The “conversational” part of the Biennale's program consisted of numerous lectures and master classes (both by world architecture stars like Rem Koolhaas and Peter Eisenman, and representatives of manufacturing companies and developers), as well as discussions, with their scope and themes sometimes more reminiscent of scientific conferences. So, on May 28, the Club of German Architects and Engineers (KDAI) held a round table on the topic "Restructuring: Towards Sustainable Architecture and Urban Development Planning", and on May 29, the discussion "The Future of the Metropolis" was organized by the Project Russia magazine, in which French city planners.
As you know, the main theme of the Biennale was modernization - apartments, houses, neighborhoods, cities and landscapes between megalopolises, and it was the logic “from the particular to the general” that guided the curators, forming its exposition. But in the discussions, such a continuity of scale did not work out - they talked about everything at once, and the leitmotif of any discussion invariably became regrets that Russia, alas, is still infinitely far from the humanistic trends of Western architecture. Of course, it is clear that we are unlikely to be able to take it and jump into the world of sustainability in one fell swoop, but we can gradually get closer to what is already a real practice for Europe, and the easiest way to do this is through constant exchange of experience and exercises on a given topic. And in this sense, curator Bart Goldhoorn for his persistent, repeated from year to year question "How to live?" one can only thank.
The city's resources and their wise use have become one of the main topics of the current Biennale. This issue has been studied in one way or another by almost all non-commercial projects, from the Perm exposition to student works. Using the example of Dubna and Chernyakhovsk, young architects showed non-trivial and, most importantly, realizable scenarios for the revival of small towns in Russia. And if the authors see the key to the renovation of Dubna in the once flourishing, and now pretty forgotten network of bicycle routes, then the "gene code" of Chernyakhovsk, located in the Kaliningrad region, is the historical buildings - residential buildings and massifs built in the 1920s according to the projects of the famous German architect Hans Scharun. The project “Krapivna: Resurrection”, already mentioned more than once, was devoted to the same topic, within the framework of which students, under the leadership of Evgeny Ass, developed a comprehensive strategy for the revival of the city and its inclusion in an active socio-cultural life. Interestingly, the economic side of the issue was also thought out - the students proposed to develop the Tolstoy brand (the writer once worked at the local zemstvo), as well as a local liqueur factory. The presentation of this project, which was conducted by Evgeny Viktorovich himself, attracted a lot of spectators. The objects, touching in their simplicity and restraint, did not leave anyone indifferent. And Evgeny Ass admitted that he considers such a result to be the most significant - according to him, the creation of a seemingly uncomplicated “new provincial architecture” is much more difficult for modern students than, say, designing an airport. The existing fabric of historical quarters was also used by the architects of Ostozhenka as the main resource for the modernization of the city. As Andrei Gnezdilov said at the presentation of the project, they considered a parcel or a unit of historical households as a module, the boundaries of which, as a rule, are firewall walls. For each of the cells, the architects have developed their own set of options for sealing construction, preserving the existing scale and nature of the environment.
All these projects were carried out in line with the European urban planning logic, however, the curator does not harbor any illusions about their implementation. At one of the round tables, Bart Goldhoorn bluntly stated that sustainability is fashionable, but, to put it mildly, is not a Russian topic at all. Is it possible to convince a Russian developer that high-quality and energy-saving architecture in the long term is much more profitable than everything that is being built in our cities today? And if so, how to do it? Bart Goldhoorn himself recognizes only social responsibility and denies all kinds of legislative coercion - he is convinced that the latter, if they can lead to something, then only to the restriction of the architect's creative freedom. Well, in just a couple of decades, and the developer's mentality will inevitably evolve, and perhaps really for the better. By the way, the curator is not at all embarrassed by such long periods - biomorphic architecture did not take root in Russia at one time, and this, in Goldhoorn's opinion, was only good for her. Now "sustainable" is not taking root very well - and this is also not bad, because so far it is perceived in our country as, first of all, sophisticated eco-buildings. It is much more important if at this stage the investor understands such simple things as the advisability of building low-rise housing and creating cozy courtyards. A high-quality living environment, by definition, should not be expensive, and this is what was convincingly proved by both the expositions of the current Biennale and the discussions held within its framework.
