Archi.ru:
What tasks did you set for yourself as a curator?
Oscar Mamleev:
- From the very beginning, the main task was seen in not answering directly - "what is the architecture of the future in Russia", because this is a rather rhetorical question, and it is very difficult to give an adequate answer to it. Rather, we wanted to give a reason to think about the current state of architecture and the prospects for its development in Russia.
What, in the end, was shown at the exhibition?
Compared to the original concept, our exhibition has been slightly adjusted. It consisted of two exposition parts, each 12 meters long. One of them had two photographs: a famous photograph of VKHUTEMAS students with models and a staged photo of modern students surrounded by models. Between them were placed the answers of Russian and foreign architects to the question "What is the architecture of the future in your understanding?" Among the respondents were the head of the Snehetta bureau from Oslo Hjetil Thorsen, Kim Nielsen from Copenhagen 3XN, the German engineer Werner Zobek, our architects - Nikolay Lyzlov, Andrey Chernikhov, Narine Tyutcheva, Alexey Muratov, Levon Airapetov and others. Also there were statements of young people - winners of various competitions: NEXT, "Smart House", etc. At the same time, the text alternated with images of the projects of the international competition Archiprix, which coincided with our exposition in terms of ideology: interesting, promising works that offer solutions to pressing problems win there.
The second part of the exposition was dedicated to the architectural college of Alexander Ermolaev, the Samara workshop of Sergei Malakhov and Evgenia Repina, and the MARSH school. Ermolaev's exposition showed a methodology, the result of which is not so much a project, but something more, filled with intellectual content. Looking at this exposition, you understand that young people in college are being prepared to understand the social responsibility of the profession of the future.
The exposition of Samara residents was perceived with the same mood. Malakhov and Repina have long been involved in the preservation of the environment of the old city, and their part of the exhibition talked about what is happening with historical Samara today, how old buildings are being demolished by whole districts, and huge, monstrous structures are being erected in their place. The guys-students of the workshop presented a kind of essay, where they outlined the existing problems of the city and answered the question: what incentive is needed not to leave, but to continue living in their hometown. I must say that Zodchestvo 2014 was very different from the festivals of previous years, when they simply showed the buildings and projects of bureaus from different Russian cities. This time, we not only recorded the current situation in Russian architecture, but also received information about the understanding of young people of their responsibility for the profession.
Many visitors of the festival liked the exposition of the MARCH school: there were presented the graduation works of its first graduation, as well as very interesting models for the project commissioned by the Garage Museum of Contemporary Art. The task was to design a pavilion for the 100th anniversary of the Russian exhibition at the Venice Biennale.
In addition, we showed two "Tatlin" trees of the "Arkhkuznitsa" association - the brainchild of Pyotr Vinogradov: versions of what they did last summer in Vyksa at the "Art-Ovrag" festival. Young architects from the Novoye bureau put a screen with a plan of a city in the center of our site: when the viewer approached this screen, the plan gradually turned into facades, and then “aligned” into a straight line: as if you were leaving the future and dissolving there - elegant work.
But within the framework of your project there was not only a “traditional” exposition part, but also a seminar?
- Yes, at the same exhibition area we held a seminar, which was attended by guys from Kazan, Samara and Moscow. They were also tasked with speaking on the topic “What is the architecture of the future in Russia?”. There were three teams. Samara residents, as in the case of the exposition of the workshop of Malakhov and Repina, showed a number of acute problems of their city, and as a result presented a proposal for the humanization of the environment.
A group from the Department of Environmental Design at Moscow Architectural Institute made a very interesting presentation. They did not make a specific project proposal, deciding that attempts to present the architecture of the future for a distant period at such a fast pace of development as now can only bring a smile. The students composed a story called "Confessions of one Architect", analyzing various situations in the city of N-squa and sarcastically describing all its problems: attitude to architectural monuments, flirting of the state with the church, they also "walked" on the problems of the lack of public spaces, transport and etc. Here is a quote: "Pseudo-oligarchs order pseudo-creators from pseudo-foreign countries for pseudo-architecture for pseudo-money for a pseudo-good life." And it all ends with the confession of another architect, who, having mentioned that he is a “wrong” architect, describes how to actually work - honestly. This team has framed their work as a brochure, which I hope we will publish again.
As I understand it, it was especially important to combine the exhibition with a more “reactive”, creative and educational component?
- It all started with the fact that the curators of Zodchestvo-2014, Andrei and Nikita Asadov, expressed their hope that our project could turn out to be alive, because one can see static expositions and not understand everything, and an “active” project gives space for reaction and response. My assistant at the seminar was Yegor Orlov, a graduate of KSASU, the author of a very interesting thesis “Cybertopia. Death of Analog Cities”, which was also included in our exposition. I invited Totan Kuzembaev, Yuri Vissarionov, Nikolai Lyzlov, Sergei Malakhov, who took part in the discussion of the seminar projects. The very atmosphere of dialogue, communication with famous masters was also important for the students.
