Menu
HomeLeisure and recreation

Essay on paper architecture. Castles in the air: the most famous paper architecture projects

Information market or sanctuary of 11 oracles.

Apartment for an islander's family.

“Atrium, or space where everyone can be big and small”

Museum of Equestrian Sculpture without Riders. 1983

“Tombstone skyscraper, or urban self-erecting columbarium”, (together with Yuri Avvakumov) 1983

Theater of the Lonely Red Lady.

Architect: Mikhail Filippov

Resistance shaft. 1985

Tower of Babel. 1989

Atrium. First prize at the international competition 1985

Information market. Honorable Mention at the International Competition 1986

Monument 2001. Honorable Mention at the International Competition 1987

Architects: Alexander Brodsky and Ilya Utkin

Ilya Utkin and Alexander Brodsky

House for a doll

Home for Winnie the Pooh.

Museum of Vanished Houses (Columbarium) - first page.

Museum of Vanished Houses (Columbarium) - second page.

Hole mountain.

Villa Nautilus

Bridge over the abyss

City turtle

Crystal Palace of the twentieth century.

Museum of Urban Sculpture. Island of stability.

Bridge city.

Dome. 1990

A theater without a stage, or a wandering auditorium. 1986

Nameless river.

Ship of fools.

Opera Bastille.

Museum of Architecture.

Temple city.

The villa is claustrophobic.

Glass monument.

Untitled.

Forum of a Thousand Truths 1987

Monument 2000

Filippov Mikhail Anatolyevich. R Born in 1954 in Leningrad.

Education:

In 1979 he graduated from the Leningrad State Academic Institute of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture. I. E. Repin.
In 1983 he joined the Union of Architects of Russia, in 1984 - the Union of Artists of Russia.

Urban development projects:

  1. . 2009.
  2. (Moscow region).

Individual objects:

  1. Reconstruction of GUTA Bank (Moscow). Diploma of the festival “Zodchestvo-97” - 1996-1997;
  2. Executive mansion (Moscow, B. Afanasyevsky lane) 1998;
  3. State Musical Jewish Theater (Moscow, Taganskaya Square) - 1997. Diploma of the Quadriennale in Prague (1999), II degree diploma of the Zodchestvo-97 festival, I degree diploma of the Zodchestvo-98 festival, Golden Section prize of MOCA (1997 ), diploma from the Union of Designers (1998). Nominated for the State Prize;
  4. Representative complex (Gorki Leninskie village, Moscow region) - 1998. Diploma of the festival “Architecture-98”;
  5. Project for the reconstruction of the marine terminal and harbor area of ​​the city of Sochi 2000 - 1999;

Competitions:

  • "Sculpture Museum", Central Glass, Tokyo. Second prize - 1983;
  • "Style 2001", JA, Tokyo. First prize - 1984;
  • “Atrium”, Central Glass (for the solution of the atrium space), Tokyo. First prize - 1985;
  • "Shaft of Resistance", JA, Tokyo. Honorable Mention - 1985;
  • "The Information Market", Central Glass, Tokyo. Honorable Mention - 1986;
  • "Monument 2001", JA, Tokyo. Honorable Mention - 1987;
  • “Island”, Moscomarchitecture (commissioned by the Academy of Architecture of the Russian Federation). Diploma - 1998.

Main exhibitions:

  • Milan Triennale - 1988;
    State Russian Museum, St. Petersburg (personal) - 1992;
  • Milan Triennale - 1996;
  • State Museum of Architecture named after. A. V. Shchuseva, Moscow (personal) -1998;
  • VII Venice International Architectural Biennale (solo exhibition “Ruins of Paradise” in the Russian pavilion). 2000;
  • "Marmomak-2000", Verona (personal). 2000;
  • State Museum of Architecture named after. A. V. Shchuseva, Moscow. 2000;
  • "10 Years - 10 Architects", Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA), London. "10 best architects of Russia." 2002;

Creative credo:

"Canonical order architecture — architecture of post-consumer society"

In the USSR, the “paper boom” arose during the period, in the words of art critic A.K. Yakimovich, “late Soviet civilization.” By the beginning of the eighties, the era of a rigid and uncompromising division into “ours” and “yours” gradually became a thing of the past, revealing “totalitarian anarchy” in the socio-political sphere, when confused and lost moods prevailed in society. In the book “Flying over the Abyss. Art, culture, picture of the world. 1930 – 1990” Yakimovich, to understand the context of fine art of the eighties, suggests paying attention to the work of the Soviet thinker Merab Mamardashvili “How I Understand Philosophy,” where the philosopher addresses the existential problem of a confused person. Yakimovich draws parallels with Mamardashvili’s thoughts on the topic of being and nonconformism, and we can go a little further and build a similar bridge to conceptual paper architecture.

Indeed, the subjects and moods that the “paper money” architects take into account are in many ways close to the ideas of Mamardashvili. The philosopher writes about the use of tradition, which creates the appearance of continuity of development, blurring the boundaries between “old” and “new”; he is concerned about the historical formation of man, his loneliness, total lack of independence: “he constantly returned to the theme of the anthropological catastrophe hanging over people. The thinker meant nothing more than a loss of orientation and the inability to rely on any criteria.<…>The human personality has become disorganized and vague." These theses found explicit or hidden reflection in the projects, experiments, and installations of conceptual architects. For example, the theme of “survival as a philosophical problem”, which is clearly visible in the graphics of Anatoly Zverev and Dmitry Pavlinsky, also appears in the works of wallets associated with subjects of imaginary stability, the creation of a home and the death of utopia.

