Bloggers, of course, did not miss the results of the high-profile competition of concepts of the Museum and Educational Center of the Polytechnic Museum and Moscow State University. Lomonosov. Meanwhile, the victory of the consortium of the famous Italian Massimiliano Fuksas and the Russian bureau "Speech" became an occasion to discuss not only the architecture of the contestants, but also the professional ethics of architects. As the initiator of one of such discussions Sergey Kryuchkov writes in his blog on Facebook, “out of several strong teams, the winner is the one in which the managing partner just recently became the chief architect of the city and a member of the jury of this competition”. In the opinion of bloggers, Sergey Kuznetsov, for ethical reasons, should have left the jury after the results of the first stage were announced, when it became clear that Speech had gone further.
Grigory Revzin undertook to dispel suspicions: “I believe that Fuksas won and won honestly. - he writes in the comments to the discussion. - Sergey Kuznetsov voted for 3XN and did not know who he was voting for…. Kuznetsov's position was not biased and dangerous for his former bureau. " However, bloggers in the majority do not argue with the fact that the Italian-Russian tandem won deservedly, another thing is that, according to Sergey Kryuchkov, such a situation, in principle, should not arise. For example, as the user Andrey Vozzhov writes, "in Ottawa when considering an architectural project by the city council, council members, very respectable people whose business interests may intersect with the initiators of the project, leave the hall until the end of making a decision on it."
The person of Sergei Kuznetsov, meanwhile, continues to arouse great interest among Internet users in connection with the politics of the post of chief architect. Thus, numerous comments appeared on the official’s interview with the Kommersant newspaper, the authors of which argued especially fiercely about Kuznetsov’s position regarding the “200 Temples” program. The chief architect does not support either the method of placing religious buildings "according to the order, and not according to high-rise dominants or successfully converging axes of streets", or modularity; to make the same churches, in his words, "a step against the ideology of the harmonious development of the city." This position has many supporters among bloggers. “Kuznetsov is absolutely right. And about the appearance of already crumbling remakes, and about the benefits of society,”writes, for example, eye_witness_21. “He is one of the few in power who understands well that the loss of a century ago cannot be compensated for by thoughtless and artificial insertions into the modern, already established urban development,” adds shurik_m.
Defenders of temple building, meanwhile, rebuffed attacks in the same Kommersant blog, in comments to an article about a letter from Orthodox public organizations that defended modular churches. The activists complained to the mayor about municipal deputies who, according to them, were sabotaging the implementation of the program. Their main argument, as noted in the comments by user Philipp Grill, is partial compensation for the losses suffered by the Orthodox Church in the 20th century. Blogger Sergey Terekhov assures that there are no standard projects in the program; and the chief architect, in his opinion, is obliged to support the initiative, since “without the support of the state, in a“natural”way, the temple cannot be built now,” writes the blogger. “Kuznetsov is not against churches as such, but against their quick build-up according to standard designs,” objected Vitalij Anančenko. Opponents of the program, meanwhile, write about the upcoming seizure of land on the territory of parks, nature protection zones and playgrounds: "From time immemorial in Russia, temples were built in certain places, and not as now, where it is necessary, where the place was torn off", - notes the user Alena Sher …
An equally heated debate a week unfolded between supporters and opponents of the demolition of the Don Baths. Scandalous reports appeared in blogs one after another, in which dilapidated baths evoke quite strong emotions, casting a resemblance to the scenery for a Hollywood horror. City activists, meanwhile, called them a black PR of the developer in light of the upcoming project near the Donskoy Monastery. Local historian Denis Romodin also got it, having posted links to critical posts on his Facebook blog. However, the author noted that although he does not welcome the demolition of constructivist baths, he should "sober up the romantics": "In the form in which the building is now located and was operated before it was closed, it cannot exist," concludes Romodin. “It is also necessary to protect the typical, if it plays an important role in the environment,” Alexandra Selivanova writes in response. - We have just signed a petition for the preservation of a typical bathhouse in Tyumen. Although according to this logic - you can endure, the state is terrible, plus in St. Petersburg there is the same. The dispute about whether there is anything that can still be saved in the Don Baths continued in the blogs of alexlufer and the Project Russia magazine.
Meanwhile, the users of Live Journal recently had the opportunity to learn something new about the state of a number of the most important construction projects in the capital: Live ZhZh-TV showed an interview with the Deputy Mayor of Moscow Marat Khusnullin. However, a number of bloggers were unhappy with the fact that the official did not clarify a lot. For example, on the notorious Khitrovskaya Square, Khusnullin only noticed that a reconstruction project was being worked out, something definite about which it would be possible to say only three months later. Meanwhile, user hitrovka writes that an unusual monument to Mayor Yu. M. Luzhkov will appear on the square this fall, which will be made by a Japanese company using a huge 3D printer.
Blogger Artemy Lebedev, in turn, turned to the network audience with a proposal to show examples of "good modern architecture" in any Russian city. Users called, in particular, Skolkovo, Metropolis and the Tsvetnoy shopping center, and the blog author himself cited the Novatek office building on Leninsky Prospekt as an example. Recently, modern architecture was also discussed in the blog dkphoto.livejournal.com, the author of which posted a report on the new buildings in Khabarovsk.
But the residents of Volgograd, meanwhile, were seriously offended by the architect Erik van Egeraat, who in an interview with Archi.ru inadvertently called it a city in which "there are no architectural masterpieces and even simply attractive buildings from an aesthetic point of view." Egeraat himself hopes to create a new accent in Volgograd - the Museum of the History of the Cossacks. “What amazed me was the attitude of Erik van Egeraat to a truly cultural heritage site, a unique complex of post-war restoration and reconstruction of the center of Volgograd,” writes, for example, the user Zlatta Chuykova. “Only a person who has never visited Volgograd can say so,” Diana Morales is sure. However, the Volgograd people liked the project itself.
And finally, a note by Sergey Estrin on how the architectural tastes of the owners of elite housing have changed. 15-20 years ago, when in modern history people first got the opportunity to buy luxury housing, the architect recalls, they perceived it as a family castle and demanded a unique space with columns, a dome and an aquarium under the floor, in which their children would then live. Today housing has become a commercial product, says Estrin, and now the most unusual and expensive thing about it is the furnishings. “These apartments are no longer architects' apartments. These are decorators' apartments ", - the author concludes and adds that sometimes he still meets customers who want their penthouse" to amaze the imagination with a swirling, wrapped space, complexly subordinated to the architect's idea."
