[Continuation of the conversation started in September with an article by Ekaterina Shorban - Ed.] It so happened that I was invited to discuss the film Away From All Suns, which was held as part of the architectural film festival in Tribeca, Manhattan, in front of my a trip to Moscow. The film by German documentary filmmaker Isa Willinger captures the lives of the heroes of our time. Each of them literally gives up a particle of himself in order to prolong the life of three Moscow architectural complexes of the Soviet avant-garde era, built in the late twenties of the last century.
Architect Vsevolod enthusiastically revives the commune house according to the project of his teacher Ivan Nikolaev. Pensioner Elena is selflessly fighting for the salvation of the house of the Ogonyok publishing house, the only surviving building built by El Lissitzky's design, and the neighboring residential building of M. Barshch and P. Antonov, where she spent her whole life. The young artist Donatas lives in the apartment of the communal building of the People's Commissariat for Finance in the very center of Moscow (a project by Moisei Ginzburg), which turned into pitiful ruins decades ago. He dreams of living here as a commune with friends (apparently the building itself disposes of this), but for now he is arranging wonderful futuristic performances, then heaving a cube on his head screaming about the upcoming total "cubophobia", then publicly swearing to abandon everything personal and materialistic.
Behind each of the constructivist buildings featured in the film, the indisputable masterpieces of world architecture, there are living and poignant stories. The stories of those who once lived in them and still live now, people who, frankly, were not very lucky with their place of residence. It even becomes somehow embarrassing for the inhuman social experiments conducted on them.
But how lucky the architects were! What a field for fantastic creativity! All the architects of the world can only bite their elbows, which they were not able to create in those innovative times. What are the current airport-islands, kilometer-high skyscrapers or palaces of sheikhs and hereditary presidents … The architects of the young Soviet republic were true designers of human lives, in their projects they sincerely tried to educate a new person!
This is how the architect Nikolayev described the daily routine in his commune house: “After the wake-up call, a student dressed in simple canvas pajamas (panties or other simple suit) goes down to take gymnastic exercises in the gymnasium … vigorous blowing throughout the day. It is prohibited to enter it before nightfall. " The further, the more detailed, with reservations, that the student is given the right to choose to do one, the second and, sometimes, the third. But Nikolaev does not stop at describing the student's day. He does not leave him alone even at night: “The evening bell, which gathers everyone for a walk, ends the day. Upon returning from a walk, the student goes to the dressing room, takes a night suit from the closet, washes, changes into a night suit, leaves his dress together with underwear in the closet and goes to his night cabin. The sleeping cabin is ventilated during the night using a central system. Ozonation of air is used, and the possibility of soporific additives is not excluded."
It is curious that today's newspapers would write about such a public residence, but it is known that the Vechernyaya Moskvy correspondent wrote when he visited the commune house immediately after the opening: “The dweller of the sleeping cabin gets up with a well-ventilated and cheerful head. Anatomy at home pleases with its intelligence. The sleeping building stands separately from the common rooms, no one and nothing interferes with sleep. The sleeping cabin has been cleared of household giblets."
These are the unique houses. Nowhere in the world is there and there was nothing like it. This is absolutely certain. In recent years, thousands of new, comfortable houses have been built all over Moscow, and there are no more modern buildings than these utopian buildings. They seem to be created by aliens from another time that never came. Standing on the semicircular balcony of his narkomfinovskoy apartment, Donatas notes in the film: "We slipped somewhere … We were brought into the wrong pocket … We are rummaging in the wrong trouser leg."
What amazing stories take place in these obsolete buildings to this day. Apparently, in the houses themselves, there is a spirit of genuine experimentation and projection. This is incredibly interesting and all of this must be preserved.
But how can such radical buildings be preserved? After all, it is important not only to extend the life of these structures physically, but also to use them with dignity. In any case, it should not be allowed that in 5-10 years nothing will remain in their place. But neither the authorities, nor home-grown capital have anything to do with this. The indifference of officials and the greed of developers lead to the complete destruction of an entire cultural layer, which never ceases to attract the widest interest.
