Mirhan Damir, H. Oevermann, Martin Meyer, M. Mahdavinejad, Hassan Elmouelhi
The countries of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) have only recently discovered their modern industrial heritage as an object of conservation and future development. Through an in-depth analysis of four industrial sites in Egypt and Iran, testifying to a designated modern era, this article documents the complex historical process of industrialization and its political and economic background. Building on fieldwork, archive studies, workshops, and interviews, the article explores how built structures of modern industrial sites signify the multi-facetted, symbiotic, and exploitative international exchange behind the modernization of economies in the region. In the face of many obstacles to the conservation of this heritage, ranging from incomplete listings and ineffectual policies to high development pressures on urban land, this article aims to transcend the current Eurocentrism in industrial heritage research and practice, and encourage regional claims on this significant heritage.
{"title":"Sites of Modern Industrial Heritage in Egypt and Iran","authors":"Mirhan Damir, H. Oevermann, Martin Meyer, M. Mahdavinejad, Hassan Elmouelhi","doi":"10.52200/docomomo.71.02","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52200/docomomo.71.02","url":null,"abstract":"The countries of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) have only recently discovered their modern industrial heritage as an object of conservation and future development. Through an in-depth analysis of four industrial sites in Egypt and Iran, testifying to a designated modern era, this article documents the complex historical process of industrialization and its political and economic background. Building on fieldwork, archive studies, workshops, and interviews, the article explores how built structures of modern industrial sites signify the multi-facetted, symbiotic, and exploitative international exchange behind the modernization of economies in the region. In the face of many obstacles to the conservation of this heritage, ranging from incomplete listings and ineffectual policies to high development pressures on urban land, this article aims to transcend the current Eurocentrism in industrial heritage research and practice, and encourage regional claims on this significant heritage.","PeriodicalId":504955,"journal":{"name":"Docomomo Journal","volume":"5 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141693854","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article analyses the conversion of a big hospital and teaching complex, designed between 1968 and 1978 and commissioned by Santa Casa de Misericórdia de São Paulo to a team of architects led by Fábio Moura Penteado, into the biggest criminal justice complex in Latin America, since it was acquired by the State of São Paulo in the mid-1990s and opened in 1999. The architectural characteristics and the superlative scale of the complex constitute a privileged object to analyze the potentialities and limits of architectural flexibility, as well as how this concept is related to the modern project culture, specifically with the general strategies developed by the so-called Escola Paulista.
{"title":"From Hospital to Criminal Justice Complex","authors":"Ivo Giroto","doi":"10.52200/docomomo.71.04","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52200/docomomo.71.04","url":null,"abstract":"This article analyses the conversion of a big hospital and teaching complex, designed between 1968 and 1978 and commissioned by Santa Casa de Misericórdia de São Paulo to a team of architects led by Fábio Moura Penteado, into the biggest criminal justice complex in Latin America, since it was acquired by the State of São Paulo in the mid-1990s and opened in 1999. The architectural characteristics and the superlative scale of the complex constitute a privileged object to analyze the potentialities and limits of architectural flexibility, as well as how this concept is related to the modern project culture, specifically with the general strategies developed by the so-called Escola Paulista.","PeriodicalId":504955,"journal":{"name":"Docomomo Journal","volume":"82 13","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141714967","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Patrick H. Fleming, Petronella Mill, Marcelo Rovira Torres, Anders Bergström
This work presents the first detailed study of the construction and materials of the Stockholm Public Library. As the building undergoes a rare period of maintenance and renovation, the floors and walls of the library are examined from three perspectives. First, using available but limited archival documents and plans; second, with non-destructive ground-penetrating radar measurements; and finally, through on-site surveys during local interventions for the maintenance and renovation process. The ensuing results emphasize the complementary nature of this combined research approach in recovering lost or forgotten construction details and further reveal several important findings. In the case of the unique wall finishing of the library’s rotunda, multiple layers of lime mortar, each varying in thickness and coarseness, were used to build up and craft the relief-like interior wall surface. With the use of in-situ aerated concrete and prefabricated Solomite panels in the library’s 1931–32 floor construction, a material connection between Asplund and the broader modern movement in architecture is further highlighted. At first glance, these construction-related findings seem to reinforce the common architectural narrative of the library as a transitional project between neoclassicism and modernism. At the same time, however, the library’s separate periods of construction of 1925–28 and 1931–32 and their distinct materials can be seen as a continuity of construction culture, with the innovative use of local raw materials related to the Swedish landscape.
