If an artist, in an object created according to the canons of this time, reproduces almost documentarily the decorative details taken from the artistic heritage of the past—this is stylization. This criticism reflected the general disillusionment in post-Stalinist functionalism of the late 1950s and the 1960s. Beginning from the 1970s and up until the actual collapse of the Soviet Union, Central Asian architects and critics used the ideological quest for authentic national forms as a means of expressing the growing distrust in prefabricated functionalism and their strategic oppositioKosinskiin to Stalinist regionalism. Un style qui est utilisé pour construire des usines. Functionalism & Modern Architecture in the Okanagan Valley. On Ginzburg’s attitude to the historic heritage of Central Asia see also Boris Chukhovich, “Local Modernism and Global Orientalism: Building the ‘Soviet Orient’,” Hintergrund, vol. Fundamentally, it was grounded in the personal experiences of the aesthetic subject or, in Kim’s words, in the object’s representation within the mind of an individual. This article starts with the Peter Eisenman discussion about modern architecture and how it was seen as both an outmoded functionalism and an obsessional formalism. Figure 3: Moisei Ginzburg’s Dead Orient (mertvyi vostok). ), Soviet Modernism 1955‒1991: Unknown History, Zurich: Park Books, 2012. 18 A. V. Shchusev, “Arkhitektura sovetskogo Vostoka[The Architecture of the Soviet Orient],” Arkhitektura SSSR, vol. 14 John Fizer, “The Theory of Objective Beauty in Soviet Aesthetics,” Studies in Soviet Thought, vol. That situation was only possible because in the post-Stalinist era the self-referentiality of architectural discourse was never seriously challenged by the political authorities occupied with more urgent social issues. Functionalism is an important part of modernist architecture. Besides, in the real world of the Soviet 1970s, triumph of functionalism—whether or not it was informed by the traditional urban fabric of Central Asiaresulted in the massive demolition of historic houses and their replacement with prefabricated apartments, while the crossed-out Ulugbek Madrasa was exiled to the category of architectural monuments “with its completely unclear relation to modernity.”11. L'insistenza del governo sovietico sulla continuità primordiale delle tradizioni architettoniche regionali ed etniche, nonché sulla loro necessaria integrazione nel nuovo stile socialista dell'architettura centroasiatica, è stata ripresa da architetti e critici sovietici che, attraverso la ricerca ideologica di forme nazionali, hanno potuto esprimere la loro crescente sfiducia nel funzionalismo prefabbricato e la loro opposizione alla versione centroasiatica dello stile stalinista. 22The classical Kazakh national forms, and the first ones that Utenova discusses, are the dome and the shape of the yurt (fig. the post humanism in . 16The buildings preserved from “the period between the thirteenth and seventeenth centuries in Persian architecture” were primarily mosques, madrasas, and mausoleums like the Ulugbek Madrasa crossed out by Ginzburg. Source: Sholpan K. Utenova, “V poiskakh natsional’noi formy [In Search of the National Form],” Arkhitektura i stroitel’stvo Uzbekistana, vol. Preferences over jurisdictional architecture are the product of three irreducible logics: efficiency, distribution and identity. 5). Change ), You are commenting using your Facebook account. The particular features of climate and everyday life reflected in the structure of these streets and squares, in the organism of a house, are the national premises that would serve as a background and as an ensemble for the growing new Orient.9. Architects: V. Figure 7: Kazakhstan Pavilion at the XII International Festival of Youth and Students in Moscow. Les bâtiments du fonctionnalisme offrent beaucoup d'espace pour vivre. That is not entirely unfair, since the discussions preserved on the pages of Arkhitektura i stroitel’stvo Uzbekistana,2 a journal of Central Asian architecture, and occasionally covered by Arkhitektura SSSR,3 were primarily used as post factum justification of the new forms. URL: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/BF01044663.pdf. Durch die kritische Analyse zweier der akademischen Kritik entlehnten Unterscheidungen – zwischen nationaler Form und sozialistischem Inhalt (bzw. 8, 1934, p. 8-10. Architects: V. T. Khvan, M. K. Ospanov, V. V. Chechelev, K. R. Tulebaev, 1979-1982. The neoliberal ethos of triumphant subjectivity, already entrenched in Western postmodernism by this time, was fundamentally alien and incomprehensible to Soviet architects. Its national forms were almost textual in their message. National Forms of Soviet Post-Functionalism: Architectural Criticism in Late-Socialist Central Asia Prendendo spunto dai testi quasi dimenticati di critica architettonica della tarda Asia centrale sovietica, l'articolo esplora le strategie discorsive utilizzate da architetti, critici e storici per giustificare il passaggio dal rigido funzionalismo degli anni '60 all'architettura, più attenta alle varianti regionali, degli anni '70 e '80. Yet, the conceptual flexibility of architectural criticism essentially shielded the late-Soviet architecture from the ideological dogma allowing for its impressive formal experiments. Relying on all but forgotten texts of architectural criticism from late Soviet Central Asia, the article explores the discursive strategies employed by architects, critics, and historians to justify the shift away from the rigid functionalism of the 1960s to the regionally sensitive architecture of the 1970s and the 1980s. 4‒5, 1926, p. 113-114. Her distinction was hardly more precise than Abdullaev’s opposition between styling and stylization, but its imprecision and suppressed—yet apparent—subjectivity allowed Utenova to defend her taste for creative post-functionalism in the architecture of Soviet Kazakhstan. ( Log Out /  29A standard Soviet history textbook maintained that “the Marxist-Leninist ideology constitutes the unshakable foundation for the cultural unity of the people of the USSR; it defines the common socialist content of all their cultures, different in form.”36 The government’s insistence on the continuity of regional and ethnic modes of artistic expression from the ancient to the medieval, the capitalist, and ultimately to the socialist era allowed Soviet architects and critics to justify any experimental design. Figure 8: Central State Museum of Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic, Almaty (Z. Mustafina, Iu. 8) to the “metaphorical” Valikhanov Museum (fig. Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. He suggests that in pre-industrial humanist practice, a balance between form and function could be maintained “because both type and function were invested with idealist view of man’s relationship to his object world,” (236). cit. Architects: A. Korzhempo, M. Ezau, V. Panin, 1983. Eisenman discusses the critical theory of postmodernism, comparing it to the modernist period. 14In fact, these “exercises” fell into one of two main categories: the formally sophisticated ones praised within the profession, but almost never built, and the more straightforward projects that were functional, structurally simple, and—in Central Asia in particular—national in form. Certainly, Utenova was aware of this paradox, but presenting her own ideas as a simple reflection of people’s needs was the safest tack for her to take, in order to stay within the limits of ideological loyalty. new feature to it, which is . 12Still, for the most part, as much as Soviet architects might disagree between themselves about acceptable professional methods and standards, they never doubted that good standards must produce good architecture, regardless of what the users’ intentions or subjectivities make out of it.


Garage Door Too Heavy To Lift Manually, Aldi Meatballs Ingredients, Kingsbridge Insurance Contractors, Chinese Chicken Watercress Soup Recipe, Russian Verb Conjugation Chart, Business Analysis Core Concept Model, Compound Nouns Exercises,