Archi.ru:
One of the main parts of your project is the exhibition of ARCHIPRIX award winners. Which architectural schools are participating in the exhibition?
Oscar Mamleev:
- In the context of the festival theme declared by the curators, we wanted to show new, non-standard views on the formation of the environment. In addition to works from Great Britain, New Zealand, Spain, Holland, China, diplomas from the Moscow Architectural Institute of Yuri Grigoryan's workshops and the Department of Environment Design are presented.
What master classes are planned?
- On our site, we plan to hold a series of lectures, seminars and master classes with the participation of architects from the bureau "Cosmos", "Fourth Dimension", "Project Meganom", the school "Evolution", graduates of the MARSH school.
In your manifesto, you first talk about liberation from stereotypes, and then about the search for ideals. Do not found ideals then become new stereotypes?
- The word "stereotype" means the prevailing opinion, the established attitude towards the events taking place. Life shows that any stop and admiration for what has been achieved leads to a transition to the rearguard. The task of conceptual projects is in the development of not only new forms of solution, but also in new types of perception. An urban environment with a resource for diversified development and full-fledged living is the main value.
There, in the manifesto, there are words about the fact that the teacher should "make the student think." It is difficult to disagree with this, perhaps only this is what an independent person needs. But how do you do it? What is needed, in addition to an indefinable teaching talent, to “teach to learn,” to develop, and not kill interest? What approach to architecture education do you consider optimal and what is the main thing in it? How to liberate a student creatively? What is the teacher's skill?
A. For the longest question, I will give the shortest answer, citing myself in an interview with the Dutch magazine HUNCH (published by the Institute Berlage): "love and professionalism."
What, in your opinion, are the mistakes of modern architectural education? And most importantly: where is the best place to study as an architect, in Russia or abroad?
- In choosing an educational model, Russian architectural schools are finding it difficult to adopt new methods. Extreme conservatism is becoming the most characteristic feature of teaching focused on the reproduction of historical styles without attempts to update the set of spatial and technological solutions.
The second is the lack of qualified teaching staff who regularly and systematically update their information stock. It is necessary to involve practitioners gravitating towards teaching, to participate in the discussion of projects of the masters of modern architecture.
Third, the prevailing stereotype of architectural education actually devalued the role of the student, turning him only into a “learning object”. It is rather difficult to get used to the fact that the student has a leading role in the educational process of an architectural university from the standpoint of the idea of him as a mere listener, which has been entrenched for decades.
As with any process, competition is essential. New educational institutions are emerging in the country. MARCHI has an unconditional potential in strengthening its positions not only at the domestic but also at the international level.
The advantages of foreign universities in a variety of pronounced and clearly formulated methods. A student who is really motivated to acquire knowledge must choose his own "trajectories" of education, educational institutions that are similar in spirit from the standpoint of determining his place in the profession.
