For several days, the press and the network have been discussing rumors about the alleged plans of the Ministry of Culture to disband five humanitarian research institutes under its jurisdiction (which now employ about 800 people), replacing them with one research center (out of 100 people). This was preceded by ministerial inspections at institutes, a polemic between the director of the State Institute of Art Studies Dmitry Trubochkin and Deputy Minister Grigory Ivliev, and a proposal by the director of the Russian Institute for Cultural Studies Kirill Razlogov “to create a humanitarian Skolkovo”. Minister Medinsky has already apparently denied the rumors about the merger-reduction, although not completely (but said that "this is one of the ideas"). The Institute of Art History, one of the five research institutes on the list, today held an open Academic Council (a new form of meeting scientists with the public, already unfairly called a rally, which was soon refuted). Art critics are collecting signatures under a letter to the President of the country with a call to "stop the destruction of the humanities."
Without going into further details of the intrigue and without pretending to clarify the exact plans of the Ministry of Culture (now it is unlikely anyone can do it), we asked a few questions to the doctor of art history with an architectural education, the author of many works on the history of ancient Russian architecture and the history of restoration, Deputy Director of the Kremlin Museums and employee of the Old Russian sector of the Institute of Art History, Professor Andrei Batalov.
Archi.ru:
Andrei Leonidovich, you and I definitely do not need to explain the value of the Institute of Art History, but how could you formulate what exactly this institute is interesting for for our readers, among whom there are many architects?
Andrey Batalov:
First of all, it is the only institute that deals with fundamental science - a comprehensive study of the history of art: from music and theater to painting, architecture and applied arts. Creating a comprehensive picture of the history of artistic culture not only in Russia, but also throughout the world.
It is important that the attitude of the institute to any period of history has always been marked by the professional calmness of historians - a clear and precise, in some ways even civic position. At a time when there was a generally accepted negative attitude towards the era of modernism, historicism and avant-garde - the institute has always seen in the history of these eras and trends, and defended its undoubted artistic value. The first books on Art Nouveau were published here. For many years, it was this institute that was the center for the study of the history of Russian architecture, which was important not only in itself, but also for the development of professional architectural restoration.
The fact is that the quality of architectural restoration directly depends on the correct "reading" of the monument, the correct attribution, which is born from the fundamental knowledge of the history of architecture. The knowledge that restorers now possess was formed precisely in this institute. For decades, meetings of the Old Russian art sector have been a forum for many restorers. These meetings were constantly attended by Sergei Sergeevich Podyapolsky, Boris Lvovich Altshuller - people whose names are associated with the development of the national school of scientific restoration.
Restoration without science is impossible - and it is in this institute that the history of architecture is considered as a part of historical science. Therefore, if this institution is destroyed, it will be a significant blow not only to fundamental science, but also to the branches connected with it. The expert center for the restoration of architectural monuments will also disappear.
I am not even talking about the Collection of Monuments - a sector that has accumulated knowledge about the entire architectural heritage of our country for decades.
Yes, but the ministry has its own collection of monuments. How is it related to the institute?
Indeed, the materials of the collection are also kept in the ministry. But it is the institute's Code of Monuments that is the analytical center, it forms an expert opinion on each object. The intellectual driving force behind this gigantic project is the Arch Sector of the Art History Institute. This sector publishes volumes of the Code, identifies monuments, attributes them. Count Uvarov also said that a silent monument cannot be included in the history of cultural development. The Svoda sector is in charge of identifying and attributing monuments. We can say that this sector is an intellectual center for collecting information about the architectural heritage in our country. It has been in operation for several decades.
The Strugatskys have a wonderful story "A million years before the end of the world", the heroes of which repeat all the time: "where is the estate, and where is the water" - and in the end everything turns out to be interconnected, studies of the Japanese language and astronomy are "in one plate" and together somehow influence the future. So, even if one does not go so far into abstract comparisons, how can modern architecture and fundamental humanities be connected? Why do modern architects need a well-written history?
Cultural life in the country, including the life of an architect, is like an organism. It is impossible to imagine that the hands will work normally if the head is turned off: it will be an uncontrolled process. Therefore, if in one place we overlap the studies of the history of architecture - both Russian and Western - we cut off the source of knowledge.
A break in the development of the history of architecture, which occurred, for example, in the 1930s and then in the 1950s, had a very painful effect on the general architectural culture. The books that were conceived did not appear. If the academic direction is destroyed now, it will affect in 30-40 years. Because there will be no new works on the history of architecture that shape the architect's perception of his environment. After all, architectural consciousness is not only the environment of the city in which he lives, but it is a common intellectual environment, which should include both knowledge of the world context and knowledge of history. In architecture schools around the world, architects are taught to think, and knowledge of history - it, first of all, determines the cultural level of the architect. It is impossible to imagine a modern Western architect without this kind of knowledge. An architect must think. The non-thinking architect turns into a draftsman.
Any concept, any idea of how to organize any environment, is based on background knowledge, and this background knowledge is formed by the concept of context - understood in a very broad sense, which includes ideas about the history of the profession and the history of related fields. If these notions are false, then everything else falls apart like a house of cards. It is not by chance that fundamental science is associated with the word “foundation”: without this foundation, both human and architectural culture will collapse. Or, more precisely, it will begin to feed on myths that distort reality.
How to distinguish myth from scientific knowledge?
Scientific knowledge is distinguished by accuracy and validity, exactingness to the results that have to be repeatedly checked in the process of work in order to form reliable ideas - in particular, about architecture or painting of the past. Vladimir Ivanovich Pluzhnikov said very accurately: “our institute has a cool climate in which bacteria do not breed”. A demanding attitude to knowledge excludes unhealthy myth-making and ultimately allows you to find out the truth and build conclusions on a solid foundation.
Without this, mythical trends begin to emerge, "bacteria" begin to appear, which form primitive and, thanks to this, very understandable, easily perceived, but absolutely deceitful schemes.
The Institute is accused of inefficiency, that is, insufficient speed of preparation of publications …
A number of volumes of the History of Russian Art have been prepared. An official may think that they should grow like mushrooms. But this is not a popular science book, it is primarily a work on the generalization and refinement of knowledge. There is research behind each volume. Two volumes have already been published, one is the most complex, prepared under Alexei Ilyich Komech under his leadership, dedicated to the most ancient period - the significance of this volume cannot be overestimated. Other volumes are being done as quickly as possible in order for this to be a truly fundamental work. Such books take a long time. All these years people have worked without much support from the ministry and received grants. To say that these people have eaten some mythical state millions is absurd.
If the Russian sovereigns thought only about the speed of the release of volumes, we would not have a Collection of Russian Chronicles, there would be no Archaeographic Commission. Our sovereigns counted on for a very long time, because they did not feel like temporary workers - we are still reaping their labors.
On the contrary, the Soviet government, often, but usually unsuccessfully, tried to demand a quick practical result from fundamental science. It is not right. What science does cannot be reflected in practice directly and immediately. Fundamental science forms, so to speak, a basic intellectual product, the level of which affects the quality of the cultural atmosphere as a whole.
Let's imagine for a moment that the institute has been disbanded - what will happen?
This will actually mean a huge blow to the country's prestige, which no one can yet realize. The fact is that if a country claims a place in the common European civilization, this country must have institutions that study art and artistic culture. Studying not only their provinces, but the whole world. Because the level of civilization is also determined by the level of historical knowledge.
The Institute possesses unique scientific traditions and a valuable intellectual atmosphere that have been created and honed for decades - if they are destroyed, it will be a loss for the intellectual reserve of the country. The country, imperceptibly for people from the ministry, will become more provincial.