English photographer Richard Peir came to Russia every year from 1993 to 2003 and methodically photographed samples of the Soviet avant-garde. Ministries, sanatoriums, hostels, palaces of culture, workers' clubs, factories, printing houses, power substations, garages and water towers in his photographs - this is a look from today in the era of great hopes and dreams. And just a decade later, it turned out that his photographs became almost the only documents-witnesses of the heritage of the avant-garde, the most complete photo archive of Soviet architecture at the turn of the 1920s-1930s. Ten thousand negatives depict a hundred and fifty buildings of the Vesnin brothers, Golosov, Ginzburg, Melnikov and Serafimov, built in different parts of the country - from Moscow, Sverdlovsk, Kiev and Baku to Leningrad, Ivanovo and Sochi. The Lost Avant-garde exhibition of the photographer took place in Russia and around the world, including the Museum of Modern Art in New York and the Royal Academy of Arts in London.
What has changed during this time in our attitude to our own national masterpieces? The fact of the matter is that nothing! Some buildings were irretrievably lost, others were not rebuilt in the best way, and those that survived were noticeably worn out. But that's not all. Peir's priceless photo archive is at his home, and if there is a fire or flood, these unique photographs will disappear forever. Today in Russia there are no such people and organizations that would like to acquire this archive. They are not interested in this. They don't need it.
Reference: photographs of Richard Peir are provided on the condition that his position will be voiced. The photographer condemns the ongoing reconstruction of the Nikolaev commune house. He believes that the departure from the conventions adopted in the world on the restoration of monuments destroyed the complex. According to the photographer, this project will now be used as an example of the reconstruction of such monuments and will lead to the loss of many avant-garde masterpieces.
But back to the movie. As an architect, of course, the closest thing to me is the history of the reconstruction of the Nikolaev house-commune complex. There is a lot of controversy about this object and, from time to time, criticism appears against the leading architect of the project, Vsevolod Kulish. They say that many original fragments have been lost, the forms of architectural details have been changed, the balconies have been enlarged, and an elevator is being built into the ramp of the sanitary building, which was not there before, and so on … Is another World Heritage site dying before our eyes? Even before arriving in Moscow, I contacted Kulish and asked him to take me to the site.
Already approaching the recently restored dormitory building, the very one in which two thousand students fell asleep and woke up on a common call, and everything was thought out to the last detail, I assumed that not everything here, as they say in New York, is kosher, from the point in terms of conducting restoration work. I have never seen such "new" constructivist buildings. Is this good or bad? Do not jump to conclusions, it is better to look inside.
We come to the volume of stairs, which previously only touched the inner facade of the eight-story building. Now its ground imprint almost clings to the main façade, which greatly diminishes the effect of the "floating" ground floor. “We've added an elevator here, the building has eight floors,” explains my interlocutor. I easily agree. Indeed, how is it here without an elevator? And where to hide it, if not deep into the building?
I am interested further: "What's the story with the oval supports?" And there is a quick explanation for this. The original columns, which, if we rely on historical drawings and photographs, at different times were either square or round, today are unable to bear the loads given to them, and it was impossible not to strengthen them. Kulish increased the cross-sectional area of the columns by stretching the circles into ovals with additional reinforcement. Purely visually, this technique makes the supports more convincing: it is clear that they are placed here to carry a serious load, which, incidentally, increased after the reconstruction (the existing steel supporting structures were reinforced, and the wooden floors were replaced with reinforced concrete ones).
We pass under a building that resembles an ocean liner in volume, and in plan - an airplane (it should be noted that this is an unusually beautiful form, and anyone who doubts the advisability of restoring avant-garde masterpieces must visit here to see the potential beauty that needs to be returned similar buildings, lying in ruins for decades, disfiguring Russian cities). We climb several floors along the newly rebuilt stairs. I turn to Kulish: "Do you know that your first and last step of each flight differs from all intermediate ones?" The architect, obviously expecting my question, easily retorts: "Do you really think that I do not know?" - "So what?" “Nothing… the builders made mistakes. They installed the stairs without considering the thickness of the floor tiles on the floors. Now nothing can be fixed. As an architect, I am powerless here. " Very interesting … But this ship has already accepted its first passengers on board.
