"The greatest monument of the history and culture of Russia is in danger!" - with such a heading in the "Architectural Heritage" community, a message recently appeared about the intentions of the mayor of Zvenigorod Leonid Stavitsky to "revive" the Kremlin on the territory of the ancient settlement, which is called Gorodok, by arranging an "open-air museum" for tourists in it: "In none of the other a city near Moscow (and even more so in Moscow) to carry out such work is simply unrealistic - everything has been built up for a long time. We have in the very heart of the ancient settlement - in the literal sense of the word, a plowed field,”the mayor's election campaign emphasizes. Next to the Dormition Cathedral of the XIV century, according to the plans of the head of the city, “a complex of ancient buildings carefully recreated in detail - the dwellings of our ancestors of the XI-XIV centuries, workshops of potters, coppersmiths, armourers and chain workers” will grow, by analogy with the Moscow “City of Craftsmen” on Fili. It is also planned to clear the defensive ramparts from the layers. “Right there you can have a bite to eat right in the historic interiors, drink sbitnya or mead, watch the performances of folklore groups,” the mayor shares his fascinating program.
The author of the post zvenigorod calls the initiative "another tasteless remake, a fake to attract tourists who want to have fun under the spreading cranberries." "The archaeological" stuffing "is supposed to be unearthed in a hurry, - zvenigorod is convinced. - We, Zvenigorod residents, already know what this means in bureaucratic jargon. For example, "recreational lightweight buildings in the" chalet "style in the language of the chief architect Semochkin are cottages for new Russians on the priceless Duna burial mounds near Zvenigorod."
If you rummage in the press, it turns out that the plans to revive the Zvenigorod Kremlin were born back in 2004. Since then, some new buildings have already appeared near the cathedral, but the clearing inside the ramparts is still empty. True, this is only at first glance: in fact, there is a most valuable archaeological layer here, and this is what they write about this in the comments to the post: “I believe that such reconstructions have a right to exist. BUT!!! Outside the territory of archeological monuments. Where there is not a centimeter of the cultural layer! … You can even grow New Kitezh, but a real archaeological monument must remain intact. Remember - even the most correct excavation is the destruction of a monument."
However, the project also found supporters: “As a sane person, I cannot share such an emotionally categorical position,” someone I. Vadeev writes in the comments. - The town in Zvenigorod can be recreated with a high degree of accuracy on the basis of scientific and archaeological research. In the same way, it is possible to revive the lost kremlins: Ruza, Torzhok, Kashina, Dovmont gorod, Zaryadye in Moscow, Landskrona in St. Petersburg, etc. The only question is the control of specialists and the public over all works. " This project, according to the author of the post, will allow to explore Gorodok and "create a magnificent museum, find answers to many questions." The main thing, in his opinion, is that everything should be done "according to the old technology, exactly on the foundations of buildings and exclusively from wood."
On the website sobory.ru, where this letter was posted, it was considered very opportunistic. Artist Sergei Zagraevsky asks: “I wonder if Mr. Vadeev is a real person or a fictional one by the designers? I hope that the second … "By the way, according to Zagraevsky himself," in Zvenigorod, the authorities took the "St. Petersburg path" - under the cover of a monstrous and unlikely absurdity with the development of Gorodok, they distract public attention from some smaller and numerous violations of the historical environment (built-up mounds, eg)…". The blogger under the nickname Zvenigorodez has an even more pessimistic mood: “In Zvenigorod, there are 3 opinions among the people:“this will not happen, since we will all lie under the bulldozers”,“this is just money laundering,”“EVERYTHING can be in our city (as it shows history with mounds, Pervomayskaya street and other lost monuments) ".
Meanwhile, Pskov is also being selected for new construction in the protected zones. The local expert community is concerned about the proposed changes to the RZZ, which entail a sharp reduction in the boundaries of the historical settlement. A protest letter to the head of the city in this regard was written by employees of the Pskov Museum-Reserve - it is published by the recently appeared blog of the defenders of historical Pskov, which is led by the Deputy Chairman of the Pskov VOOPIIiK Lev Shlosberg. It also tracks the fate of another dangerous project for the center - a high-rise block opposite the Snetogorsk Monastery, which, according to the General Plan of 2010, was intended to create a park and a sports complex.
And in Samara, the next construction in the center was started by the Russian Orthodox Church: recently, the authorities, under its pressure, returned to considering the project to restore the cathedral on Kuibyshev Square, which was destroyed in the early 1930s. Samara blogger golema puts forward five arguments against the implementation of this project, the most compelling of them are urban planning. First, the city's skyline has changed significantly since the cathedral was built in 1864: “the restored cathedral will not be able to dominate against the background of two“candles”in the“European quarter,”the author believes. Secondly, “the construction of the temple not in its original place violates the idea from the point of view of the cross-plan of the square. Those. the main goal of the pre-revolutionary builders of the cathedral today is not relevant for this part of the city. " Thirdly, many are sorry to lose the ensemble formed in Soviet times around the DK im. Kuibyshev (Theater of Opera and Ballet) in the style of "Stalinist Empire". In addition, construction on the square will deprive residents of public space and destroy the so-called bunker Kalinin ("Control center of the urban district of Samara, where the administration is evacuated in case of an emergency").