From your curatorial idea it turns out that the future is young people, new architects. And how do you, as a teacher with great experience, assess the level of optimism among young people? Are they ready to try to change the world for the better?
- Now, of course, both young guys and experienced architects do not have a lot of reasons for optimism. But it is very important to understand that if people did not try to express their opinion about the current situation and did not demonstrate their social activity, then it would be impossible to say that they have optimism. Such actions already serve as an incentive, give hope that people will confront the strange events that sometimes happen around us, and one of the most serious problems is lack of professionalism. There is hope for a change for the better. In this regard, young architects are optimists, although they speak out loud about sad things. It is important that teachers, masters of their craft, experienced architects not only pass on professional and craft skills to students, but also educate them about where and how they live, so that young architects, with their work, try, if not to improve, then at least not to worsen. town.
Our young architects - do they all have an active social position?
- We cannot say that everything. When I worked on the jury of the competition, which was held on the eve of Zodchestvo, I saw the work of students and young architects. The young architects section looked rather dreary. I believe that the festival ideology should be changed in the future. It is wrong to simply show a real situation without commenting on it in any way. We have a lot of interesting young guys, I really love young people and try to support any of their undertakings. If these architects also took part in Zodchestvo, then we too would be more optimistic.
With student works, the situation is better, but, as always, there are well-known leaders among schools who, even at the contests, differ for the better from the rest. But there are not so many of them, and as a result, there are not enough interesting works that should be recommended for display at exhibitions, awarding diplomas, etc.
You mentioned talented young architects who did not submit their works to Zodchestvo. Why did they decide not to participate?
- This is a common position, not only among these young people. I myself did not go to Zodchestvo for five years at all, because they constantly showed the same thing. Many of my friends have the same reaction. I offered to answer the question about the architecture of the future to several famous architects, but when they heard the word "Architecture", they immediately replied that they had never taken and will not take part in this festival. So far, unfortunately, there is a very big difference between Zodchestvo and ArchMoscow. ArchMoscow is always a kind of intrigue, a search for a problem, attraction of new people and new ideas. Bart Goldhorn is a great fellow in this regard, he organized the NEXT competition for young architects, thanks to which we got to know absolutely amazing guys with innovative thinking, which is the key to success in the profession. If the ideology of Zodchestvo is changed, then many more architects will take part in it.
Let's get back to the problem of education and its connection with reality, which rarely pleases us. How should young architects be prepared for real practice outside the walls of the university? And is it worth doing it at all?
- Everything is very simple: the education system itself must be adjusted. You cannot drive an academic scheme to the point of absurdity. It is clear that institutions such as higher schools are huge liners that are not very mobile and hardly change their course. But, nevertheless, if we see a goal on the horizon, then we must correct our movement in order to eventually arrive at this goal. There are many methods of architectural education that are very different from each other. There are German schools, especially the architecture departments of technical universities, where there is a strong bias towards technical disciplines. There are excellent departments and specialists in related disciplines. The work of students of these universities is very seriously worked out.
The best English schools are filled with poetics, they go to the side of fantasy. Solving serious problems, students there make proposals that, at first glance, are not very realistic. But in the famous contests of "paper architecture", from the point of view of people far from architecture, "absurd" works won. But when you see a non-standard proposal, it encourages you to reflect on the topic yourself and maybe come up with an innovative solution. Unfortunately, many Russian architectural schools do not have such approaches, and curricula and assignments have not changed for decades, although there are brilliant teachers and talented students in universities. It seems to me that we need to be bolder in reorganization.
- I didn't even mean that education is fantasy or, on the contrary, realistic, but that the atmosphere of the school is “ideal”. The student develops his ideas in a comfortable environment, he is supported. And then he finds himself in real life, where he has to maneuver between customers, officials, etc., and new, interesting ideas do not always find a positive response
- I just talked about the methodology, and you touched on the qualification issue. What kind of methodology you work with is not so important, but the key point is professionalism and understanding of both technical and all other issues. Why, in all countries, priority is given not to individual architectural universities, but to universities with an architectural school in its composition? Because the same technical departments employ highly qualified practitioners who keep their finger on the pulse of the development of the profession. They know very well what modern materials and technologies are, and they teach this to students. You can't teach children a post-beam system using textbooks 20 and 30 years ago. Every teacher must improve himself, and only a person who is constantly learning himself can teach. At the Moscow Urban Forum, which was held for the fourth time in December, I did not see the teachers from Moscow Architectural Institute - with some exceptions. While practical architects constantly visit such events, because interesting topics are discussed there - not only narrowly professional ones, but covering the entire spectrum of the city's problems. Professionalism, level, qualifications are the main thing. You can graduate from different schools, but if you have reached a certain level of proficiency in the profession, then this is the key to success. But, of course, not all of our architectural workshops are ideal, because the construction complex exerts a lot of pressure on them, and we have to use those technologies that have not changed for decades. Many yesterday's students, getting into such bureaus, agree to work within this framework for the sake of earning money, but when the result of their work is shown at the Zodchestvo festival, it turns out to be far from ideal.
