The move of Arch Moscow and other projects of Expo Park from the Central House of Artists is a story that lasted for several years and is now over. Now the office of the company that organizes many large Moscow exhibitions: about antiques, about books, and finally, about architecture, is located in Gostiny Dvor, so Arch Moscow, after last year's experiment with Manezh, moved to Ilyinka. It is also warm and even brighter here, but it seems a little less space. What could have been a problem if not for 2020. The exhibition was postponed at least 2 times - after all, it is spring, and was quarantined, so it opened in October. Almost immediately after that, here, in Gostiny Dvor, the "autumn" architecture should take place. Everything was mixed and compressed - but Arch Moscow is the first off-line major event held in the capital in 2020, entirely dedicated to architecture.
Moreover, there are very few manufacturers' stands, and the main part of Gostiny Dvor is occupied by curatorial projects, stands of large institutions and departments. Remember, once we walked around the Central House of Artists and cursed that there was only plumbing and tiles around? Now everything is completely different, and although the situation has evolved very gradually over the past 10 years, 2020 seems to have completed the work: the hall is white, spacious, and - especially, one must think, for those who do not like large-scale construction - it is not high. Even Aleksey Kozyr and Alexander Ponomarev promised to build a lighthouse, but put some kind of bubble on the roof of the pavilion (it looks mysterious due to the absence of explications).
A large exhibition is a tedious business by definition, the general wish for it has always been to get away from fuss to clarity - and so, Arch Moscow of the quarantine year is arranged quite transparently. Those who enter are greeted by the red wedge of the Moskomarkhitektura stand dedicated to the idea of revising the standards. From it, in two directions, run like Via Ripetta and Via Babuino, white porticoes of expositions: 30 years, 30 buildings, 30 experts, the magic magic of numbers (and
vote); on the right is Arch Catalog, on the left is NEXT !. Further along the central axis is the most official partner of the exhibition, the Mosinzhproekt company, with a very digital stand about the Big Metro Ring and a model of the Ryazanskaya TPU by Timur Bashkaev.
Further on the axis is an exhibition of paintings and sculptures "Architecture in Art" by Polina Mogilina from the Triumph gallery: one work by Sergei Tchoban, one by Alexander Brodsky, but there is also another interesting one.
Then the round conference hall of the Astrakhan region, the heir to a similar, but more substantial last year's construction of the Kaluga region in the Manezh. Around it is the so-called "Arts Square": installations by Totan Kuzembaev and Ruben Arakelyan, Nikolai Lyzlov and Dmitry Ovcharov. Further, again on the axis - ArchiGraphics, the exhibition is understandable and always pleasing to the eye.
On the sides of ArchiGraphics - a mandatory educational part, exhibitions of foreign architecture: Denmark, France. Norvergia, with stands-houses - from Anna Martovitskaya, the author
guide to the modern architecture of this country. The stand contains museums, libraries and concert halls: it is called "cultural enlightenment".
Pandanus, on the other hand, is a collection of “ours there” and “theirs here” from Project Russia magazine: a selection of buildings by Russian architects in other countries and foreigners in Russia, resolved as an investigator's wall with tight strings - their number is suspiciously equal.
And finally - a kind of fat point in the whole plot - a garden of grass and maples from the winner of the NEXT program! last year, bureau megabudka. They very conveniently decorated their trees with a neon sign "No architecture", similar to the sign of the British pavilion at EXPO 2015 in Milan. There was - Breathe, that is, "Breathe", and everything was planted with grass and trees. Here is a smaller fragment, but the meaning, I suppose, is the same: tired of architecture? - So she's not here, breathe.
The statement is sudden. At the entrance, we were pleased with the light "paws" of propyls, then they hit us with a red wedge and a media onslaught, and then, towards the end, they offered to rest. But this is just one aspect. After all, you can understand it in another way, for example, like this: get off, you have arrived, there is nothing for architecture to flirt with art, forgetting its place on the far shelf of the building complex. Architecture could not stand it. No, no. Served to the edge where you can breathe easily. Most likely it happened by chance, the exhibition is made up of separate statements, but on the other hand, and quite provocatively.
It is not customary for us to talk about architecture as art. According to the results of the 20th century, it turned out that there is fine art, there is modern art, there is music with theater, and architecture is design. If an architect makes an etching or an installation, this is contemporary art. But if he builds a house, he is a designer, number 10.3 in the project declaration. He is a good fellow when he is talking about ecology, economics, planning, technology, CAD, BIM, and if he draws or makes installations, then this is his hobby, he is also great, or he has gone into contemporary art, well then. It's not supposed to talk about the plasticity and aesthetics of the house, which has more than three floors - immediately crowds of fluffy foxes from social networks come running in and begin to shame - "how can you!" It sounds pretty wild, but architecture has ceased to be perceived as art even by many architects. And even those who actually make it as art are at times shy to talk about it, preferring to present projects without comment. This conversation is actually a long one, but there will be neither a good visual environment in cities, nor a good social status of the architectural profession in society until we explain to everyone, everyone, that architecture is an art. That it is not only possible, but also necessary to say about it.