Other bloggers agree with golema, but not on everything. For example karl_snov writes: “Yes. It's not enough for us this ugly so-called. "European Quarter", so also this. Although in fairness, the theater on the square is also not a very beautiful building. We just got used to it. " And 3ojlotou notes: “Not so long ago I looked at the map of Samara, I was shocked by the number of temples, churches, etc. Where else is it, and even in the city center? What for?" And ania_ba reminds that a similar story happened not so long ago in Yekaterinburg: “They were going to squeeze the cathedral back to Truda Square, where the Stone Flower fountain is. The people were very indignant, it seems that this case has quieted down right now. By the way, golema himself is generally not against the construction of new churches: “I am calmer about the fact that churches are being built in other districts of Samara, I even like some, such as at the intersection of Stavropolskaya and Novo-Vokzalnaya. The temple on the Frunze glade looks worthy. But in the center it is no longer necessary. At the most, the church in the Kutyakov-Vodnikov area could be recreated. " As for Kuibyshev Square, the best option, in his opinion, would be to simply improve it: “I liked the idea of Vagan Gaikovich, proposed back in the Soviet years, about arranging fountains on the square”.
Another initiative of the ROC touched Moscow: the clergy propose to build a new church on the territory of the university complex on Vorobyovy Gory. This news created a real rift in the student community. The majority of votes were on the side of the opponents of the project, and they sent an open letter to the rector Viktor Sadovnichy, which emphasizes the multinational and multi-confessional composition of the students. Hundreds of students commented on the letter: they are mainly concerned not so much with the temple as an architectural object, but with the fact of the ROC's interference in the affairs of the university: “Well, after all, there is a Church of St. Tatiana, a church next to the observation deck, and the University Hotel, that on Indira Gandhi Square is occupied and managed by the Pilgrimage Center of the Moscow Patriarchate. Where and why else? It would be better if the Moscow State University has restored the system of cultural leisure that has been completely destroyed over the past decade. " In the stream of indignant entries, there are also rare comments in defense of the project: “Why not build? The only thing is that when they say “temple”, they immediately imagine a standard “washed-out” building, a building built according to the “architectural canons” of the temple … Today technologies have stepped forward, and the temples are the same … I think that if this goes on and there will be no “modernization” "Churches, young people will completely stop going there …"
Since we are talking about "modernization", it's time to move on to an overview of posts on contemporary architectural practice. In the column of Eduard Hayman on the Theory & Practice portal, an article appeared on 3D printing technology, which, according to the author, will lead to a cultural revolution in the near future. “Architects are persistently creating an image of a new city life, in which everything can be printed: from women's jewelry to entire neighborhoods,” writes Hayman, adding that a qualitatively new method will differ in that three-dimensional printing “allows you to create mechanisms at once … In printed mechanisms all parts are already in place and ready to go as soon as excess raw material is removed. " In addition to designers who have mastered this method more actively than others, architects are also selected to "print" buildings. For example, Dr. Behrokh Khoshnevis from the University of Southern California, according to Hyman, is developing Contour Crafting technology, i.e. layer-by-layer production of buildings from ceramic material. And a mechanism called D-Shape, designed by Enrico Dini, "makes it possible to create a full-size sandstone building without human intervention."
Meanwhile, the most advanced architectural practice in Moscow, the Strelka Institute, announced that the famous architect Yuri Grigoryan will become its director in the new academic year. Now Grigorian, together with Michael Schindhelm, leads the research topic "Public space", but he was so carried away by the work that the head of the Meganom bureau enthusiastically accepted the new proposal: "The whole work process that led to this was almost the most interesting time in my life, in terms of the amount of information, new contacts, reflections, teamwork,”says Grigoryan. - There is a tradition that architects go to teach at some point … This is not even guild solidarity, not professional ethics, but you just have to and that's it. And I also went like this six years ago at the Moscow Architectural Institute. You can't just eat it all yourself."
And the Museum of Architecture in its blog talks about a new large international project in which it takes part. We are talking about the exhibition "Architecture in Uniform" with the subtitle "Design and construction during the Second World War", which opened the other day at the Canadian Center for Architecture (Montreal). It was curated by the famous architectural historian Jean-Louis Cohen - the meaning of his manifesto boils down to the fact that "the war served as an accelerator of technological innovation and production, and this led to the superiority of modernism in architecture."Materials for the exhibition were provided by museums of ten countries participating in hostilities. The MUAR blog partially publishes the Soviet part, which includes the Trophy Pavilion in Moscow's Gorky Park by Alexei Shchusev, the project for the post-war restoration of Smolensk by Georgy Golts, the military monuments of Andrei Burov, Grigory Zakharov, Ilya Golosov, Yakov Belopolsky.