{"title":"Recovering the Historical Construction and Materials of Erik Gunnar Asplund’s Stockholm Public Library","authors":"Patrick H. Fleming, Petronella Mill, Marcelo Rovira Torres, Anders Bergström","doi":"10.52200/docomomo.71.03","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52200/docomomo.71.03","url":null,"abstract":"This work presents the first detailed study of the construction and materials of the Stockholm Public Library. As the building undergoes a rare period of maintenance and renovation, the floors and walls of the library are examined from three perspectives. First, using available but limited archival documents and plans; second, with non-destructive ground-penetrating radar measurements; and finally, through on-site surveys during local interventions for the maintenance and renovation process. The ensuing results emphasize the complementary nature of this combined research approach in recovering lost or forgotten construction details and further reveal several important findings. In the case of the unique wall finishing of the library’s rotunda, multiple layers of lime mortar, each varying in thickness and coarseness, were used to build up and craft the relief-like interior wall surface. With the use of in-situ aerated concrete and prefabricated Solomite panels in the library’s 1931–32 floor construction, a material connection between Asplund and the broader modern movement in architecture is further highlighted. At first glance, these construction-related findings seem to reinforce the common architectural narrative of the library as a transitional project between neoclassicism and modernism. At the same time, however, the library’s separate periods of construction of 1925–28 and 1931–32 and their distinct materials can be seen as a continuity of construction culture, with the innovative use of local raw materials related to the Swedish landscape.","PeriodicalId":504955,"journal":{"name":"Docomomo Journal","volume":"16 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141716982","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The destructions of the Russo-Ukrainian war are leading to a rapid loss of cultural heritage in Ukraine, including contemporary 20th century monuments in Kharkiv, the cradle of Ukrainian modernism. At the greatest risk are the sites, which were complex and not well understood heritage before the war - mass housing estates of 1960s-1980s. In view of the postwar reconstruction, there is a great need to analyze mass housing estates in Kharkiv as potential objects of preservation. The purpose of this article is to reveal the architectural and historical value of the first Kharkiv mass housing estates in terms of their innovation, which might be the basis for further preservation steps. The article focuses on the three earliest areas of mass housing estates of the city - Pavlovo Pole, Novi Budynky and Saltovsky mass housing, which were designed and built during the period of the transition to rapid and large-scale pre-fabricated industry in the late 1950s - early 1960s. It is namely during the design and construction of these estates that innovatory technologies and approaches were developed and tested, which were later used in the construction of new housing estates both in Kharkiv and in other cities of Ukraine. These innovations included the system of microdistricts, the staggered system of services for the population, and the method of focusing in urban planning. The creation of a number of standard series of pioneering residential buildings for mass industrial development by the “Kharkovproject” and “Ukrmistostroyproject” design institutes. The study is based on the reconstruction of the historical chronology of design work of 1960’s - 1980’s in the history of Ukrainian city planning; a comparative analysis of the first-erected housing estates, and the definition of the unique solutions of Kharkiv city planners that were implemented in the development of the first housing estates in Kharkiv.
