When at the end of last week Moscow journalists received a press release about the upcoming Perm events, many were surprised by the phrase "On March 10, an international architectural competition will take place in Perm." As if a high-profile competition featuring several architectural celebrities is an event that can be held in one day! After all, we have known for several years how it actually happens: first, architects receive technical specifications, then they develop projects, then they send tablets and layouts to the exhibition, which is open either for the press or for everyone, then the jury studies them for a long time, and only then, finally, the winner is announced. But Perm gave up on all these tedious rituals: on March 10, six teams arrived in the city, each held an hour-long presentation, in which they talked about themselves in general and their proposal in particular, after which the jury consulted a little and soon delivered a verdict. For twenty years the city has been looking for an adequate solution to the problem of reconstruction of its most famous theater building, and Senator Sergei Gordeev, so to speak, untied this twenty-year-old knot in one day. The only thing that cannot but surprise an outside observer is the fact that a staunch fan of the avant-garde (and Gordeev, as you know, heads the Russian Avant-garde Foundation and owns half of the famous masterpiece house of Konstantin Melnikov) in this case gave preference to the most conservative project of the competition … However, first things first.
About the building
The theater building in question is deservedly considered one of the oldest and most famous in Russia. On its stage, for the first time in our country, the operas "Foam of Days" by E. Denisov, "Cleopatra" by J. Massenet, "Lolita" by R. Shchedrin, "Christ" by A. Rubinstein were staged. And the Perm theater is often called the Tchaikovsky House, since it was in it that all the stage works of the great composer were staged. The stone building of the theater was built in 1878 according to the project of the architect Karvovsky. It was a classical musical theater with an orchestra pit, corresponding acoustics and a parterre for 240 seats. By the middle of the 20th century, it became clear that the troupe needed a larger building, and in 1959 it was completely rebuilt, while splicing fragments of the old theater with new walls. The columns of the portico were taken out to the main facade, and behind the curtains, a fragment of a brick wall, laid out in the 19th century, is still carefully preserved. After reconstruction in 1959, the theater received 900 seats. However, by the mid-1980s it became clear that this increase in area was not enough: the theatrical organism grew and developed so rapidly that the banal embroidery of the camisole did not last for a long time, and the only way the city could help its main center of culture was to give it a new dress. … Such attempts have been made more than once. Over the past 20 years, Perm architects managed to complete about ten reconstruction projects, and intracity competitions were also held, but the discussion of their results did not go further. The city was constantly struggling with two directly opposite desires: they wanted to turn the theater into an ultra-modern building, then they wanted to save money on its reconstruction by simply adding a couple of new ones to the existing volume. The apotheosis of the first concept can be considered the project, which the local press called "Invisible" - in it the building was proposed to be completely revetted with glass, which would reflect the surrounding landscape and "dissolve" a new volume in it. And the pinnacle of the "economic" doctrine was the so-called "Ears", which were two massive wings attached to the side facades of the theater.
About contests
The leadership of the theater and the city is not very fond of talking about this, but, apparently, not a single architectural project impressed them enough to donate a significant part of the budget for its implementation. And only after two high-profile international competitions were held in Perm - first for the project of the new building of the Museum of Contemporary Art (won by Boris Bernasconi and Valerio Olgiati), and then for the reconstruction of the River Station (won by Project Meganom), it became clear that there is a fundamentally different architectural and economic scenario for the development of events. An architect can be invited from Moscow or even from Europe, and money to pay for his talent can be found from sponsors. The process was catalyzed by the new senator of the Perm Territory Sergei Gordeev (the competition for the River River was also organized by him, and the previous exhibition of contemporary art "The Russian Poor" had the subtitle "Sergei Gordeev's project"), and the main sponsor of the theatrical competition was the main taxpayer of the region - the Lukoil company.
About the assignment
The terms of reference were developed with the participation of foreign consultants (the Dutch urban planning bureau KCAP, the developer of the new master plan for Perm, and theater technology specialists from Theater Projects) and were distinguished by increased detail. In just 2 months, the contestants had to design a new stage for 1,100 seats and develop a project for the reconstruction of the existing building, as well as link these two operations so that the work of the theater would not be interrupted for a single day. In addition, it was necessary to think over the improvement of the adjacent park, bounded by Lenin, Sibirskaya, Sovetskaya and 25th Anniversary of October streets, to emphasize its connection with the theater complex and turn it into a place "where residents will just love to be, meet and stay."
