A spacious vaulted hall - the chamber of the former sovereign of the Apothecary Prikaz once here, is occupied with a very laconic, simply small exposition. Sometimes they say about the exhibition that it “holds” or organizes the space of the hall - so, it does not hold and does not organize here, but as if it seeks to take up less space, disappear from this hall or become invisible. It can be assumed that this is deliberate - the viewer, if he has already come, is forced to catch the exhibition "by the tail", to peer at the miniature, which, under other circumstances, would probably have passed without hesitation.
So, the hall is almost empty. On the right, a penguin costume (a remnant of the winter campaign "Icing" at Archstoyanie in Nikolo-Lenivets) meditates in front of multi-colored screens with the inscription "Lord, have mercy" in four languages, selected according to the principle of maximum difference in the style of the inscription - the penguin, apparently, understands. Further: behind thick brick pillars are hidden two tables with handwritings - the most material and familiar part of the exhibition. However, from the material there is still: a lace fly-towel in an embroidered column - the newest work of the group, shown in the fall at the exhibition of the Museum of Architecture in honor of the anniversary of Palladio; a model of "Skhrona No. 2", the Pantheon, buried under the ground, which was also exhibited in the museum, but a year ago, at the exhibition "Persimfans". And another carpet; with the carpet it is unclear: probably an airplane. All these objects are placed in the hall at a great distance from each other, as if at random.
The rest of the exhibit consists of a series of small monitors hung along the wall. On each of them there are videos of one or two projects of the group. To understand, you need to stand in front of each monitor for 2-3 minutes. Not a lot, but it requires some effort from the viewer - if you just walk by, you will not see anything. It turns out an express cartoon.
All together - demonstrates the work of "Icing" for about 10 years. Works belonging to a special genre, which I would like to call “conceptual” in the simplicity of my soul, but this word is now unpopular. The curator of the exhibition, Doctor of Art History Vladimir Sedov, came up with another term, especially for her - “paraarchitecture”. According to the curator, the concept was born from an analogy with "paralysis" (this word means everything that "falls short" of high literature: science fiction, detective story, fantasy …). I would like to give another analogy - in a similar way the word "Metaphysics" appeared when publishing the works of Aristotle: "what is after physics" - that is, it is not clear what, that cannot be defined otherwise. Subsequently, the definition, given by necessity, stuck, and now everyone knows what metaphysics is - well, or at least guesses. Apparently, the curator of the exhibition is counting on the same thing - perhaps this definition will take root and be remembered - after all, the genre has not yet had a clear definition.
What is this genre? Things made by architects, but not designed to be built, are commonly called "paper architecture." This familiar definition is also not to everyone's liking, if only because it has two meanings: one means any project, unrealized and put on the table, the second - competitive projects of young architects of the 1980s. In the opinion of many, these projects, which won international competitions of ideas, were the best that late Soviet architecture gave us. Now, some "former wallets" are successful practicing architects, some are artists; exhibitions such as last year's Persimfans do happen from time to time, but it is clear that by the 2000s, “paper architecture” had become weak. Young people all this time were more busy with practice, and there was especially no one to develop the movement. Icing is one of the exceptions; their interests are not limited to realizations. Although there are others - everyone who participates in the festivals "Goroda", "Shargorod" and others.
"Icing", although it is engaged in practice, but, unlike many, as if hides it. They don't advertise their realizations very much. The exhibition is no exception: in the press release and in the catalog it is said that they have real works, and that three of the group work in the same workshop, but it is not said which works and in which workshop. Although it is known that this is the workshop of Sergei Tkachenko, that the architects from "Icing" participated in the design of the building "Patriarch", for which they painted the egg house, or "maternity hospital in Bethlehem", later built by Sergei Tkachenko at the corner of Mashkov and Chaplygin streets. As for the rest of the realizations, it is not even very well known … But the house-egg is not at the exhibition, although if you try, you can find one small sketch among the drawings. But on the whole, there is a feeling that the authors diligently distinguish between practice and “paraarchitecture”. And they want only the latter to be identified with "Icing".
Here I would like to argue with the esteemed professor Sedov. Paraliterature is something inferior to "high" literature, it is to some extent a profanation. The projects exhibited in the Pharmaceutical Order are not profanities. Their relationship to architecture is not entirely clear; it is not "before" or "after" architecture. It is clear that these are things that the authors do "for themselves" and for competitions during the time free from the main work. What brings her together again in "paper architecture". Paraliterature, by definition, is more popular than "high", but here it seems to be the other way around - it is a kind of "pure" creativity and reflection, in contrast to the practice burdened with realities. There is more paralysis than "high" (read real); "Paraarchitecture", if we accept the term - less than "real".
This is, of course, not architecture. Only some of the works here look like architecture, and even then not quite. Bridge of the XXI century, on supports over the bed of the Moskva River, a bridge across the Bering Strait; "Object at the intersection of the Bering Strait and the date line", which looks like rusty submarines; "New Moscow", dug out of the ground; "Refutation of Russian cosmism" through the proof that if you divide five-story buildings with bunks and compact them 4 times, you can resurrect and resettle everyone who has ever lived on earth. "Temples" made of umbrellas; "Russian elephant" in the form of a mammoth. This is an incomplete list.
All this, if it looks like architecture, is, in meaning, something opposite.
Rather, it is an attempt to laugh at the cliches: the bridge is not across the river, but along; a multi-tiered city does not grow up, but dug down; and so on, each project has its own, to put it bluntly, joke that turns something inside out. Discovers a paradox in itself.
I think the main point here is laughter. This laugh distinguishes the projects of "Icing" from the classic "paper" ones (those were more romantic and far from always funny, although they were often paradoxical too, there is continuity here). And I must admit that this kind of laughter is useful for modern architecture (and life in general), there are too many clichés.