{"title":"Innovatory Kharkiv Mass Housing Estates in Urban Planning of the 1960s-1980s","authors":"N. Antonenko","doi":"10.52200/docomomo.70.10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52200/docomomo.70.10","url":null,"abstract":"The destructions of the Russo-Ukrainian war are leading to a rapid loss of cultural heritage in Ukraine, including contemporary 20th century monuments in Kharkiv, the cradle of Ukrainian modernism. At the greatest risk are the sites, which were complex and not well understood heritage before the war - mass housing estates of 1960s-1980s. In view of the postwar reconstruction, there is a great need to analyze mass housing estates in Kharkiv as potential objects of preservation. The purpose of this article is to reveal the architectural and historical value of the first Kharkiv mass housing estates in terms of their innovation, which might be the basis for further preservation steps. The article focuses on the three earliest areas of mass housing estates of the city - Pavlovo Pole, Novi Budynky and Saltovsky mass housing, which were designed and built during the period of the transition to rapid and large-scale pre-fabricated industry in the late 1950s - early 1960s. It is namely during the design and construction of these estates that innovatory technologies and approaches were developed and tested, which were later used in the construction of new housing estates both in Kharkiv and in other cities of Ukraine. These innovations included the system of microdistricts, the staggered system of services for the population, and the method of focusing in urban planning. The creation of a number of standard series of pioneering residential buildings for mass industrial development by the “Kharkovproject” and “Ukrmistostroyproject” design institutes. The study is based on the reconstruction of the historical chronology of design work of 1960’s - 1980’s in the history of Ukrainian city planning; a comparative analysis of the first-erected housing estates, and the definition of the unique solutions of Kharkiv city planners that were implemented in the development of the first housing estates in Kharkiv.","PeriodicalId":504955,"journal":{"name":"Docomomo Journal","volume":"35 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140699629","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In 2022, Docomomo International launched a call for papers on Modern Movement in Ukraine together with Docomomo Ukraine. More than 20 proposals were received, most of them from authors based in Ukraine itself—despite the difficult circumstances. The Docomomo Journal 67 presented a first selection of those articles to display regional and architectural particularities and current challenges of archiving, documenting, protecting, and preserving the modern heritage. Nearly 100 examples of Ukrainian modern buildings were presented in a graphical overview. The modern Ukranian architecture was dominated by Constructivism from the mid-1920s to the early 1930s, with Kharkiv as the epicenter of production, while Socialist Realism with the Stalin Empire emerged from 1932, lasting until 1955, with Kyiv as the capital of Ukraine. From December 1919 to January 1934, Kharkiv was the first capital of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the cultural, economic, and educational center of the new Ukrainian Republic. The status as new capital led to prestigious master plans and construction projects, among them the world-famous Derzhprom building at Freedom Square–as a symbol of Constructivism–or the Kharkiv Tractor Factory–as a symbol of the industrialization of agriculture. The leading role of Kharkiv as a forerunner and capital of Constructivism is often expressed by the famous State Industry House (Derzhprom) built from 1925 to 1928. Being the only modern ensemble in Ukraine nominated as UNESCO World Heritage, it became and still is the focus of identification and pride—despite the many controversial reflections and discussions about the conservation efforts and changes carried out since the original construction in the 1950s and after the year 2000. This explains the many articles dealing with Freedom Square and Dherzprom as a reaction to the call for papers in 2022 and also Docomomo International’s commitment to dedicate this special issue of the Docomomo Journal to Kharkiv under the title From Constructivism to Modernism in Kharkiv.
{"title":"Kharkiv Modernism","authors":"U. Pottgiesser, W. Quist","doi":"10.52200/docomomo.70.ed","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52200/docomomo.70.ed","url":null,"abstract":"In 2022, Docomomo International launched a call for papers on Modern Movement in Ukraine together with Docomomo Ukraine. More than 20 proposals were received, most of them from authors based in Ukraine itself—despite the difficult circumstances. The Docomomo Journal 67 presented a first selection of those articles to display regional and architectural particularities and current challenges of archiving, documenting, protecting, and preserving the modern heritage. Nearly 100 examples of Ukrainian modern buildings were presented in a graphical overview. The modern Ukranian architecture was dominated by Constructivism from the mid-1920s to the early 1930s, with Kharkiv as the epicenter of production, while Socialist Realism with the Stalin Empire emerged from 1932, lasting until 1955, with Kyiv as the capital of Ukraine. From December 1919 to January 1934, Kharkiv was the first capital of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the cultural, economic, and educational center of the new Ukrainian Republic. The status as new capital led to prestigious master plans and construction projects, among them the world-famous Derzhprom building at Freedom Square–as a symbol of Constructivism–or the Kharkiv Tractor Factory–as a symbol of the industrialization of agriculture. The leading role of Kharkiv as a forerunner and capital of Constructivism is often expressed by the famous State Industry House (Derzhprom) built from 1925 to 1928. Being the only modern ensemble in Ukraine nominated as UNESCO World Heritage, it became and still is the focus of identification and pride—despite the many controversial reflections and discussions about the conservation efforts and changes carried out since the original construction in the 1950s and after the year 2000. This explains the many articles dealing with Freedom Square and Dherzprom as a reaction to the call for papers in 2022 and also Docomomo International’s commitment to dedicate this special issue of the Docomomo Journal to Kharkiv under the title From Constructivism to Modernism in Kharkiv.","PeriodicalId":504955,"journal":{"name":"Docomomo Journal","volume":"76 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140702747","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Since February 24, 2022, the architectural heritage of Ukraine has been exposed to dangerous destruction. The government center on Freedom (Svoboda) Square in Kharkiv - the largest urban development of early modernist architecture and its pearl, included in the Tentative UNESCO World Heritage List (2017) and provisionally inscribed on the International List of Cultural Property under Enhanced Protection (2023) - Derzhprom (The State Industry Building), were hit by a missile attack on March 1, 2022. In the conditions of non-cessation of hostilities and non-priority, the only means of protecting monuments in the city for months were, and in many places still are, sandbags, adhesive tape and plywood. The architectural research community and Government of Ukraine, together with international organizations, must take all possible actions to protect and restore the damaged architectural monuments. The article deals with the modernist monuments of Freedom Square, the chronology of their reconstruction since the Second World War and the damage received over the past almost two years. The paper raises important questions regarding their future fate with the possibility of restoring some objects of the square to their original appearance of the modernist era.