Participants of the seminar at the exhibition “Future. Method "- 5th year students of the Moscow Architectural Institute, Department of" Design of the architectural environment"
Saida Bakaeva:
“Architecture is the art of designing. The aim of the festival is to raise the level of architectural and urban planning activities in Russia through exhibitions, lectures, presentations and discussions. Analyzing the three days of the festival, we can safely declare that the goal has been successfully achieved: it will attract not only professionals, but also the general public, which, I am sure, will bear fruit. Awareness, immersion, contact - these are the synonyms of "Architecture" -2014.
Having participated in the workshop on the topic "Architecture of the Future", I realized how important it is to give people freedom of thought, freedom of imagination, freedom of action. Do not limit or set limits. Only thanks to this, my team and I were able to overcome the "framework" and do a job that would reflect the "utopia" of our future - a world that celebrates every day a "victory day" over common sense!"
Anaida Karakashyan:
Architecture. A lot of material, the ability to distract yourself, look around.
A different setting, a different format. Workshop. The opportunity to break away, play a game, stop being serious, constantly busy. Just look at such an important topic as the future. Made me think …
Why don't we always be free, work, play and have fun ?!"
Daria Svistova:
“Zodchestvo-2014 was my first step in building new relationships in the professional environment of architects, designers, artists, teachers. Architectural schools, independent projects, “skilled” architects coexisted in one space. The festival became an indicator of my place in the professional environment and turned out to be a believable reflection of this environment. Contrasting expositions next to each other emphasized the disunity of the design world, living in such opposites: pathos and naturalness, complexity and simplicity, sincerity and falsity, compromise and unquestioning. The artificial alignment of the exposition was read only in its external form - a hint of a connection with architecture. I have not seen absolute, unmistakable, ideal expositions at the exhibition, but that is why the festival seemed direct and honest, like life itself.
Workshop "Architecture of the Future" in the section "Future. Method”is not so much a fantasy about the future as an experience of the present, one more reason to stop and comprehend the present day. It is important for me to make such stops, pauses. A workshop is always a pause and an attempt to comprehend all your experience from a different perspective. In the educational process of the institute, endless frameworks lead to blinkeredness, closeness, narrowness of sight, and therefore ossification of design solutions. Callousness, unambiguity, monumentality, "eternity" in architecture, it seems to me, are tantamount to failure, because they mean death. Flexibility, mobility, changeability, lightness speaks about life. And this ease is provided only by the constant pulling oneself out of the holy confidence in one's own importance, the credibility of projects. My little project experience was not crossed out, but corrected under the influence of the workshop. And I am sorry that the titled architects did not go a similar path at Zodchestvo in those three days. The world would be a better place."
Diana Marinicheva:
“This was the first time I took part in such a festival, where a topic that was very close to me spiritually was touched upon. There was a sense of participation and interaction in an attempt to find a way out of the present day into tomorrow's future. Always worried about the question: what will happen tomorrow? It was great to discuss projects concerning our future in such a close-knit circle. For me, brainstorming at this level was perhaps the most important event, because I felt our, albeit small, but participation in a common cause, I felt that ideas and discoveries were expected from us that could help our lives and the lives of our children in the future. … I was really amazed at how we, with all our common forces, participated in the common cause. The way people of different ages shared thoughts and suggestions, and how fiercely each of us tried to convey our ideas, how the listeners treated them with respect and favor - they supported and gave advice. The most important thing is that the festival makes everyone think about tomorrow at least for one moment, and, perhaps, after that someone will look at this important aspect of our life - the future - in a completely different way. With great gratitude for the opportunity to participate in such an important matter."
Maria Shirova:
“It was interesting in the vastness of the Gostiny Dvor, the simple organization and theme of the festival made it possible to once again draw attention to the avant-garde past, the ideas of which are still appreciated today. A good selection of photographs and works allowed me to be inspired and take part in the workshop of Oskar Raulievich Mamleev. The theme of his workshop is addressed to the festival and encouraged us to rethink and realize the future, its possible and impossible change. We were given complete freedom to design any object and any concept. Egor Orlov also helped lead the design process, who had to listen to and develop our vague ideas and confused thoughts. His ability to set and change the direction of the development of an idea helped us create the concept of the Prison of Rethinking project. The essence of this project is to create such a space in a dystopian future that will allow a person to reflect on the real values of our existence. And I want to thank him for his support and thoughtfulness. It was great to try myself in a new format, different from the educational projects of our institute. I would like to see future Zodchestvo festivals in a more "filled" state, so that there would be as many workshops and other events as possible, as well as participants."