Now, after all, the architects themselves are confused in the concepts: "art" turns out to be fine or modern, and architecture is somehow separate. And at the exhibition too: here is architecture, here is renovation, and over there installation, painting, sculpture and graphics - they are, of course, art, and they are separate. This gap was best visualized by Totan Kuzembaev in the “Roots” object: at the bottom there are “toys” played by “children” (here Totan also includes paper architecture), at the top of the box as boxes, here is the sad difference between art and architecture. Totan suggests “flipping the table,” but it is unclear whether changing the places of the terms will help. Meanwhile, this is the only installation that programmatically reveals a given topic, which is not much.
All the rest are rather lyrical. Nikolai Lyzlov tore off Venus's hands (who at least once did not think about where the hands of Venus went? And who has not thought about how to rip off some master's hands?). Dmitry Ovcharov placed a large Jupiter over small protrusions in the walls of the rocket-like structure. Ruben Arakelyan interpreted his installation, which serves as a pair of Totan Kuzembaev's object and is dedicated to the main theme of the exhibition, as a long sculpture made of asymmetric cubes, similar to Totan's cubes "under the table" - one must think that the table has already been "turned over".
-
Image 
zooming 1/6 Nikolay Lyzlov, installation VENUS Photo © Archi.ru
-
zooming 2/6 Nikolay Lyzlov, installation VENUS Photo © Archi.ru
-
zooming 3/6 Nikolay Lyzlov, installation VENUS Photo © Archi.ru
-
zooming 4/6 Ruben Arakelyan, Hayk Navasardyan, installation "Experiencing" Photo © Archi.ru
-
zooming 5/6 Ruben Arakelyan, Hayk Navasardyan, installation "Experiencing" Photo © Archi.ru
-
zooming 6/6 NEFA architects, installation "THOUGHT" Photo © Archi.ru
Roughly the same niche as installations has been occupied in recent years by landscaping - it, too, in the minds of different types of public, is allowed to be a subspecies of art, in contrast to architecture. Therefore, also - "breathe".
Among the 24 participants of the Arch Catalog, three ventured to speak on the topic of art. ATRIUM, approaching from a formal, but pleasantly tangible point of view, showed a metal facade, I think, scales, motivating it with words about texture and form, which, in fact, is very pleasing - a direct conversation about the form and its elements, I repeat, in our time and place is rare. Now we are waiting for an object with such a "dragon skin".
Totan Kuzebmaev showed a wooden drop-oyster on long legs, accompanying the statement with meaningful verses, which is worth at least such a beginning: “I don't accept architecture when brick bugs suck Russian sick soil around the forest path”. And then ironically: "… you are alone, architecture justifies the locality, address, pockmarked brick." One can feel the confident voice of a seasoned woodworker. On the other hand, it turns out that the correct bug is wood.
TPO "Reserve" approached the issue in detail, having published at the stand, in addition to a selection of many projects, a rather voluminous interview with Vladimir Plotkin from "Architectural Bulletin", directly devoted to the stated topic.
Some limited themselves to a conceptual statement: The Ass architects put the word "quarantine" on the white wall, and Ilya Mukosey put the Villa Savoy on the head of Pallas Athena. Signed below: "Athenian charter", in the form of a halo behind the head of Athena, the inscriptions "the results of observations" and "must be demanded." Ilya Mukosey explained it to me this way: “This is the structure of the main, second, part of the Athens Charter. Each of the 4 sections - "Housing", "Rest", "Work" and "Movement" is divided into two parts - "Results of observations" and "Need to demand". I even attached a sign with explanations there."
Most of the participants, as always, followed the path of presenting projects, new and not so much. Among them: sounded, but alas, it seems, still rejected by the developer project
Sergei Skuratov's schools in Garden Quarters; a multi-storey eco-quarter in Cherepovets made of glued timber, created at the MARSH intensive under the leadership of Vladimir Kuzmin, the airport of Alexander Tsimailo and Nikolai Lyashenko in Gelendzhik, made up of completely transparent pavilions with very thin legs - if it is built, it will be a very atypical airport, but a project marked as 2018.
The objects of the "Ostozhenka" bureau are shown very beautifully - along the banks of the river, conditional, although recognizable.
Wowhaus presented itself in the form of houses of cards, apparently hinting at the fragility of the sphere of urban and park spaces in which the bureau operates. WALL - in the form of sculptural models.
And finally, Nikita Yavein presented his large, if not grandiose, project of the ITMO campus magnificently and at length. With two good layouts, bigger than any of the neighbors.
Note that both Studio 44 and Sergei Padalko used the same grid at their stand as they used in the anniversary
the exhibition "Studio 44" in the Enfilade of the General Staff - it seems that this technique is entering the trend almost like wooden pallets used to be. By the way, from the Hermitage exhibition came not only a grid, but also a large container with a video presentation of Nikita Yavein's buildings - it meets us at the entrance.