{"title":"Modernist Monuments of Freedom Square In Kharkiv","authors":"Mariia Rusanova, Oleksandr Maimeskul","doi":"10.52200/docomomo.70.05","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52200/docomomo.70.05","url":null,"abstract":"Since February 24, 2022, the architectural heritage of Ukraine has been exposed to dangerous destruction. The government center on Freedom (Svoboda) Square in Kharkiv - the largest urban development of early modernist architecture and its pearl, included in the Tentative UNESCO World Heritage List (2017) and provisionally inscribed on the International List of Cultural Property under Enhanced Protection (2023) - Derzhprom (The State Industry Building), were hit by a missile attack on March 1, 2022. In the conditions of non-cessation of hostilities and non-priority, the only means of protecting monuments in the city for months were, and in many places still are, sandbags, adhesive tape and plywood. The architectural research community and Government of Ukraine, together with international organizations, must take all possible actions to protect and restore the damaged architectural monuments. The article deals with the modernist monuments of Freedom Square, the chronology of their reconstruction since the Second World War and the damage received over the past almost two years. The paper raises important questions regarding their future fate with the possibility of restoring some objects of the square to their original appearance of the modernist era.","PeriodicalId":504955,"journal":{"name":"Docomomo Journal","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140700558","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper explores the composition logic of the creativity of the Avant-garde masters and to identify the principles of the composition language of the architecture of modernism.To characterize the composition language of Avant-garde architecture, systemic, historical-genetic and semiotic methods of research are used. Architectural composition is interpreted as an activity that has its own semantic, morphological and syntactic features. In the example of Svoboda Square (the former Dzerzhinsky Square) in Kharkiv, the logical methods of artistic activity and thinking of the architects of the Soviet Avant-garde of the 1920-1930s are studied.At the beginning of the 20th century avant-garde movements were created artificially, consciously, by an act of will, and they strove to dictate their ideas, concepts and principles as universal and general. The architectural language of the Avant-garde is normative, ascetic and rigidly organized. Distinctive features of the artistic movements of the Avant-garde are the deep analyticity of thinking and the normativity of the declared requirements, abstract concepts and symbols. The logical principles of composition are often repeated thanks to stable semantic associations and are reflected in geometric structures and forms. Thus, the methods of compositional thinking of the Avant-garde form a monological system, i.e. they are internally holistic and normative, not allowing alternatives. It was possible to identify and show that the Avant-garde, as a monological language system, is characterized by the following features: internal integrity, self-sufficiency, normativity; stability of figurative language devices; restriction of freedom of artistic expression with the help of a concept, declaration, slogan, clear conceptual system.Researchers and designers should treat the phenomenon under study not as a “closed”, stylistically defined object, but see it as a complex historical process of structure formation based on an even more complex process of development of thinking and activity of architects and builders of a particular period.
