The round table, which took place on June 10 at the MARCH School, was organized jointly by the International Institute of Architecture i2a and the MARCH School of Architecture. He summed up the interim results of the Russian-Swiss program “Swiss Made in Russia”, within the framework of which a series of lectures by Swiss architects was held on the subject of the civil responsibility of an architect. From April to June 2014, Nikola Ragushi from the XNF bureau, Christoph Naegi from TRIBU and Andreas Sonderegger, head of the Pool Architecten workshop, spoke to the Moscow audience at the MARCH school, whose lecture took place immediately before the start of the round table.
Using the example of a large-scale project for a new agglomeration in the valley of the Glatt (Glattal) river north of Zurich, developed by his bureau as part of the Crocodile architectural group (also included EM2N Architekten and others), Andreas Sonderegger showed how the civil position of an architect in Switzerland and how it interacts with the city and society, for which architectural design is only a tool for fulfilling social and cultural needs. This was also discussed during the round table, trying to understand whether such an approach to architecture is possible in Russia.
As it turned out, the topic posed by Swiss colleagues and so important for the successful development of any city is not very relevant in our country: there were not many people in the hall - neither a large number of practicing Russian architects, nor, moreover, members of the public were noticed. Obviously, this is very revealing. As Andreas Sonderegger noted in his report, architects, and not only Russian ones, since the time of early modernism and the inception of the idea that they can design literally everything - from a small fork to the whole universe, began to consider themselves almost godlike. Only now, according to the speaker, a turning point is taking place in the profession: the injustice of such an opinion is being realized. The architect begins to understand that he is only the executor of the tasks assigned to him by the client, the government, the city. And since this is so, then he is simply obliged to reckon with their interests. However, due to the former conviction of the uniqueness of his purpose, he still refuses to communicate normally with society and recognize himself as a part of it. As for members of the public, the very idea of asking people to think about the project appeared not so long ago, around the 1970s. But the trouble is that these people rarely know what exactly they want: it is much easier for them to answer the question of what they categorically do not want. Therefore, as long as it is not about expressing protest, it is not easy to attract public attention.
Andreas Sonderegger
architect, partner of Pool architecten:
“The perception of the role of an architect has changed a lot today. This can be easily attributed to globalization, but there are other reasons as well. For example, the emergence of "star" architects. People know only a few names that have appeared on hearing in connection with the construction of certain iconic objects. All the other specialists, who can really become real assistants in the implementation of the most important social tasks, found themselves outside the architectural world, which has been narrowed down to a few names. As for the position of the architect himself, then he should not strive for fame. His tasks are much more utilitarian. For example, it is important that, while designing, he learns to think not on the scale of a building and even a street, but a district and a city, acting as a kind of conductor of a large orchestra."
Evgeny Ass
rector of the MARCH school, actively supported the position of Andreas Sonderegger:
“It is useful to“ground”the profession of an architect, to show that it can be everyday and very socially significant. Our problem is the lack of initiative projects. Most of the social projects are solely government initiatives. The architect remains on the sidelines, inactive."
Alexander Ostrogorsky
journalist, teacher of MARSH, disagreed with the Swiss architect. In his opinion, an architect should not be a "conductor", he should work in one large multidisciplinary team. The opinion about the loss of a special status by an architect is just a myth, he never had this status. Architects need to stop stewing in their own juice and dream of a special position in society, and instead learn to conduct a dialogue with a wide variety of population groups:
“In Russia, we see a lot of discussions about the role of an architect, but most of them take place in the circle of architects alone. Neither civic activists, nor representatives of local communities, nor bloggers, nor politicians participate in these discussions. In such a situation, a full-fledged dialogue cannot work out. People are not interested in architecture, so they will never turn to it if the architects themselves do not start talking to people."
“You are right when you say that the image of an architect as a conductor has outlived its usefulness,” said Andreas Sonderegger. For example, in our project, we took over the leadership of 25 teams."
“We are asking a question about the role of the architect in the life of society. But how and when did it happen that he fell out of this life and forgot about what was happening in society? - continued the conversation Eugene Ass - Our profession is characterized by dualism, because the architect, being an integral part of society, one way or another imposes on him a certain way of life. Deep down, I myself consider myself a demiurge and I don't understand why society does not agree with this position. This is, of course, a joke, but some hostility, if not hatred of society towards architects does exist. I've never heard people hate, say, cheese makers, but architects are not favored in most countries of the world. At what point did architecture stop being magic? Probably, this happened during the period of industrialization of cities, when the architect was solving the most earthly problems. And, probably, today there is no need to strive to regain the lost status. On the contrary, it is necessary to bring the profession even closer to the problems of ordinary people."
In realizing the profession of an architect as important and socially significant, the educational aspect is important - I am sure
Nikita Tokarev
school director MARCH:
“If the issue of social and civic responsibility is not raised at the stage of education, then in our country there simply will be no thinking architects. An architect must feel well not only space and form, he must have a special empathy - to feel people. In Russia, few architects take part in civil projects, and no one really represents the interests of residents either. Therefore, it is extremely important today to try to breathe a new idea into the architectural profession."
Ludovica Molot
curator of the "Swiss made in Russia" program, International Institute of Architecture i2a, talked about how important the educational aspect in the architectural profession at the earliest stage of development:
“Three years ago, we came to the conclusion that in order to establish a dialogue with society, one must first learn how to speak with children. By teaching children, telling them about the basics of the profession, we are thus trying to reach out to their parents, and at the same time we are raising a new, differently thinking generation. At first, we took the educational model of a similar school in Helsinki as a basis. For a while, we ourselves became students of this school in order to understand the process from the inside. Today, we independently deal with preschool children, studying with them the most diverse aspects of architecture - from simple typologies to modern building techniques. We discuss with children such difficult topics as the quality of life and environment, the formation of urban space, etc. We are confident that sooner or later this knowledge, instilled in childhood, will move to a higher level and will be discussed in political circles."
Within the framework of the discussion, the issue of competitive practice was also discussed, which is widespread in European countries and is just gaining importance in Russia. Andreas Sonderegger said that all his projects were created in a competitive format. But, according to Evgeny Ass, competitions in Moscow are held only for iconic objects. It is difficult to imagine that in Russia every house under construction will become the subject of a competition.
Elena Gonzalez
architectural critic and curator of the "Competitions" exposition at Arch Moscow-2014, I am sure that this is a very promising direction, which aroused keen interest from both architects and society. [Alexander Ostrogorsky, on the contrary, asked for a start to prove the viability of this tool and its necessity in our country, before unconditionally adopting the experience of other countries in terms of holding competitions. - clarification from A. Ostrogorskiy: “- strictly speaking I meant that I am not sure that competitions can work well precisely at the level of the needs of local communities, as it happens in Europe, where local government is stronger, especially in terms of the distribution of finances. In general, I think that competitions are good, and they should be done according to global standards. "]
The exchange of experience between the two countries will not be limited to the Swiss made in Russia program. Alessandro Martinelli, director of the International Institute of Architecture i2a, said that it is necessary to continue lecturing, expanding the lecture program, inviting different specialists, conducting joint seminars and workshops. Evgeny Ass, for his part, suggested holding an exhibition about the life and work of not “star” architects, but ordinary architects of Switzerland and Russia.