Reference: In 1995, Moscow Architectural Institute began work on a project to preserve the house-commune of Nikolaev, the main issue was the choice of the concept of the project - conservation or regeneration. The decisive argument in favor of the choice of regeneration was the joint decision of MISiS and Moscow Architectural Institute to preserve the original purpose of the complex as a student hostel. The primary task of the project was an engineering survey of the state of structures and foundations of all buildings of the complex. Inspection of the dormitory building revealed that its steel frame is dangerously corroded and does not correspond to the standard loads, and the original brick window sill walls are covered with a mixture of peat and moss. Today, the use of organic insulation is prohibited by fire regulations. Thus, a decision was made on the feasibility of dismantling the entire building with the subsequent erection of a new one. The inner wall of the reconstructed building is made of reinforced concrete, and the outer wall is made of bricks, partially taken from the dismantled walls. The space between them is filled with mineral insulation.
We go further and find ourselves on one of the sleeping floors. There is now a new, more spacious layout, the walls are painted in a new way, in bright colors. Kulish deliberately emphasized his authorship by this, and he is absolutely right, because the building is alive and that it should continue to work as Nikolayev intended it to be out of the question. In 1966, while Nikolayev was still alive, his double cabins were rebuilt for more spacious living cells. It is clear that today they have undergone changes again, but Kulish restored several sleeping cabins in part of the first residential floor. It is supposed to be a kind of attraction for true connoisseurs of the avant-garde. The sliding ribbon windows of the hull, lost in the 60s, have now been restored. Outwardly, they exactly recreate the Nikolaev ones, but they open differently and are made of other materials (nothing can be done, the firemen were not allowed to restore them from wood).
From the inside of the dormitory you can see how the construction of the sanitary block balconies is underway. The architect complains with annoyance that the workers have messed up again: before, the beams carrying the parapets were hiding behind them, and now they stick out under them and are visible from the outside (the architect provided the drawings, and the workers made it cheaper, but for some reason it seems to me that they would not cope with the task assigned to them, even if they really wanted to - such workers). It's a shame!
And finally, the story of the elevator. Kulish is going to build it into the famous triangular ramp. They say that there was no elevator here before, and that it will finally kill this wonderful space, where, until recently, even spectacular art exhibitions were held. But whether there was an elevator or not, it is easy to check. The plans of the building have been published, and they clearly have an elevator, more precisely, a paternoster (a continuously moving belt of passenger cabins), which in terms of the plan is equivalent to two twin elevators. However, the projected paternoster was not implemented, and now Kulish is accused of deviating from the original solution.
How to be an architect? The elevator will undoubtedly kill this wonderful space, but not at all because Kulish will put it here. He will simply choose a beautiful and comfortable one, the one that is most needed here, and the workers, the very ones who have already “hacked” a lot of other things, will establish something completely wrong and wrong.
You can continue to list everything that was violated during this reconstruction: the uneven coloring of the facades, rough construction joints and how the building comes into contact with the site, and the choice of finishing materials. But it's better to stop.
It's amazing how little power remains in the hands of an architect! It turns out that everything depends on the foreman and the worker? Now everything is clear. These are the people who destroyed all the beautiful houses in the city. This is why everything is so ugly. Kulish is not to blame, and not the workers, of course. The system is to blame, though then it is not very clear who is to blame … And I said to Kulish: “You, dear Vsevolod, need to erect a monument. You really deserve it. And if not for the result, then certainly, for the attempt, which has never happened in Russia before. But Kulish still believes that his project is not an attempt, but the result of a new approach to the concept of preserving a monument, for which historical memory and cultural self-identification are more important than the difference in the height of the steps or the poor quality of construction. I do not know. It still seems to me that the high quality of construction is somehow more convincing than the low one. Although it so often happens that construction flaws are corrected some time later, and then that self-identification that Kulish talks about comes to the fore.
So, to summarize - for almost twenty years now, the architect Kulish has been working on the restoration of the commune house almost alone and instead of support, only reproaches are heard in his address. Maybe there is such a building in Moscow that should be set up as an example for Kulish, so that he would go there and see how it is necessary to carry out the reconstruction? After all, they say that, they say, all permissible norms adopted at international conventions are violated. But, excuse me, what conventions are we talking about? Maybe the reconstruction of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior took place according to those conventions? Or the Moscow Hotel? Or a planetarium? Maybe the Bolshoi Theater can become an example of reconstruction? Or Tsaritsyno? Can anyone suggest what kind of reconstruction needs to be adopted as a positive example, here in Moscow?