Along with personal ones, the “paper workers” were also worried about professional problems, which they smoothed out by going into graphics: in the absence of real practice, the helplessness of the architect as an architect appeared, i.e. professional dysfunction was formed, the inability to be a master of his craft. And here, of course, the general crisis of self-identification and development of an artist, associated with the costs of postmodernism, is exposed. Although outwardly the papermakers cannot be called suffering, their work, no matter how banal it may sound, is rather a reflection of the era. Hide, take cover, dissolve, disappear - these are the main postulates, most often laid down not even by the wallets themselves, but by the organizers of competitions, which gave the opportunity to speak out and think about the topic.



Of course, when talking about a new type of philosophy in paper architecture, the question inevitably arises about the role of “papermen” in Soviet culture. Judging by the artistic criticism of that time, then until the end of the nineties, i.e. Before the decline in interest in paper projects, there was a widespread opinion that the “paper projects” were continuers of the architectural trends of the 1920s and 30s, and were reviving the utopian ideas of Soviet constructivists. Such a comparison suggested itself due to the fact that the place of “wallets” in Soviet culture remained unclear due to the short-term nature of the phenomenon. But now it is obvious that, apart from some similarities in style, the difference between these periods is great. Even if we look at the fantasies of Leonidov and Chernikhov, we will see work with forms for their subsequent embodiment in real buildings, while the “paper workers” simply do not have such a goal. “The projects of the 20s were a positive and constructive dream of the future, albeit temporarily unattainable for technical or other reasons, but retaining the desirability of implementation,” writes I. Dobritsyna. “The projects of the wallets, for the most part, did not openly join in this, insisting that their projects were free architectural fantasies and there was no point in realizing them.” By and large, the “papermen” of the eighties were not at the forefront of architectural thought and were not ahead of their time, but worked with the present, while reviving some images of a bygone era and carrying out its partial reminiscence.

A.G. Rappaport, whose efforts contributed to the paper architecture of the 1980s. quite accurately recorded both in the domestic and foreign press, constantly trying to draw a historical analogy for it. As if not believing in the independence of the phenomenon, in his recent article “Once again about paper architecture,” he proposes to compare the work of the “papermen” not with the constructivists, but with OBERIU, emphasizing the similarities in the use of scientific and philosophical culture by both sides. As an example, A.G. Rappaport cites the poem “Pointless Youth” by A.N. Egunov, a writer from the Oberiut circle. The irony of utopian consciousness, which became widespread in his poem, in his opinion, 50 years later moved into the paper projects of Moscow architects, allowing them to create a metaphorical poetic game using graphics. But the comparison of these philosophies is not entirely correct in its essence, since the historical conditions and the very existence of the Oberiuts and the “papermen” of the eighties are strikingly different: the latter, as a rule, came from intelligent, prosperous families, did not live in cramped conditions and were neutral towards authorities, which is felt in the non-politicized nature of their work, while almost all Oberiuts were subjected to repression.



It is interesting that in his early articles of the era of paper architecture A.G. Rappaport sought to shift the emphasis towards politics, which fueled interest in “wallets” in the West. If you look at the publications of those years, you can see that the domestic press, through the efforts of critics close to the circle of architects, was rather neutral, while the Western press (the East, despite the popularity of the “paper money”, also remained outside of political assessments) tended to attribute the “wall paper” to nonconformism era of post-totalitarianism. Foreign publications somewhat artificially insisted that paper architecture is a politicized protest, in particular, this can be seen from the catalogs “Postmodernism. Style and Subversion 1970-90" and "Papierarchitektur: neue Projekte aus der Sowjetunion". For example, in the latest catalog the following is written: “Paper architecture, of course, is only part of that nonconformist culture that is gradually gaining the right to exist in the USSR. The necessary revision of the principles of socialist realism is becoming one of the main problems for all areas of artistic activity.” However, the development of such thoughts can be found, including now, by looking at books on architectural postmodernism: “paper projects,” writes historian and architectural theorist I. Dobritsyna, “are a form of thinking about what set of ideas of existential content could express architecture through metaphor without being so constrained by economics and ideology.” And it seems that formally all this is true, but in relation to “wallets” this is said with unnecessary stretch. Ideology did not concern architects as much as was commonly believed in the West; this is now unanimously stated by the “papermen” themselves, who are not inclined to attach a nonconformist meaning to their youthful quests. For international competitions, of course, the political background was important, since interest in the closed country of the USSR was heightened, and therefore in every paper project they looked for features of infringement and discontent. However, the projects of the “wallets” calmly passed censorship and were sent to competitions far beyond the country’s borders, and, it is worth assuming, this was not at all due to the fact that, as Rappaport writes in articles of that time, censorship critics did not know how to react to these ironic work. It’s just that ideologically, the “wallahs” were not dissidents at all, but maintained imperturbable political indifference, showed initiative even in cramped circumstances in the absence of real creative work, ironically, but absolutely good-naturedly, making fun of Soviet realities.

