Archi.ru:
- You graduated from Moscow Architectural Institute in 1974. What happened then?
Oscar Mamleev:
- After studying at the Moscow Architectural Institute, I worked for three years on assignment at the Central Institute of Typical Design. It is difficult to imagine a tougher contact with reality after the creative atmosphere of the institute. But after that I was more than rewarded when I returned to the walls of the School as the head of the Student Architectural and Design Bureau (SAKB).
Was it design work?
- Yes, the research sector (NIS) was engaged in science, and SAKB - in design work. It was a golden time. Great teachers came to the bureau - Andrey Nekrasov, Alexander Kvasov, Boris Eremin, Evgeny Rusakov, Alexander Ermolaev. These were the first teachers in the profession. Also, real work attracted the most active senior students, and I met the students of that time - Sergei Skuratov, Boris Levyant, Andrei Gnezdilov, Dmitry Bush. We maintain friendly relations to this day.
And teaching?
- Almost from the moment I returned to the institute, I worked as a part-time worker at the department "Prom", and in 1982 Serafim Vasilyevich Demidov took me on the staff as a senior teacher. I have always liked teaching work, although I still remember the then state of self-doubt, fear that you would not be able to answer any question.
You are actively in contact with foreign colleagues. How did your international activity start?
- In 1988, my students and I got to the European Assembly of Students-Architects (EASA), held in West Berlin. EASA is an independent organization that annually brings together up to 500 students and young architects from all over Europe. The host country announces the topic, and the invited "stars", gathering a group of students into their team, develop a concept for solving the proposed problem. I took part in EASA five times, I was in the organizing committee for 4 years, and in the “final” I acted as the head of the “workshop”. Acquaintance with colleagues from European schools of architecture served as the basis for further trips with lectures and teaching abroad, organizing joint seminars with architects from other countries.
Have you always worked at the Moscow Architectural Institute at the same department?
- Yes, at the department "Prom", which I myself graduated, I worked for 30 years, of which ten - as a head.
In professional circles, the last years of your leadership of the department were actively discussed
- The experience of communicating with foreign colleagues and work in prominent European schools prompted a rethinking of the traditional methods of education, to the liberalization of the educational process. This is the creative activation of students, their involvement in a professional dialogue, the development of their meaningful attitude to the urban context. The curriculum should be built on the principle of identifying and trying to solve the problems of modern society, on the principle of complicating the spatial typology with an analytical approach, comprehensive understanding of the problem, comparison, identification of the main and motivation of the decision made.
A new staff of the SJSC was formed, which included leading practicing architects. The commission was replenished with young colleagues, foreign architects were invited to participate. Several heads of architectural bureaus began teaching, offering their students their own programs. But, unfortunately, MARCHI was not ready for such reforms.
How do you assess the state of higher architectural education in our country, the prospects for its development?
- I would like to answer this question based on the research of Anna Poznyak, a graduate of the Strelka Institute. The analysis was carried out on the example of the Moscow Architectural Institute, the leading institute of the country, according to the method of which the overwhelming number of universities in Russia works. The main topic of Anna's project was the study of the role of traditions in the Moscow Architectural Institute. The goal is to find an opportunity to "revive" the heritage of the institute and a way to popularize it among former, current and future students and society as a whole. Three possible scenarios were considered: conservation, new construction and reconstruction of traditions. The first implies the absence of changes, the second - the creation of a new school, the third is a combination of the first two, "reanimation" of the existing educational tradition.
The conservative scenario does not imply change and encourages a critical view of everything new. It leads to the indoctrination of the profession. This developmental trajectory is considered less traumatic and implies the preservation of the teaching and administrative staff. A narrow view of the profession, represented by the specialization of the graduating departments, is also preserved. New construction is the emergence of a new school and the emergence of new traditions of the Moscow School of Architecture. It is difficult to change something inside the Moscow Architectural Institute, so it is easier to create new institutions. The reconstruction scenario is the modernization of the MARCHI heritage, the formation of new meanings for the existing traditions. The "implementers" of this strategy work on the actual needs of the institute, create opportunities for interdisciplinary cooperation between the graduating departments and exchange of experience with other traditional schools
From the moment of its foundation in 1933 until 1972, the Moscow Architectural Institute was the only Soviet architectural institute. His curriculum is considered exemplary and is still used in architecture schools in Russia and the entire former USSR. In the 1960s, Western architecture schools experienced student riots and a massive rethinking of teaching methodology. The student-teacher hierarchy collapsed. The opposition “classical versus radical” has become relevant. The first has become synonymous with authoritarianism and academicism, the second - experimentation, critical thinking, open and democratic education. At a time when Western schools talk about their mission and views on the profession, MARCHI does not speak about what kind of architects it graduates.
In order to be able to uncover your legacy, it is necessary to determine what is the priority for the institution and what is its reaction to the changing future. It is possible to change the ideology of entrance exams, to make them accessible to people with different education. Why is this necessary? Discussions about architecture and urbanism are becoming important in modern Russia (suffice it to recall urban forums), and there is a need for a progressive architecture school with an advanced view of theory and practice. A close look at Russian education showed that the existing problems are similar to those in Western architecture schools: the dominance of the knowledge transfer model, in which the student is perceived as a passive "container" for filling with information. MARCHI needs to focus on the formation of a communication strategy, make it mandatory for a public presentation of student works with their discussion by experts of various specialties.
But the overwhelming majority of Moscow Architectural Institute teachers are for the traditional educational doctrine, and in this they are very solidarity
- The word “solidarity” in this context reminded me of the theory of mechanical and organic solidarity of the 19th century thinker Emile Durkheim, describing two types of social structure. The Mechanical Solidarity Society is a patriarchal society built on the conformity of all its members to a certain canon. The similarity of individuals with each other is considered the highest virtue. Individual freedom is tightly constrained, group interests are more important than personal ones. Life in such a society does not shine with diversity: its members for the most part are engaged in the same business, obey the same rules and are easily interchangeable. Another type is the “society of organic solidarity”, where personality is above all, individualism is welcomed, freedom is the highest good. Durkheim believed that a "mechanical" society is hierarchical and totalitarian. It consists of merged groups that are either at war with each other, or are lined up in a hierarchy under the leadership of a leader. An organic society consists of a multitude of free but interdependent individuals connected with each other in a variety of relationships. It is a complex mechanism that is very difficult to manipulate. Did I answer your question?
- I think yes. You are one of the professionals who critically assess the situation in Russian architectural education, but some heads of institutes speak of a sense of patriotism and pride in their school
- To answer this question more fully, I will start with the opposite feeling - shame. I remember the times when there was an anecdote about the sixth sense of the Soviet person - "the feeling of deep satisfaction." Those days are gone, and with them and satisfaction. Now, in my opinion, shame pretends to be the sixth sense. When viewed on a national scale, shame for Russia is deeply rooted in early contacts with the West. The first to formulate this feeling was Pyotr Chaadaev (later - Bunin, Pasternak, Solzhenitsyn, Brodsky …). The discourse of shame is characteristic primarily of the educated class.
Shame is not the Russophobia of the cultural elite, but a special kind of Russian reflection, the ability for critical thinking and sober self-esteem. Closing in a narrow circle of self-satisfied colleagues who believe that “we are always the best” and violently attack those who criticize “everything is ours”, you do not realize that you can be ashamed of what you love, what you are worried about. And this is much more important and patriotic than pride. For opponents, I will quote the words of the sage: "The one who stands with his back to the sun sees only his own shadow."
Reading your previous interviews, you notice an invariably tough position and sometimes harsh statements, but now irony has been added to them
- A little bit of backbiting gives life a piquant acuteness….
