The project I DO / I DO is intended to demonstrate the full range of creative and professional positions of a new generation of practicing architects, and it is also intended to start a public discussion about the foundations of architectural activity.
For this, a simple format was chosen: a presentation by the architect followed by a discussion, during which the architect will discuss his position with an invited opponent and the public.
As a result of this series of discussions, the initiators of the project hope, a picture of current opinions and ideas about the foundations, goals and objectives of the profession will be formed. In addition, an important precedent will be created for direct and equal interaction between an architect and a critic in public space. Based on the results of the project, its creators plan to publish a catalog with statements by architects and fragments of discussions.
Thus, within the framework of their new project, the MARSH school and the Praktika bureau propose to declare their positions to architects and architectural bureaus, active young professionals with their own practice. Their interlocutors will be authoritative architects, architectural critics and theorists: E. Ass, E. Gonzalez, S. Sitar, V. Kuzmi and V. Savinkin. It is also planned to invite N. Tyutcheva, V. Plotkin, A. Lozhkin, A. Rappaport, V. Paperny, Y. Grigoryan, B. Goldhorn, A. Muratov to participate
Archi.ru: What is the “professional position of an architect” in your opinion as organizers of discussions? Why should it be defended? Perhaps it is better to express your architectural views in their own creative works, and leave the critics to subtract from these works, as is usually done?
YY: A position is, firstly, a conscious system of principles and values that serve as a fulcrum in work, and secondly, a message, an idea that the architect proposes to society. In the project, we are interested in simple, meaningful and rational categories - why, why, for whom. For us, creative work stems from the professional position of an architect, not the other way around.
DC: We have invited the representatives of the new generation of practicing architects, to which we ourselves belong, to speak. If you have something to say, you need to speak. This is the selection criterion for participants. We are interested in who does what, and how he comprehends what he does. First of all, we are interested in listening to the direct speech of our colleagues.
NT: I agree with my colleagues. If there is a position, then it can be formulated and discussed, if there is no position, then there is nothing to subtract. In this case, "reading" occurs more often, i.e. the critic's ideas are embedded in an architecture that does not contain them. We do not limit the genre and form of expressing our position, leaving freedom of expression from high poetry to completely practical answers to everyday questions, the main thing is that the form allows a discussion, that is, it contains statements, arguments, conclusions.
In my opinion, modern Russian architecture is poor in utterances: aesthetic, ethical, social or political, and finally, the position of the architect is not expressed. With few exceptions, we are not inclined to think about our motivation, about the goals of our work. As a result, the conversation about architecture is reduced to "beautifully-ugly" and the agenda is formed by the authorities, the developer, the journalist, anyone else, but not the architect.
The (creative) position must be defended, although it is not necessary to go to a meeting for this. The mechanism of our project is not a "defense", not an exam, but a dialogue with an intelligent interlocutor, allowing a position to be formulated and discussed. Five years ago, when the first issue of Tatlin about young architects was published, I wrote in a review article: “What architecture can offer, besides packing square meters, what position, idea, socially significant topic - remains unclear”. It is still unclear, so we are trying to clarify. Credo means "I believe", what do we believe in?
Archi.ru: The task looks like a challenge, how do you think, how many will agree to present their beliefs for public discussion, and what will this give the participants, in addition to stress?
YY: Of course, participating in a project is a challenge, and it's not about defending your views in front of anyone. This is a challenge to yourself: to formulate and declare a professional position. The invited interlocutors are reputable and respected colleagues who can set a high level of professional polemics. Through a discussion with them, we want to come to a critical understanding of the statements of a new generation of architects. Will it be possible to discern the identity of a generation through the summation of positions and creative practices? This is the intrigue of the project for us.
NT: I'll add another simple point: in addition to stress, our project is known. We want to initiate a public discussion that would go beyond the project. and ideally beyond architecture. The speaker is heard. We plan to gather colleagues, students, journalists for discussions, publish statements and fragments of discussions, speak at the Moscow Architecture Biennale, and publish a book in Russian and English as a result of the project. In a word, to make the stated positions a public, media event.
Archi.ru: Who was the initiator of this project, why exactly Praktika bureau, does the bureau plan to start with itself or remain in the shadows as an organizer?
YY: Some time ago, we realized that we lacked real meaningful communication with colleagues, discussion of what worries us in our daily work. There is a feeling of some kind of vacuum. Therefore, we came up with this format of public discussions, motivating for a meaningful statement. We have invented this challenge for ourselves too, so we will certainly take part. We are interested in expressing ourselves, and correlating our position with what others will say. This is something like building up such an actual coordinate system in which the stated positions will form a kind of semantic cloud. It would be interesting.
Archi.ru: Why did MARCH school decide to move from open lectures by gurus to talking with young bureaus? What exactly does MARCH expect from these discussions?
NT: Working at MARSH with British colleagues, having seen British education from the inside, we understood what importance is attached to what is called statement, argument, that is, the very position and the ability to substantiate and demonstrate it. A position is not just an arbitrary "I want it that way", but a system of views and beliefs on which architecture is based. Which does not exclude artistic intuition and imagination at all. Therefore, for us the process is often no less important than the result: students devote half of their time on the project to analytical and research work, constantly keep a diary of their project process, write essays on various topics. The result of the work is a portfolio that includes all the preparatory materials, all stages of design from idea to detail.
For us, the formulation of positions is not just a means of teaching students, but an important matter for the development of architecture in Russia. If there is a competition of forms, who is "cooler", and not positions, then architecture will always be in the grip of commerce. We see MARCH not just as a place of study for two years, but as a discussion platform, a research laboratory, and, if you like, as a “club of thinking architects” that will unite not only students and teachers, but also alumni and our colleagues of different generations.
Therefore, we gladly agreed to the proposal of the Praktika bureau to make this project together, and we hope that architects not only from Moscow, but also from other regions will take part in it.
The first discussions within the framework of the project will take place at MARCH on April 10 and 17, information on the MARCH website www.march.ru and the Facebook page