Although, of course, it is worth noting that in terms of the type of organization, the use of artistic citation of cultural abstractions and concepts, and the predominance of the comic element, the “wallahs” are quite close to the circle of Moscow conceptualists, who are usually classified as unofficial art. With their daring and cheerfulness, the projects of the “wallets” are reminiscent of the works of D. Prigov, I. Kabakov, E. Gorokhovsky, E. Bulatov, V. Pivovarov. But if the work of the latter was often quite politicized, and their postmodernism was indirectly or directly addressed to power, then such a tendency was almost not observed among paper architects. Ilya Kabakov, who preserved “Notes on Unofficial Life in Moscow” in book format for the period of the 1960-70s, noted that both in the seventies and in the first half of the eighties, a distinctive feature of typical unofficial art, in addition to ideological positions and life in permanent fear, there was also a purely economic factor: as a rule, cramped life circumstances and the need to earn money by trying to sell paintings, doing book illustration, etc. “Paper” conceptualists received cash prizes for winning competitions; therefore, of course, apart from stylistic and symbolic moments, nothing else brings them closer to unofficial art. According to A. Yakimovich, the very division into unofficial and official art took place precisely not on stylistic grounds, but on sociopolitical ones: “whoever was not allowed to attend authorized official exhibitions or who himself did not want to participate in them became “unofficial”.” But in the 1980s. An entirely new type of artist began to emerge, one who pretended that the ideological imperative did not exist at all. It is precisely this type that the “papermen” began to gravitate towards, ignoring issues of ideology. They, as G. Revzin noted in a project dedicated to Mikhail Belov, were like hippies, lived in their own small commune and created the world and system around themselves. “Papermakers” are one of the first who began to work in groups in conceptualism and paper architecture.

There is a theory that the culture of postmodernism is “radical conservatism”, which revives old aesthetic categories and plays with them in its own way. According to art critic A.K. Rykov, postmodernism encourages emotionality and pays great attention to quality criteria, welcomes originality and authorship, while abandoning the cult of novelty and the creation of new types of artistic creativity. In this sense, “wallets”, consciously following traditions, clearly represent the meanings of postmodernism, since they take forms that have become classics as a basis and add their own conceptual “filling” to them. Moreover, they play with dystopia, another characteristic of postmodernism, appropriating its ideas of destructive progress. But here there is also a discrepancy with postmodernism, which does not have a pronounced romantic beginning: moving towards irony, the “papermen” in their projects retain the opportunity for the author’s and spectator’s dreams, maxims and daydreams.

The era of paper architecture, ending in the early 1990s, canceled out all further development of this genre, as virtual architecture picked up the baton. Gradually, according to real, rather than fantasy, projects, the “paper workers” began to build houses in Moscow and the Moscow region, and many of them replaced drawing instruments with computer technologies. Multi-layer designs, axonometry, sections and plans captured in etchings are a thing of the past, and it is possible to immediately see the final object on the screen. And if the desired result can be carefully examined in 3D models, then the need to use allusions and symbols to reveal the image is a thing of the past. The current architectural fantasies (or, as G. Revzin calls them, “fantasies”), for example, the futurologist Arthur Skizhali-Weiss, are already completely far from the philosophy that was formed in the 1980s, there is no intellectual game or joke in them, this simply a high-quality construction of a certain future on the ruins of the past, including the remains of conceptual paper architecture.

Now, a quarter of a century later, we can confidently speak about the influence of the “paper” stage on the creative biography of the founders of this movement. Alexander Brodsky from a “paper” architect became an artist: he reproduces atriums and fantastic structures made of glass and wood not in etchings, but in museum spaces, creating conceptual installations and art objects. Open to all winds, his huge wooden “Rotunda” stands in the Nikola-Lenivets Park, with its open form clearly reminiscent of numerous graphic villas created in collaboration with Ilya Utkin, who, unlike his colleague, founded an architectural studio and in reality builds residential country houses. At first glance, in his projects there is little left from the “paper” period, but sometimes the capitals and marble cladding seem to repeat the details of theatrical etchings or elements of the interiors of the Atrium restaurant. It is interesting that in 2011 I. Utkin together with P. Angelopoulou at the Museum of Architecture. A.V. Shchusev in Moscow created the installation “Children’s Reliquary,” apparently immersed in nostalgia for the conceptual games of the 1980s (Ill. 58). His “reliquary” is a precious chest, a real home for a child, where he can be left alone with his fantasies and keep his relics. Mikhail Belov, who already at the “paper” stage was balancing between neoclassicism and postmodernism, now adheres to the same sentiments in real architecture. Children's playgrounds in the Lego style in the spirit of Aldo Rossi (Ill. 59) coexist with classicist mansions and "imperial" and "Pompeian" houses, and the "English quarter" resembles the Towers of Babel. Mikhail Filippov, according to G.A. Revzin, continues the mood of “world of art Petersburg” in architecture, creating mansions in Moscow and new ski villages in Olympic Sochi. Dmitry Bush also operates with complex forms, but not in graphics, but when designing multifunctional stadiums. Former “papermen” no longer face the task of balancing on the brink of official and unofficial art or choosing the “third” path; they have gained fame and are free to choose an architectural direction, but in the absence of regular fantasizing on a given topic, it is now much more difficult for them to show their individuality, as this was in the “paper” period.

Conclusion

In putting forward the thesis that Soviet paper architecture of the 1980s became a sociocultural phenomenon, we took into account the context of Soviet realities, without making comparative analogies with foreign processes, since this is a separate, rather broad topic. However, in conclusion, it is appropriate to explain why international competitions were won mainly by “wallets” from the USSR. The fact is that in competitions held by Japan Architect, OISTAT or UNESCO, their works were presented mainly by architects under construction from Europe and the USA, who, in addition to competitive activities, were engaged in real design, while Soviet architects were completely focused on “paper” construction. Moreover, participants from the USSR numerically prevailed in these competitions, since the very first prizes they won aroused active interest and healthy competition among Soviet architects who were ready to fantasize for the sake of fantasizing, and were not burdened with ongoing projects. Therefore, it is important that, despite the short duration and transience of the competitive period, it attracted a large number of architects starting their career.