{"title":"Composition Methods of the Soviet Architectural Avant-Garde","authors":"Оlena Remizova","doi":"10.52200/docomomo.70.04","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52200/docomomo.70.04","url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores the composition logic of the creativity of the Avant-garde masters and to identify the principles of the composition language of the architecture of modernism.To characterize the composition language of Avant-garde architecture, systemic, historical-genetic and semiotic methods of research are used. Architectural composition is interpreted as an activity that has its own semantic, morphological and syntactic features. In the example of Svoboda Square (the former Dzerzhinsky Square) in Kharkiv, the logical methods of artistic activity and thinking of the architects of the Soviet Avant-garde of the 1920-1930s are studied.At the beginning of the 20th century avant-garde movements were created artificially, consciously, by an act of will, and they strove to dictate their ideas, concepts and principles as universal and general. The architectural language of the Avant-garde is normative, ascetic and rigidly organized. Distinctive features of the artistic movements of the Avant-garde are the deep analyticity of thinking and the normativity of the declared requirements, abstract concepts and symbols. The logical principles of composition are often repeated thanks to stable semantic associations and are reflected in geometric structures and forms. Thus, the methods of compositional thinking of the Avant-garde form a monological system, i.e. they are internally holistic and normative, not allowing alternatives. It was possible to identify and show that the Avant-garde, as a monological language system, is characterized by the following features: internal integrity, self-sufficiency, normativity; stability of figurative language devices; restriction of freedom of artistic expression with the help of a concept, declaration, slogan, clear conceptual system.Researchers and designers should treat the phenomenon under study not as a “closed”, stylistically defined object, but see it as a complex historical process of structure formation based on an even more complex process of development of thinking and activity of architects and builders of a particular period.","PeriodicalId":504955,"journal":{"name":"Docomomo Journal","volume":"11 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140702317","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Marking the anniversary of the redevelopment of the Van Nelle Factory in Rotterdam, the related project archive was formally transferred to the Rotterdam City Archive in order to enable proper archival conservation and public accessibility of this essential documentation. This article sheds light on the documentation and redevelopment process of a modern World Heritage (WH) site and on the role of archives as an example for other protected heritage projects or sites.
在鹿特丹 Van Nelle 工厂重建周年之际，相关项目档案被正式移交给鹿特丹市档案馆，以便妥善保存档案，并向公众开放这些重要文件。这篇文章揭示了一个现代世界遗产（WH）遗址的文件编制和重建过程，以及档案作为其他受保护遗产项目或遗址范例的作用。
{"title":"Archival Challenges for the Van Nelle Factory","authors":"Edward Van Hevele, Wessel De Jonge","doi":"10.52200/docomomo.70.12","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52200/docomomo.70.12","url":null,"abstract":"Marking the anniversary of the redevelopment of the Van Nelle Factory in Rotterdam, the related project archive was formally transferred to the Rotterdam City Archive in order to enable proper archival conservation and public accessibility of this essential documentation. This article sheds light on the documentation and redevelopment process of a modern World Heritage (WH) site and on the role of archives as an example for other protected heritage projects or sites.","PeriodicalId":504955,"journal":{"name":"Docomomo Journal","volume":"35 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140703064","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The ideologists of Constructivism and “production art” of the 1920s put forward the slogan “not style, but method!”. However, the Constructivists-“productionists” movement carried a stylistic charge of great power. The intentions of the Constructivists-“productionists”, their manifestos and slogans are polemically pointed evidence of their awareness of their own place in the Soviet culture of the 1920s. Creative practice continued the development of a certain artistic tradition. It is necessary to reconstruct the development of the problem of style in the concept of “productionists” as a natural and historically determined stage of the movement. The manifestation of the rejection of the idea of style in artistic creativity in the concept of “production art” paradoxically corresponds to its specific conditions in setting the task of creating and identifying the mechanism for the development of modern style. They are analyzed in the article.The “anti-stylistic” orientation of “production art” was paradoxically opposed to the orientation towards a “Constructivist style”. In the late 1920s, it covered a wide range of architects and artists who did not belong to the Constructivist movement and who opposed them. In this regard, the fate of several outstanding monuments of the Modern Movement in the architecture of Kharkiv is indicative — the House of State Industry (Gosprom), the House of Projects and the House of Cooperation. They were the largest and most integral ensemble in their architectural and compositional solution, which embodied the ideas of the Modern Movement in Soviet architecture. The reconstruction of the ensemble after the Great Patriotic War (1941-1945) showed the contradictions that were embedded in the Constructivist concept of the modern style. The duality of understanding the art form in it was revealed. On the one hand, it acted as an independent stylistic entity. On the other hand, it could also be considered as a framework, a “draft” of some further work with the form. The concept of modern style defended by the “productionists” was problematized by the practice of “Constructivist stylizations”.