About projects
It is clear that for the invited Europeans this last wish became a kind of beacon, signaling that the project should turn out to be completely ecological, and that the theater and the surrounding greenery merge in the ecstasy of mutual love. Here, a big role was also played by the way European architects saw Perm when they came here for the first time this harsh winter. The motley buildings of the city itself and the endless dense forests around, chained in the Kama ice and snowdrifts the size of a man. And suddenly, in the very center, there is a real park with fountains and sculptures and a classicist building in the back. The fact that this rectangle of greenery in an industrial city was interpreted by foreigners as a piece of untouched forest in a stone jungle is perhaps even too expected. And, nevertheless, most of the contestants followed this path.
PLP Architects, who were the first to present their project to the jury, said that they understand the existing theater as a temple of art in a deep forest, symmetrical and self-sufficient. The architects immediately dismissed the idea of reproducing the architectural language of an existing building and turned to nature. They remembered, for example, that Tchaikovsky drew inspiration from the forests of his native land. They thought that the new center of culture was something like a clearing in the forest, where primitive people gathered to perform ritual dances. In the horseshoe-shaped auditorium, such a glade is really remotely guessed, because it is housed in a transparent spherical volume, which continues towards the park with a long glass canopy supported by thin columns, designed, of course, to symbolize trees. The stage itself with its spacious pockets, rehearsal rooms and technological rooms are grouped in an elongated volume, placed along the back and side facades of the existing theater. The new building faces the street with a glazed gallery and a spectacular spiral staircase, but even these visually light elements do not conceal the overall massiveness of the structure - the new construction actually "overlaid" the classicist theater from three sides, and the perception of the main facade, in front of which the architects proposed to arrange a large pond, also changes.
Another British bureau, Avery Associates, is adding an almost equal volume to the back of the existing theater, and fanning out pedestrian galleries on the sides. The undulating edges of the roof are supported by the same thin columns. Between the old and the new building, the architects envisioned a narrow street, into which tall and narrow glass bay windows of the dressing rooms open out. In addition, it is through it at the level of the second floor that a bridge will be thrown over which the scenery will be transported so that everyone can watch this spectacular process. The street, as conceived by the authors, resembles a mountain gorge (near the Urals), and the snow-white lining of the walls resembles snow on the peaks.
Perhaps the most artistic and delicate theme of columns as trees was played by the Danish bureau Henning Larsen Architects. The architects placed the new theater in the far left corner of the site, practically at the intersection of Sibirskaya and Sovetskaya streets. A block of rehearsal rooms, make-up rooms and workshops is being erected at a tactful distance from the historic building along its rear facade, and the stage itself and the auditorium are actually located parallel to the existing volume. The main facades of both theaters are on the same line, however, in an effort to emphasize the dominant role of the existing building, the Danes actually equate with it not the entire volume, but only the canopy of its roof that is strongly brought forward. You probably already guessed that this structure is supported by thin columns. Only in the place where the supports touch the plane of the roof, the Danes cut rectangular slots in it - they are protected from precipitation by glass, but the sun or evening illumination will penetrate through them exactly like rays in a real forest make their way to the ground through the dense crowns of trees … The architects make the main facade of the new building triangular - these are several tiers of galleries intended for all citizens. The sharp-nosed console is sheathed with wood, and from the street, given the harsh climate of Perm, it is separated by glass screens.
The famous Dutch bureau Neutelings Riedijk Architects (the project in Perm was presented by Willem Neutelings himself) also made the new theater a continuation of the park. True, they interpreted it as an object of landscape design. The fact is that the Kama is located just a block from the theater, and the park has a strong slope towards the river. The difference in elevation on its territory is almost 14 meters, and the Dutch (they attracted their compatriots - urbanists West 8 to work on the project) proposed to level the inclined plane, create a green platform around the existing theater, into which all new premises will be dug. In fact, behind, as well as to the right and left of the building with a portico, a hill is poured, its slopes no longer facing the river, but in the opposite direction, towards the theater square. On these slopes, grand staircases are arranged, and between them there are "hollows" of the entrance lobbies and foyer. However, it was not possible to fulfill the requirements of the TK only due to this platform, so the architects are constructing two additional volumes - a parallelepiped of the auditorium and a tower with rehearsal halls. It should be noted that these are buildings that are very characteristic of Neutelings Riedijk Architects - they are faced with copper sheets, decorated with thematic patterns of dancing figures, and have an emphatically sculptural character. By the way, for the jury, these somewhat sham volumes became the main stumbling block - Willem Neutelings was even asked at the presentation whether he could (in which case) lower the height of the tower or remove it altogether. The architect looked discouragedly at his layout, but after a moment's hesitation replied: "Yes, of course."