The grid makes Arch Catalog akin to the neighboring - and generally the central - stand of the Moskomarkhitektura, software more than ever. It is not the first time that MCA has shown program stands at Arch Moscow: we have already seen the renovation and announcement of new RGNTDs. Now the stand is highly controversial, which is perfectly reflected by its shape in the form of a red wedge.
The plot of the stand is as follows: the territory was taken, the PPT for which was developed by the Institute of the General Plan of Moscow and already approved - the Metrogorodok area. This territory was experimentally given to four teams: ABTB, CITIZENSTUDIO, AI Architects and SAGA - they developed alternative proposals with varying degrees of violation of the norms, which, therefore, are proposed to be questioned. The degree of opposition to the standards is clearly shown on the lattice stand, which is "recruited" from cubes as a constructor. Green - the norm in the project is met, red - violated.
The most daring (and red) was the SAGA project by Yulia Ardabyevskaya, and the most plastic one was the Easter project by AI architects, represented by the Zumtor wax model. Yulia Ardabyevskaya proposed many options for development, from a combination of towers and "garden plots" to "Parisian" neighborhoods and "Singapore" towers.
“The authors of the concepts with their works have shown that not all applicable standards are so important for the comfortable existence of a person,” - this is how Sergey Kuznetsov, curator of the MCA exposition, commented on the result of the experience.
The Institute of the General Plan of Moscow, on whose project the MCA experiment was carried out, performed at Arch Moscow with a stand dedicated to renovation and designed as the embodiment of Madelon Frisendorp's postmodern illustration to Rem Koolhaas's book Delirious New York: a “bedroom” where two “houses lie in bed under the covers”, Two more houses stand at their feet, a toy train is running around them. The bedside rug is in the form of the plan of the Zaryadye park, on the bedside table the Shukhov tower. “In the form of postmodernism, we show that renovation, city renewal is not just an independent phenomenon, but a natural continuation of the idea of industrial housing construction,” the authors explain their decision.
The NEXT project turned out to be very bright! - here all participants are represented, in addition to the auto-selection of projects, by large installations. The task of young architects, according to the curator of the project, Yulia Shishalova, is “not only to resolve current, but also to anticipate future challenges”.
Yekaterinburg residents of the OSA showed a design made of different types of natural fabric, accompanied by deliberately intricate letters. According to Alexander Samarin, the installation is a reflection on the increasingly “facade” essence of the work of architects: “The fabric of the facade becomes the last hope of an architect for art, proportions are increasingly determined by the economy. This architectural “dress” is a reason for irony or a challenge to the search for new professional approaches, which preserves the opportunity for mass architecture to be art”.
Bureau Arch Volume showed a garden of flowers with toy dinosaurs; L-O-G-I-C - purple labyrinth construction;; XForma expressed their opinion with the installation "the shape of water" - on the lightbox there are traditional facades, and on top are glass jugs of varying degrees of strangeness, with water. Installation SON architecture - giant icons made of bright plastic.. Ket bureau installation - also with water, but dripping in the tulle pavilion.
-
Image 
zooming 1/6 Installation bureau.ket Photo © Archi.ru
-
zooming 2/6 Installation Arch Volume Photo © Archi.ru
-
zooming 3/6 Installation Arch Volume Photo © Archi.ru
-
zooming 4/6 Installation AB ODA Photo © Archi.ru
-
zooming 5/6 Installation L-O-G-I-C Photo © Archi.ru
-
zooming 6/6 Installation by SON architects Photo © SON architects
Located at the very entrance of the program project of the 2020 exhibition "Moscow: Significant!" is an attempt to move the Arch of Moscow into a different, "historical" dimension, a summary of the history of Moscow construction over the past 30 years. Thirty experts named the most significant, in their opinion, Moscow buildings of the last 30 years, of which they then chose the 30 most significant in terms of frequency of references. Now there is a popular vote for the most significant building.
The project, on the one hand, looks like a logical demonstration of the new qualifications of the Arch of Moscow: not only an assessment of the actual, as in the choice of the Arch Catalog, but also a summary of the historical.
On the other hand, it has chosen a position that is non-judgmental, or rather alien to aesthetic evaluation, in terms of importance. What is significance? Visibility or beauty? Could it be that it is an eyesore that matters? Significant for what and in what perspective? All these questions do not receive a direct answer, and the selection comes out, again, provocative - as the co-curator of the project Ilya Mukosey told me, most experts assess a significant part of the buildings selected on the basis of “significance” from an aesthetic point of view negatively - “they want to see”, so the selection has become something in between the Oscar and the Golden Raspberry, and where what, they say, already judge for yourself. According to my rough estimates, there are a little less than half of such "raspberries", but more than a third. The sample included the "Gunsmith" business center (well, how can you unsee it!), The Et Cetera theater and Sergei Tkachenko's egg-house in chistoprudny lanes. In this sense, the project either turns out to be parallel to the main theme, or intersects with it at some obscure angle.
However, what is art? Art can be a provocation, like an egg house or a famous fountain. Although this can hardly be a serious reason for excluding the category of aesthetic from the conversation altogether. It may still come in handy.
