organizer. Everything was perfectly arranged in his workshop, and we later used this experience in our work. And the second important thing is that he brought orders. We arranged something like an exchange of delegations between our workshops. Then we entered into an agreement - we pledged from among the Americans to work only with him, and in turn became the only Russian partners of Gilbert's workshop. He began to supply us with orders for the Russian offices of foreign companies - then they just began to settle down here. Basically, these were interiors, which our workshop made quite a lot, it was a good start and allowed us to gain experience. Then interiors became uninteresting to us, and in 1996 we transferred all these contacts to Boris Levyant, who still has an interior department.
Yu. T.
So you specialized?
S. K.
Yes, in the end we specialized. Although, like many others, they started with interiors, which they did a lot - only for the Burda Moden joint venture, in the late 1980s it was personally supervised by Raisa Maksimovna Gorbacheva, we designed the interior of a representative office in Moscow and 16 more in different cities. Then, in 1992, we made an urban development concept for the Mosfilmovsky district, which was considered at a meeting of the Moscow government, after which, figuratively speaking, a queue of heads of other municipalities lined up at our doors. Then there were reconstructions, even restorations, including a project for the restoration of the Senate in the Kremlin. Then environmental construction, restoration of historical buildings - the latter, in particular, includes the house where our office is located. Then, in the mid-1990s, we invested our work - we did several projects for free in order to get our own representative office in the city center.
Our logo still says “architecture, design, planning”. This is a declaration that we are a large, universal company. However, we rarely undertake interior design and only in those buildings that we build ourselves. We have not been involved in “two-dimensional” design - urban planning for a long time, although I and one of my co-authors from the period of the 1990s, Vyacheslav Bogachkin, graduated from the department of urban planning at the Moscow Architectural Institute. But gradually we realized that urban planning is a different type of activity: it is management, regulations, regulation. Therefore, although we are doing blocks of 10-15 hectares, I do not consider this work to be urban planning. They are just large objects. We are box architects. And we build only in the city, we do not take on cottages and suburban settlements. Ultimately, we specialized in large architectural projects that were not financially related to the authorities.
Yu. T.
Why?
S. K.
Sometime in the early 1990s, there was an attempt to work for budget money and the official who was responsible for distributing the order offered us to return part of the money for the order to him. It seemed to us that he was a thief, we did not take the order and decided to no longer contact such officials if possible. We decided that we need to work with people who build on their own money or on a loan, and not on budget funds.
Yu. T.
There was no desire to change, expand this established specialization?
S. K.
I have said on several occasions that we are a little tired of commercial orders. Of course, I want to do non-commercial architecture. Or at least a representative function. Now we are mainly engaged in fulfilling the tasks of the client, and the client, as a rule, sets the maximum tasks - to build at a cheaper price, to sell at a higher price. And I would like to build some kind of cultural object - one where profit is not the main criterion for success. But there are no suggestions. We are probably too dry, we are far from art. Maybe we have in vain created such an image for ourselves, did not pedal in any way the aesthetic component of our work for fear of being reproached for not being able to cope. Maybe it’s out of fright. Unreasonable.
Yu. T.
Nevertheless, in 2007 at Arch Moscow you were named “Architect of the Year” and, in addition, during the same year you collected all conceivable diplomas for the best buildings.
S. K.
I was surprised when we were honored as the best building architects. When a year earlier we were given a diploma for Avangard as the best project through the eyes of developers - I understood that.
Yu. T.
You often think in this way - you accentuate the pragmatic side of the matter, leaving aesthetics to art critics. At the same time, in your activity, you can clearly see the presence of rules and principles, style and behavior, which you adhere to quite firmly. Could you say a few words about principles?
S. K.
There are two principles and they both begin with the letter "y" - relevance and skill. Relevance means “do no harm”: a place, a city. This is the social responsibility of the architect to the city in which he works. And skill is a qualification that allows you to meet the needs of the client.
Yu. T.
But these are two opposite things: everything for the city and everything for the customer!
S. K.
Yes, and the third principle is a compromise, a balancing act between the two. My "sworn friends" often sneer at him - they say, Kiselev can run between the drops, an affectionate calf sucks two queens - everyone will remember. But I'm really convinced that a city architect must be a master of compromise between the greedy interests of the client and the city's constraints. As far as he succeeds, his construction in the city is so good. To be able to agree, explain why it is impossible, to satisfy the client materially and spiritually and at the same time not to get nasty with the city - these were our main principles when building in the historical center. Now, in large projects, we do the same whenever possible, but they have a different technical level of complexity. It has its own philosophy and its own aesthetics - you need to make an absolutely rational house. This already has a certain aesthetic component.
Yu. T.
How do you understand rationalism?