Even greater conformism in relation to his own project on defense was demonstrated by David Chipperfield. The essence of his proposal is to build a volume of practically the same size and configuration behind the existing theater, and then supplement it with a ceremonial apse, facing Sovetskaya Street, and two side "pockets", of which one serves as the focus of technical premises, and the second turns into the spectator's foyer. A new chamber square is being broken up in front of the foyer, thanks to which the theater receives entrances from two streets at once - from Sibirskaya and from Sovetskaya. The facades of the new building have a contrasting solution: the main volume, which continues the historical building, has massive and blank stone planes, and the side wings are glass screens sewn with thin modernist slats. And if in the case of the projects of the Danes and the Dutch, the authorship was obvious at first glance, then in the project of David Chipperfield, only the general minimalism of the composition and the musical rhythm of the lined glass facade are actually Chipperfield. However, at the presentation, the architect admitted that this project is only an initial outline, and the main work is ahead. Kees Kristianssen, head of KCAP, asked: "Do I understand correctly that there are no windows at all in the apse and the new building faces Sovetskaya Street with a blank facade?" “I don't really like it myself,” Chipperfield replied calmly. “Of course, there will be some windows, but for now I was more interested in the volume itself.” Sergei Gordeev, in turn, asked if it was possible to separate the old and the new buildings, if suddenly the authorities for the protection of monuments were outraged by such an interpretation of the idea of synergy, and the British architect also agreed to this.
The last one to defend his project before the jury was Sergey Skuratov. The Russian had to do the almost impossible, namely to interest the experts, who had been evaluating projects for more than five hours in a row and had already lost any acuity. To be honest, we are used to the fact that, against the background of foreign participants, Russian architects in competitions, as a rule, look paler, but Skuratov is a completely different case. He is very talented and just as ambitious to allow himself to be unnoticed, and, realizing that it is possible to outplay foreigners only by jumping an order of magnitude higher, Skuratov did it - his work took into account hydrogeology, history, sociology, and even the smallest everyday needs of the existing theater, and the final project was striking in detail. The conceptual difference between the project and all the previous ones was that the Russian architect hid the main volume of the new stage behind the existing building and interpreted the L-shaped composition of the complex under construction as a kind of open arms embracing the old theater. Moreover, the functions in this L are strictly separated, and it received two inputs, solved in completely different ways. The main entrance is interpreted in the form of a loggia, to which the main staircase leads, and the entrance to the rehearsal and small halls is decorated with a promising portal, whose slope towards the historical building can be considered a respectful curtsey towards the "elder brother". Skuratov covers almost all facades with energy-saving glass, partially painted from the inside in white, symbolizing the frosty drawings on the windows, so characteristic of winter Perm. In those rooms that do not need excessive transparency, composite panels with a thin layer of copper glued on are placed behind the glass as a second layer. As conceived by the author, "glass makes the architecture of the theater modern, and copper brings the effect of theatrical luxury and mystery."
The jury unanimously commended the work of Sergei Skuratov for professionalism and attention to detail, but stressed that he overdid it - in terms of area, his new theater was almost twice the size of the TK (32180 sq.m. instead of the required 18564 sq.m.). I also did not like the asymmetrical arrangement of the new complex in relation to the old theater and the existing streets - this can be considered Keys Kristianssen's personal predilection, but it has already formed the basis of the new master plan for the Perm center. For the same reason, Chipperfield's project suited the jury perfectly - compact, tactful and canonically symmetrical. Sergey Gordeev at the ceremony of announcing the winner described it as “the most understandable and economical of all those presented”, and Kristianssen even called it “an invisible hat” for his delicacy to the existing volume. So it turns out that the theater will nevertheless attach "ears", but in order to hide them, it is absolutely not necessary to chain the building in mirrored glass, it is enough to extend it into the depths of the site. And, probably, only the prim Briton Chipperfield could really summarize all the long-term searches of Perm architects so artlessly and succinctly.
