This panorama is as clear as it is uniform: many participants followed the obvious path, examining in detail how in their homeland in 1914–2014 the “absorption of modernity” took place, which the curator of the entire Biennale Rem Koolhaas made the theme for all national pavilions. Moreover, many also emphasized their diligent fulfillment of this homework in the explanatory texts, reminding once again who and what they were instructed to do, and how they adhered to this order. The results were ambiguous: on the one hand, for the sake of the biennale, extremely interesting reports were prepared on the last century of the development of architecture in those countries of Europe, Asia, America, about which it is not so easy to find information.
On the other hand, we were once again convinced of the inevitable onset of globalization, “condemnation to modernity” (this quote from Octavio Paz was included in the title of their exhibition by the Mexicans). The same story is observed in Argentina, Croatia and the Middle East: from the eclecticism of the beginning of the century through Art Deco and modernism, which seized full power in the middle of the century, we come to the 20th anniversary of postmodernism and the architecture of "our time", both typical and distinctive. It is possible that Koolhaas was counting on just such an effect of "parallelism", but not every participant of the Biennale tried to show and emphasize the characteristic local features of this "wandering plot" that interested him, which he acquired in this or that country. By the way, this is precisely why - against the background of many “history textbooks” - the Russian pavilion is very popular with the international audience, where it was possible to find a completely non-didactic, relevant and at the same time quite cognitive form for the exposition.
The aforementioned Argentina tells its story under the heading "Ideal / Real", contrasting ideas and their implementation, as well as providing it with video illustrations in the form of fragments from contemporary films of each era. At the same time, the exposition slightly resembled the Argentine pavilion 2012, where a similar chronological story was inspired by the 200th anniversary of the country's independence.
In the Croatian pavilion, almost the same is shown under the heading "Suitable abstraction" (meaning that abstract forms of modernism were very suitable for embodying national identity), a similar approach was demonstrated by the "… sentenced to modernity" Mexican pavilion; both there and there the chronology was combined with a thematic approach, but this did not diminish the "historicity".
The exhibition of the Republic of Macedonia was primarily dedicated to its capital - Skopje, famous for its unusual buildings in the mainstream of late modernism: after the catastrophic earthquake of 1963, the city was literally restored "by the whole world" - under the auspices of the UN.
A more specific and therefore curious approach was chosen by curators from Peru, who focused on only one of the many phenomena of the 20th century. These are new residential areas on the outskirts of Lima, which were created as an alternative to slums being built on illegally occupied land by migrants from rural areas. Taking into account the enduring relevance of this topic, the exhibition turned out to be informative and instructive, and the well-known experimental district PREVI (since 1970) took a deservedly central place there, in the design of which 13 leading foreign architects were involved. Among them were James Sterling, Christopher Alexander, Aldo van Eyck, Charles Correa and a group of metabolists - Fumihiko Maki, Kisho Kurokawa and Kiyonori Kikutake.
The UAE pavilion turned out to be no less interesting. In the case of the Emirates, one cannot speak of the "start" of modernity in 1914, since it really came to the country along with the oil boom in the last third of the 20th century; however, this transition is interesting precisely because of its sharpness and closeness to our days. Therefore, the attention of curators is focused on the 1970s and 80s, when architects from different countries created Abu Dhabi, Dubai and Sharjah practically from scratch, adapting Western types of buildings to local characteristics. Not much is left of this development now: it is being replaced by larger and much less interesting structures.
At the same time, the architects of those buildings and the residents of the Emirates who watched these changes are alive, and their testimonies in the form of video interviews and conversations, as well as memories included in the archive, amateur photographs, postcards, etc. history of the human dimension.
Against this background, the exposition in the Austrian pavilion seems unexpectedly laconic and symbolic: "The Plenum - Places of Power". Reflecting on how the structure of society affects architecture - and vice versa, the curators chose the most "political" type of building and created a kind of "parliament of parliaments" - about 200 snow-white models of buildings of national assemblies on a scale of 1: 500, attached to the same white walls (there is also our State Duma). Together, these objects are perceived as a strange decor, which is exactly what was intended: the organizers of the exhibition believe that these representative buildings no longer seem to people to be inspiring symbols of democracy, but spectacular decorations that hide other forms of power rather than the people.
In addition, truly democratic gatherings now take place not in ceremonial halls, but in parks, squares or even online, which is reminiscent of the “spontaneous” garden in the courtyard of the pavilion (Auböck + Kárász) with a sound installation imitating the noise of an excited crowd (KOLLEKTIV / RAUSCHEN).
But the pavilion in Giardini is not the only Austrian exposition at the Biennale. At Palazzo Bembo on the Grand Canal, Peter Ebner and Greutmann Bolzern Designstudio presented the installation Glass Broken, dedicated to the important problem of transparency in our time: this transparency, promising an excellent view, in fact turns the occupant of the building into an object of observation from the outside, depriving him of private space. This loss of privacy became even more widespread at the beginning of the 21st century, when digital technologies record and broadcast almost every step of a person. The installation offers an alternative to such a violent "openness": the complex structure allows you to look outside the palazzo using a system of reflective surfaces, but no one can look inside. The installation room is immersed in darkness: it is also a commentary on the basic phenomenon for architecture - three-dimensional space and the optical illusions associated with it. If you think about it, they are available only to people with standard visual abilities, and "habitual" perception is just one of several - subjective - options for experiencing space.
This small work about the uncertainty of any interpretation of the surrounding world (apart from darkness, the picture "transmitted" by the device is deliberately fuzzy) can be used as a metaphor for the entire 14th international architectural exhibition in Venice: perhaps none of the architectural biennials of the current century has caused such polar opposite opinions and feelings so strong. And this is ample reason to visit Arsenal and Giardini.