The existence of the phenomenon of conceptual paper architecture in the 1980s in the USSR was due, firstly, to the lack of initiative in the real planning sector, secondly, to the participation of young architects in numerous international competitions, and thirdly, to the interest that arose in Soviet “paperbooks” at first abroad, and then in their own country, which provoked a long exhibition phase for them. Revived in 1984, the concept of “paper architecture” reached the international level, acquired a fundamentally different meaning and formed a new typology, since it combined rich cultural and historical allusions with trends characteristic of current artistic processes of that time. In their works, the “papermen” came close to revealing the very essence of the theme set by the competition, its ideas and poetics through architectural citation and a strong connection with literature, and “fantasizing on the theme” on such a scale and in such quality became a truly extraordinary phenomenon. The autonomy of conceptual paper architecture in the USSR in the 1980s is also confirmed by the fact that its philosophy remained independent and only partially coincided with the cultural paradigms of society, and socio-political factors influenced exclusively the topics raised in “paper” projects, but not the the structure of this direction. Thus, based on the study of the above materials and analysis of the historical context, it can be argued that Soviet paper architecture of the 1980s formed its own aesthetics and became a sociocultural phenomenon at the intersection of architecture and fine arts.

List of used literature

1. Avvakumov Yu. Paper architecture / From the collection. Bank "Stolichny" – M.: ART MYTH, 1994. – 19 p.

2. Avvakumov Yu. Russian Utopia: [website] – M.: Utopia Foundation, 2000-2014. – URL: http://www.utopia.ru/museum.phtml?type=graphics (access date 04/20/2015).

3. Airapetov A., Krikheli M. Fantasy-84 // Architecture of the USSR. – 1984. – No. 4. – 128 p.

4. Alexander Brodsky. Ed. Muratov A. // Project Russia. – 2006. – No. 3 (41).

5. Andreeva E. Postmodernism. Art of the second half of the 20th – beginning of the 21st century. – St. Petersburg: ABC-classics, 2007. – 488 p.

6. Architect Dmitry Bush [catalog]. – M.: German Printing Factory, 2008.

7. Aureli P.V. Possibility of absolute architecture. – M.: Strelka Press, 2014. – 304 p.

8. Belov A. Architects of the Big City. Ilya Utkin // Big City. – 02/08/2013. – URL: http://bg.ru/city/arhitektory_bolshogo_goroda_ilja_utkin-17035/ (access date: 05/01/2015).

9. Belov A. History of paper architecture [portal archi.ru] – URL: http://archi.ru/lib/publication.html?id=1850569502&fl=5&sl=1 (access date 04/02/2015).

10. Belov A. List of Avvakumov. // Architectural Bulletin. – 2010. – No. 1 (112).

11. Belov M. Notes of a “paper” architect // Youth. – 1986. – No. 2. – P. 107.

12. Belov M. The original architectural project as a disappearing reality. Forgotten exhibitions. 25/CCXXV. [website]. – URL: http://arhbelov.ru/225сxxv/ (date of access: 04/23/2015).

13. Bylinkin N. P., Zhuravlev A. M. Modern Soviet architecture: 1955 - 1980. – M.: Stroyizdat, 1985. – 224 p.

14. Great Utopia: Russian and Soviet avant-garde 1915-1932 [catalog]. – Bern: Bentelli; M.: Galart, 1993.

15. Questions of the theory of architecture. Architecture and culture of Russia in the 21st century. Ed. Azizyan I. A. – M.: LIBROKOM, 2009. – 472 p.

16. Gozak A.P. Ivan Leonidov. – M.: Giraffe, 2002. – 239 p.

17. Grigorieva I. S. Giacomo Quarenghi. Architectural graphics. – St. Petersburg: State Hermitage Museum, 1999. – 149 p.

18. Daniel S. M. European classicism. – St. Petersburg: ABC-classics, 2003. – 304 p.

19. Dmitrochenkova E. N. Works of Pietro di Guttardo Gonzaga from Moscow collections, 250 years [album]. – M.: MV polygraph, 2001.

20. Dobritsyna I. A. From postmodernism to nonlinear architecture: Architecture in the context of modern philosophy and science. – M.: Progress-Tradition, 2004. – 416 p.

21. From the history of Novosibirsk paper architecture // Project Siberia [site]. – 2005. - No. 3. – URL: http://www.prosib.info/stat.php?tab=tema&id=84 (access date 04/12/2015).

22. Ikonnikov A.V. Utopian thinking and architecture. – M.: Architecture-S, 2004. – 400 p.

23. Kabakov I. 60-70s... Notes on unofficial life in Moscow. – M.: New Literary Review, 2008. – 368 p.

24. Kabanova O. Paper locks don’t burn // Russian newspaper. – 08/09/2004. – No. 3545.

25. Kosenkova K. G. Architectural utopias of German expressionism // Essays on the history of architecture of New and Contemporary times / ed. Azizyan I. A. – St. Petersburg: Kolo, 2009. – 656 p.

26. Kurg A. Towards “paper architecture”: Critical architecture of the late socialist period in Tallinn and Moscow // Project Baltia. – 2013-2014. – No. 04-01. – pp. 114-120.