S. K.
Nothing should just happen. When I was a student, I read a textbook on formal logic for teacher training universities. I really liked it. It is clear there that everything follows from something and follows something. Therefore, it is difficult for me to accept the argument “I see it this way” from my colleagues, we even had conflicts and gradually there were only those who are able to explain their decisions, formulate - why it is drawn this way and not otherwise. Why krepovka, why is it green here and red there. Sometimes it is difficult, the decision comes on intuition, but at the same time it seems very important to me to realize the result so that there is a thought, and not just - this is how the hand turned.
Architecture, in my opinion, is a much more complex type of activity than just art. It is the organization of life, function, flows, movement of people and machines. Note, in the Vitruvian triad "benefit, strength, beauty" - beauty is in last place. Many of our colleagues and many art critics read this triad in the opposite direction, enhancing the aesthetic component. This can be understood, it is the highest in its manifestation and it is she who promotes the culture. The other two are taken for granted. But it seems to me that in the city it is very important to see in addition to the aesthetic and other components. A city is more complex than just the sum of buildings. This is an organism that needs to be controlled. To organize his processes with the help of some laws or rules, written and unwritten. For me, for example, the environment in general is very important in the city. And potholes on the asphalt and advertising banners across houses and uncleaned garbage cans. I'm not even talking about peeling facades.
Yu. T.
You have created a large architectural company with many projects and several CEOs. At the same time, your scrupulousness is well known - some time ago you even put your last name on the list of the group of authors sometimes not the first in a row, thus demonstrating the degree of participation in the project. Why?
S. K.
There are some rules of decency and there are traditions. At some point, the work becomes so much, and it is overgrown with so many assistants that it already becomes more of their work than yours. Generally speaking, it is monstrous if a project is in production - it seems to be mine, but I have lost control over it and it becomes a stranger more than mine. Therefore, I did not put my surname first in those houses that, as it seemed to me, were invented by others. This concerned primarily Skuratov and Bogachkin. They were self-sufficient. The guys opened their own companies and now have every right to write themselves from above.
At the same time, my "complexes" on this score were largely destroyed by a number of buildings, in which it was I who "whistled the melody", came up with the main idea - and which also received recognition. This is an oval building in the telegraph project, Subaru Center, Avangard, Hermitage Plaza and some other things, where I have defined the general principles. In Vanguard, I proposed to make the house multi-colored, from panels of three types, I proposed to correct the tension of the lines of its rounded plan, to make it like a wardrobe, on legs …
On the other hand, in the West in large companies it is customary that the owner always writes his name first. It's like an artistic director in a theater - he is not a director in every performance, but he defines the main themes. We preach a certain aesthetics - from this workshop, for example, something with capitals is unlikely to come out.
Yu. T.
Yes, you do not make classics. In order to make a neoclassical house in Levshinsky, you called Ilya Utkin. What else determines your aesthetics?
S. K.
As Okudzhava said, everyone writes how he breathes. I am convinced that any architecture is a self-portrait not only of the author, but also of the time and country. Civilization should reflect the architecture adequate to the level of its progress. Expanding the notion of relevance to a position in time, it seems to me sincerely that it is completely inappropriate to make an order architecture when there are other technical possibilities, a different language and a different mentality. There are, of course, specific tasks that force us to use traditional techniques, but this is, first of all, restoration
Yu. T.
That is, for you the classic is conservatism?
S. K.
Yes. Of course, both architecture can be talented and vice versa - but still, it seems strange to me to do classics now. Well, I don’t understand.
Yu. T.
Still, returning to the principles - what prompted you in the 1980s to leave the design institute and start your own workshop?
S. K.
First, there is such a thing as honesty. It is impossible to sit for 8 hours for 150 rubles and earn 800 in the evenings. It is pointless. It is clear that the main working time is not filled so intensively and a person begins during these empty eight hours to do what he should have done in the evening after work. This is one of the reasons.
There was another interesting point. I was apolitical all the time and was even proud that until the age of 27 I had not read the charter of the Komsomol. Then they pulled me into the party, I categorically refused, until Yuri Platonov, becoming a member of the Central Committee of the CPSU, persuaded me, believing that we should, as communists, rebuild this country. I entered, but as soon as I realized that I was mistaken, I quickly left there of my own free will. In general, this is a one-sided action - to resign from the party and leave GIPRONII. It was the spring of 1988. Then it was serious, they talked to me - how dare I put my party card.
Yu. T.
Is this all for the sake of being honest?
S. K.
Strictly speaking, yes. For example, they say about some colleagues at the approvals - it is necessary to check the numbers behind him. They never check anything behind me. Reputation is the most valuable asset - this has remained our motto.
Yu. T.
Does it interfere or help?
S. K.
It helps. I think it was a wise move to put on a reputation from the start. This is perhaps the main principle. Why Architect of the Year? I don’t know why! Probably, over the years we have developed such a reputation that allows us to evaluate and treat us well, both from the point of view of power - I mean the architectural one, and from the point of view of the clientele. Judging by the number of orders. We have earned it, now it does not work for us, and we only save it.