{"title":"Gosprom Ensemble in Kharkiv and the Concept of Modern Style","authors":"Alexander V Shilo","doi":"10.52200/docomomo.70.03","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52200/docomomo.70.03","url":null,"abstract":"The ideologists of Constructivism and “production art” of the 1920s put forward the slogan “not style, but method!”. However, the Constructivists-“productionists” movement carried a stylistic charge of great power. The intentions of the Constructivists-“productionists”, their manifestos and slogans are polemically pointed evidence of their awareness of their own place in the Soviet culture of the 1920s. Creative practice continued the development of a certain artistic tradition. It is necessary to reconstruct the development of the problem of style in the concept of “productionists” as a natural and historically determined stage of the movement. The manifestation of the rejection of the idea of style in artistic creativity in the concept of “production art” paradoxically corresponds to its specific conditions in setting the task of creating and identifying the mechanism for the development of modern style. They are analyzed in the article.The “anti-stylistic” orientation of “production art” was paradoxically opposed to the orientation towards a “Constructivist style”. In the late 1920s, it covered a wide range of architects and artists who did not belong to the Constructivist movement and who opposed them. In this regard, the fate of several outstanding monuments of the Modern Movement in the architecture of Kharkiv is indicative — the House of State Industry (Gosprom), the House of Projects and the House of Cooperation. They were the largest and most integral ensemble in their architectural and compositional solution, which embodied the ideas of the Modern Movement in Soviet architecture. The reconstruction of the ensemble after the Great Patriotic War (1941-1945) showed the contradictions that were embedded in the Constructivist concept of the modern style. The duality of understanding the art form in it was revealed. On the one hand, it acted as an independent stylistic entity. On the other hand, it could also be considered as a framework, a “draft” of some further work with the form. The concept of modern style defended by the “productionists” was problematized by the practice of “Constructivist stylizations”.","PeriodicalId":504955,"journal":{"name":"Docomomo Journal","volume":"48 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140699282","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the 1920s - 1930s in Kharkiv, at that time the capital of Soviet Ukraine, two main programs of city development were implemented - the creation of a new metropolitan center and the development of the industrial complex. Within the framework of these programs there was an evolution of Kharkiv’s housing infrastructure, which developed largely in connection with the leading Western social concepts of architectural and urban planning practice: garden city, house-commune, residential combine and socialist city. However, in addition to these concepts that replaced each other, there was also a parallel design of “mono-functional” housing, which is an integral, important and significant component of the avant-garde architecture of Kharkiv. It was built both within the framework of the program of the creation of the capital center and within the framework of the program of development of the industrial complex. It is unfair that such housing, as a rule, is in the shadow of more vivid and radical typological avant-garde solutions and is insufficiently described. The method of systematization and analysis of literary and documentary sources was applied. In the context of Russian aggression and its unfolding of a full-scale war against Ukraine since 24 February 2022, the architectural heritage of Kharkiv, as well as the heritage of other cities of Ukraine, is under constant threat of destruction. In this regard, the documentation and introduction of undeservedly forgotten “mono-functional” residential buildings into the international scientific community is extremely relevant. The article begins to document mono-functional housing built in the 1920s-1930s, and discusses in detail several examples: Chervonyi Knygar, Slovo and Komunar.
{"title":"Mono-Functional Housing and Changing Concepts in Kharkiv Residential Architecture during the Capital Period","authors":"K. Didenko","doi":"10.52200/docomomo.70.09","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52200/docomomo.70.09","url":null,"abstract":"In the 1920s - 1930s in Kharkiv, at that time the capital of Soviet Ukraine, two main programs of city development were implemented - the creation of a new metropolitan center and the development of the industrial complex. Within the framework of these programs there was an evolution of Kharkiv’s housing infrastructure, which developed largely in connection with the leading Western social concepts of architectural and urban planning practice: garden city, house-commune, residential combine and socialist city. However, in addition to these concepts that replaced each other, there was also a parallel design of “mono-functional” housing, which is an integral, important and significant component of the avant-garde architecture of Kharkiv. It was built both within the framework of the program of the creation of the capital center and within the framework of the program of development of the industrial complex. It is unfair that such housing, as a rule, is in the shadow of more vivid and radical typological avant-garde solutions and is insufficiently described. The method of systematization and analysis of literary and documentary sources was applied. In the context of Russian aggression and its unfolding of a full-scale war against Ukraine since 24 February 2022, the architectural heritage of Kharkiv, as well as the heritage of other cities of Ukraine, is under constant threat of destruction. In this regard, the documentation and introduction of undeservedly forgotten “mono-functional” residential buildings into the international scientific community is extremely relevant. The article begins to document mono-functional housing built in the 1920s-1930s, and discusses in detail several examples: Chervonyi Knygar, Slovo and Komunar.","PeriodicalId":504955,"journal":{"name":"Docomomo Journal","volume":"289 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140703935","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：