27. Latour A. The Birth of the Metropolis. Moscow 1930-1955 - M.: Art of the XXI century, 2005. - 336 p.

28. Ledoux K.-N. Architecture considered in relation to art and legislation. – Ekaterinburg: Architecton: Kanon, 2003.

29. Lexicon of nonclassics: artistic and aesthetic culture of the 20th century. Ed. Bychkov V.V. – M.: Rossitsskaya political encyclopedia, 2003. – 608 p.

30. Lissman K.P. Philosophy of contemporary art6 introduction. – St. Petersburg: Hyperion, 2011. – 248 p.

31. Mamardashvili M.K. Arrow of knowledge: collection. – M.: Tydex Co., 2004. – 262 p.

32. Milk N. Alexander Brodsky - Ilya Utkin // Dynamic couples / Cultural Alliance. Project of Marat Gelman [website]. – URL: http://www.guelman.ru/dva/para3.html (date accessed 04/29/2015).

33. Novikova L. Yuri Avvakumov. End of story? // Interior explorer [site]. – URL: http://www.interiorexplorer.ru/article.php?article=569 (date accessed 05/01/2015).

34. The turning point of the eighties in the unofficial art of the USSR. Ed. Kiesewalter G. – M.: New Literary Review, 2014. – 688 p.

35. Rappaport A. G. John Outram - building an English “wallet” // Architecture. – 06/23/1990.

36. Rappaport A. G. Once again about paper architecture // Tower and labyrinth [blog]. – 05/23/2013. – URL: http://papardes.blogspot.ru/2013/05/blog-post.html (access date: 03/20/2015).

37. Rappaport A.G. Cranes of architectural autumn [manuscript]. – 1991.

38. Rappaport A. G. Concepts of architectural space. – M.: CSTI for Civil Engineering and Architecture, 1988.

39. Rappaport A. G. Towards an understanding of architectural form / Dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Art History, presented in the form of a scientific report [portal archi.ru]. – M., 2000. URL: http://archi.ru/lib/publication.html?id=1850569398&fl=5&sl=1 (access date 03/12/2015).

40. Rappaport A. G. A short course in “paper architecture” // Ogonyok. – 1990. – No. 24.

41. Rappaport A. G. Twilight of the future // Architecture. – 06/09/1990. – No. 11.

42. Rappaport A. G. Fantasies instead of utopia // Construction newspaper. Architecture. – 1988. – No. 22(686).

43. Revzin G. Foreign body. 19: Mikhail Belov // Classic project. – 2006. – 275 p.

44. Revzin G. Architectural fantasy // Classic project. – 03/27/2005. – URL: http://projectclassica.ru/culture/13_2005/2005_13_01a.htm (access date 04/14/2015).

45. Revzin G.I. Mikhail Filippov: architect-artist. – M.: OGI, 2011. – 435 p.

46. ​​Revzin G. Portrait of the artist in his youth // Kommersant Weekend. – 2015. – No. 6. – P. 18.

47. Revzin G.I. Russian architecture at the turn of the XX-XXI centuries. – M.: New publishing house, 2013. – 532 p.

48. Revzin G.I. Essays on the philosophy of architectural form. – M.: OGI, 2002. – 144 p.

49. Russian utopia: a depository = Russian utopia: a depository / Venice Biennale VI International Exhibition of Architecture [catalog]. – M.: b.i., . – 20 s.

50. Rykov A.V. Postmodernism as “radical conservatism”: The problem of artistic-theoretical conservatism and the American theory of contemporary art of the 1960-1990s. – St. Petersburg: Aletheia, 2007. – 376 p.

51. Ryabushin A.V. Architects of the turn of the millennium. – M.: Art XXI century, 2005. – 288 p.

52. Sikachev A.V. When you run in the wrong direction // Bulletin of the Moscow Architectural Institute [website]. – URL: http://www.marhi.ru/vestnik/theory/run.php (access date 04/14/2015).

53. Smolyanitsky M. “Paper architecture” as it does not exist // Capital. – 1992. – No. 17.

54. Modern architecture of the world: Vol. 1/Ans. Ed. Konovalova N. A. – M.; St. Petersburg : Nestor-History, 2011. – 388 p.

55. Strigale A. A. Dialogue of history and art. – St. Petersburg: Dmitry Bulanin, 1999. – 220 p.

56. Tarkhanov A. Paper architecture as of 1986 // Year of Architecture: Collection (for the VIII Congress of the Union of Architects of the USSR). – M., 1987. – P. 77.

57. Utkin I. It was the replacement of emptiness // Classic Project [website] – 11.27.2003. – URL: http://www.architektor.ru/avtor/utkin/teoriya/pressa/Ulya%20Utkin%20Eto%20bylo%20zameshenie%20pustoty.htm (access date 03/23/2015).

58. Kharitonova A., Barabanov E., Rosenfeld A. “Allowed for export from the USSR.” Moscow nonconformism. – M.: Cultural Foundation “Ekaterina”, 2011. – 276 p.

59. Yuzbashev V. From paper to virtual. Opportunities and losses in architecture // New World. – 2001. – No. 1.

60. Yakimovich A.K. Flights over the abyss: art, culture, picture of the world. 1930 -1990. – M.: Art – XXI century, 2009. – 464 p.

61. Grois B. The total art of Stalinism: avant-garde, aesthetic dictatorship, and beyond. – Oxford: Princeptom University Press, 1992. – 126 p.

62. Hatton B., Cooke C., Rappaport A. G. Nostalgia of culture – Contemporary Soviet visionary architecture. – London: Architectural Association Publications, 1989. – 80 p.

63. Nesbitt L. E. Brodsky & Utkin: The Complete Works. – NY.: Princeton Architectural Press, 2003. – 128 p.

64. Olman L. 2 Soviet Architects Build on Imagination // Los Angeles Times. – November 11, 1989. – P. F1, F10.

65. Paper architecture: The columbaria of Brodsky and Utkin // Postmodernism. Style and Subversion 1970-90. – London, V&A Museum, 2011.

66. Paper architecture. An Exhibition of Deutsche Lufthansa AG., German Airlines. – Frankfurt am Main: Deutsches Architektur Museum, 1989.

67. Rappaport A. G. Paper architecture. A postscript / Post-Soviet art and architecture. – London: Academy Editions, 1994. – P.128-143.

68. Rappaport A. G. Sprache und Architektur des “Post-Totalitarismus” / Klotz H. Papierarchitektur: neue Projekte aus der Sowjetunion. – Frankfurt am Main, 1989. – 148 p.

69. Rappaport A. G. Traveling dreamers or the Past in the Future / Brodsky&Utkin. – New Zealand, 1989.

70. Utopias. Ed. Noble R. / Whitechapel: Documents of Contemporary Art. – London: Whitechapel Gallery, The MIT Press, 2009. – 240 p.


Despite the short duration of the phenomenon called “Paper Architecture”, its total collection is very extensive. Therefore, curators have a great degree of freedom in combining her works both with each other and with works from other eras. For example, at the next exhibition, which is planned to be held at the Museum of Architecture, the works of the “papermen” can be seen together with the works of their predecessors - Soviet architects of the 1920-1960s. At the current exhibition at the Pushkin Museum, curators Yuri Avvakumov and Anna Chudetskaya placed 54 works of wallets in “company” with 28 architectural fantasies of masters of the 17th-18th centuries. from the museum's collection: Piranesi, Gonzago, Quarenghi and others. To unite in one space two eras of fantasy-architectural creativity, our contemporaries with their “forefathers,” according to Avvakumov, was the conceptual idea of ​​the current exhibition.

Russian Paper architecture is a rather specific phenomenon that had historical precedents, but not contemporary foreign analogues. This phenomenon was generated by the special conditions that developed in domestic architecture in the last decades of Soviet power. Being artistically gifted people, young architects, for well-known reasons, did not have the opportunity to self-realize in the profession and went into the “parallel dimension” of purely fantasy creativity.

The history of Russian Paper Architecture is inextricably linked with conceptual competitions held by OISTAT, UNESCO, as well as the magazines Architectural Design, Japan Architect and “Architecture of the USSR”. Their organizers sought to search for new ideas, rather than obtain solutions to specific “applied” problems. And the largest number of awards went to participants from the Soviet Union, who were able to draw attention to Russian architecture after a long break.


Unlike their predecessors (primarily the avant-garde artists of the 1920s and 1960s), the conceptualists of the 1980s did not strive to create utopian images of an ideal future. There was no futurological component in the works of the “papermen” - their teachers, the sixties, had already spoken exhaustively on this topic. In addition, the eighties are the era of postmodernism, i.e. reactions to modernism, which for several previous generations was “the future.” By the time Paper Architecture flourished, the “future” had already arrived, but instead of universal happiness, it brought disappointment and disgust. Therefore, “paper” creativity was a form of escape from the gray, dull Soviet reality into beautiful worlds created by the rich imagination of educated and talented people.

The specificity of Paper Architecture was the synthesis of expressive means of fine art, architecture, literature and theater. With all the diversity of styles and creative manners, most “paper” projects were united by a special language: the explanatory note took the form of a literary essay, a character was introduced into the project - the “main character”, the mood and character of the environment were conveyed by drawings or comics. In general, all this was combined into a kind of uvrazh, a work of easel painting or graphics. A special direction of conceptualism emerged with a characteristic combination of visual and verbal means. At the same time, Paper Architecture was associated not so much with parallel forms of conceptual art, but was, in fact, one of the varieties of postmodernism, borrowing both its visual images and irony, “signs”, “codes” and other “games” of the mind .

The name “Paper Architecture” arose spontaneously - participants in the 1984 exhibition, organized by the editors of the magazine “Yunost”, adopted a phrase from the twenties, which originally had a pejorative meaning. The name immediately caught on, as it played on two meanings. Firstly, all the work was done on whatman paper. Secondly, these were conceptual architectural projects that did not involve implementation.


A special place in the activities of the “wallets” belongs to Yuri Avvakumov, who played a key role in shaping an episode (albeit a bright one) of the cultural life of the 1980s. into a full-fledged artistic phenomenon. It was he who cemented the disparate participants into a single mass. An active creator himself, he served as a “clearinghouse,” a liaison, and a chronicler of the movement. By collecting an archive and organizing exhibitions, he brought the activities of the “papermen” to a fundamentally different level, turning it from a narrowly professional into a general cultural phenomenon. Therefore, it would not be much of an exaggeration to say that Paper Architecture is Avvakumov’s great curatorial project.


However, there was no movement as such - the “wallets” were too different. Unlike, say, the Pre-Raphaelites or the World of Art, they did not have common creative goals and guidelines - the “papermen” were a collection of individualists who worked sometimes together, sometimes separately. The only theme that united them was architectural fantasy, which makes them similar to Piranesi, Hubert Robert or Yakov Chernikhov.

Works of Paper Architecture, alas, are not very accessible to the general public. One of the reasons is the fundamental impossibility of their constant or even frequent exposure: unlike canvas, paper is very sensitive to light. Until a technological revolution occurs in this area, the hypothetical Museum of Paper Architecture will be virtual, which, in principle, is congenial to its very phenomenon.


It turns out that the less often Paper Architecture exhibitions are held, the more valuable they are. In this context, we must also consider the current one, in the Museum of Fine Arts, which occupies a cozy room behind the Greek courtyard. However, despite its intimate nature, the exhibition is quite capacious. Many works have been collected as “hits” (“House-exhibit for the 20th century museum” by Mikhail Belov and Maxim Kharitonov, “Crystal Palace” and “Glass Tower” by Alexander Brodsky and Ilya Utkin, “The Second Home of a Citizen” by Olga and Nikolai Kaverin), as well as those that have not been exhibited before (“Hedgehog House” by Andrey Cheltsov) or have been exhibited infrequently (works by Vyacheslav Petrenko and Vladimir Tyurin). Each exhibit requires careful examination, contemplation, immersion in it; behind each work there is a whole story, if not a whole world. Capriccios by old masters, including the famous “Prison” by Piranesi, occupy the central space of the hall, and “wallet” paintings surround them along the perimeter. Avvakumov’s choice is somewhat subjective - some of the “wallets” are not present (for example, Alexey Bavykin or Dmitry Velichkin), and some are presented more modestly than they deserve (I mean, first of all, Mikhail Filippov, who, in my opinion , created his best works in collaboration with Nadezhda Bronzova during this period).


Everything is clear with the first part of the exhibition title. But how to understand the second one - “The End of History”? After all, the “funeral” of Paper Architecture took place back in the early nineties. By uniting representatives of two different eras in one space, the curators wanted to draw a symbolic line under the five-century era of paper (the massive transition from parchment occurred about 500 years ago). Ironically, its final chord was Russian Paper Architecture. In the nineties, a new computer age arrived, which radically revised not only the design process, but also the entire architectural creativity. So future paper architecture will be paper only in an allegorical sense. At least until the lights go out.

The exhibition sponsor is AVC Charity.

Galina Naumova

Target:

Develop artistic three-dimensional thinking and creative imagination in the process of productive activity (artistic paper processing) .

Tasks:

Teach your child to set his own goals

goal and find ways to achieve it;

Contribute development of cognitive and creative

abilities in order to encourage independent

fantasizing.

- Develop your eye, labor skills, abilities.

Contribute development of creativity and initiative.

Contribute development of artistic taste.

Promote the development of hard work and desire

bring the job started to completion.

Promote education among children of patriotic

Paper– a child-friendly and universal material, used not only for drawing, but also in artistic design. Particularly attractive children the opportunity to create crafts yourself, which will then be used in games, as gifts for the holiday.

Paper plastics one of the simplest and most accessible ways to work with paper. It gives the child the opportunity to discover a magical world paper. Paper, scissors, a little imagination - and then unusual ones appear images: figures of people and animals, gardens bloom, cities grow.

What do classes give? paperplastic:

Develops hard work and a desire to finish what you start.

Constructive and creative abilities develop

Develops the ability to plan, create a design based on the model

Children get acquainted with ways to transform geometric shapes

Developing fine motor skills

Aesthetic taste is formed

We know seven basic techniques for working with paper:

1. Folding:

Fold paper You can do it in a straight line or along a curve. When folding paper in different directions, folds and folds of various shapes and sizes are formed, the so-called stiffening ribs - they give the resulting volumetric form elasticity and strength. The direction of the folds can be inward or outward, alternating, parallel. From the choice of bending technique paper The type of surface being converted depends. Thus, by rectilinear bending, a surface with flat edges is created from a flat sheet (harmonic). Curvilinear bending technique allows you to obtain a curved surface of arbitrary shape

2. Flexion:

The curved surface is formed by cylindrical or conical bending of the sheet without creating folds. The bending of the sheet gives it a margin of strength and the ability to withstand a certain load.

3. Twisting:

Strip paper twists into a tight spiral. It will be convenient to start winding by twisting the edge of the strip onto the tip of a sharp object (pencil or knitting needle). The result should be a tight spiral. It will be the basis for the further diversity of all forms. These figures can be very different depending on the author’s ideas.

4. Wrinkling:

Sheet paper wrinkles in different directions, which creates a beautiful surface texture. Such paper They are used in models that require a characteristic treatment, a feature of the finishing of some parts.

5. Tearing:

This is a violation of the structure of the sheet manually in a certain place, resulting in the formation of a loose border.

6. Cutting:

This is a violation of the structure of the sheet using scissors or a knife. As a result, smooth edges are formed.

7. Piercing:

Making holes using an awl, needle, punch or other tools.

To perform connecting operations, two types of connection are used paper, detachable and non-detachable. Permanent connections include all types gluing: to the edge, overlapping, to the end.

Edge gluing and overlapping are used more often than others. The glue is applied in a thin layer, and then one sheet or part of it is placed on top of the other. When end gluing, the glue is applied either to the plane of the sheet or to the end part of the sheet being attached.

Then the sheets are pressed horizontally and allowed to dry. This method is used for gluing narrow strips paper.

Detachable connections include those that allow you to assemble it and disassemble: external lock connection, internal lock connection, flat and volumetric weaving, connection with paper clips, adhesive tape, etc.

The most interesting, but, unfortunately, rarely used in practice is the lock connection. External cuts are made on one or both sheets in certain places, but no more than to the middle, since the strength of the product depends on this. Then one sheet is inserted into the cut of the other until it stops. Another interesting connection to the lock is the internal one. In this case, a cutter makes a cut or a hole of any profile on one sheet. The second sheet is then inserted into this slot or hole and takes its shape. In my opinion, the weaving connection is also interesting.

For flat weaving, strips are usually used paper, which are pushed under each other in a certain order. Sometimes parallel cuts are made on one sheet, and then strips are inserted into them paper. At volumetric weaving two or more strips paper overlap each other.

In practice volumetric modeling it is very convenient to use the method of connecting sheets paper using paper clips. It allows you to easily and quickly connect multilayer structures. For example, you can secure the edges of a bent cylinder or cone, and if necessary, just as easily adjust it - make it narrower or wider. Paper clips can be used as clamps when gluing overlaps.

Shaping:

Paper very plastic and has "memory", i.e. any operation with the sheet leaves traces on it. To give the sheet paper volume and strength, stiffeners are used, which give it rigidity and elasticity. Geometric bodies can be divided into bodies of rotation - a cylinder, a cone, a ball, and polyhedra - a pyramid, a prism and a cube. All geometric bodies, with the exception of the ball, can be made from paper.

All bodies of rotation are obtained by twisting the sheet paper. And only then it is easy to get a tetrahedral prism from a cylinder, and a pyramid from a cone by folding. The fold of the sheet concentrates all the rigidity of the structure, therefore it is the strongest stiffener.

The most interesting technique for transforming shapes is "reverse fold".

Two cuts are made on a straight fold, and then the surface between them is pressed inward, folded neatly, and ironed. Based on such a fold, you can make many transformations of different profiles and sizes.

Paper architecture.

To teach children to create models of buildings, it is necessary to introduce them to such important elements as different types of windows, doors and roofs. Windows are rectangular double-leaf and arched.

It is necessary to remind children that the window is in the middle of the wall, and not at the corner of the house, so the plane of the wall needs to be bent in half and two horizontal cuts made along the fold (distance between cuts – window height). Then cut vertically along the fold between the horizontal cuts and fold back sash windows to the sides.

For an arched window, we again fold the wall surface in half, only the cut will not be straight, but arched and the surface will bend inward (shows wall thickness).


Doors can also be divided into rectangular single leaf, double-leaf and arched. For single leaf door, make a vertical cut from the bottom of the wall, then unrolling the scissors, horizontal. We bend it to the side, the door is ready.


For double-leaf The surface of the door needs to be folded again, one horizontal cut must be made and cut vertically from the bottom along the fold.

Arched doors



To make the roof of a building, you can use different geometric shapes, for example, for a tower, a cone is suitable, which can be left unchanged, or you can cut the edges and bend them outward. The result will be a version of an ancient tower. Or you can cut the edges and insert them inside the cylinder, creating a dome version.

Well, if the tower has the shape of a prism, then it needs a roof in the shape of a pyramid.

You can also make a roof based on a cylinder using the technique "reverse fold" or various additions in the form of a straight fold. And for the Asian tower - minaret, you can make a roof from strips paper.



One of the simplest roof options is a gable roof. But based on it, you can make many different options by applying the technique again "reverse fold" or various additions.

Let's consider the sequence of work on the layout Houses: we will prepare the necessary materials and tools,


from a cylinder - blanks, we make the walls of a house with windows and a door, a large strip paper bend it in half and glue it near the fold, make tubes from small sheets by twisting them onto a pencil


Assembling the layout.

We are building a model of the temple (churches).


Making blanks: narrow and high cylinder, low but wide cylinder and cone.

We transform the wide cylinder into a prism, cut out windows and a door, the top of the walls can be made by bending the edges inward, or you can cut it in the shape of three arcs or even use curly scissors. Then a tall cylinder is placed inside the walls, this is a drum, and on top we place a cone - a dome.

From such models you can build an entire city, modern, ancient or a city of the future. Here's what we got




You can create layouts not only from geometric shapes, but also paper tubes - logs. For example, log buildings, such as were in Ancient Rus'.

Paper architecture: utopian fantasies on whatman paper

Ignoring censorship, successful positioning on the world creative arena, the desire to dilute the monotonous gray reality - this is what the “Paper Architecture” movement is. Today this phenomenon would be called a project, but then - in the 80s, at the end of Soviet power - it became a clear manifestation of postmodernist sentiments, which were based on the rejection and rethinking of the values ​​of modernity.

As architect and architectural theorist Alexander Rappaport writes, young professionals, tired of the “Lenten menu,” entered a new era, which he calls the phrase “post-post”: “Part of the properties of paper architecture coincided with the aspirations of many Soviet architects, exhausted by the asceticism of the official architectural ideology, on the banners of which it was written - “savings, savings and once again savings,” he writes in one of the studies.

“Paper architecture” is a realm of fantasy that appears outside the sociocultural context and temporal concepts. This is a kind of game, pampering, the boundaries of which the architects themselves did not draw, and the censors ignored because they did not see obvious threats.

How did it all begin? It was as a movement that “Paper Architecture” appeared in the USSR in the 80s of the last century, although isolated cases had previously occurred in other countries. During this period, aspiring masters begin to participate in major international competitions (OISTAT, UNESCO, Architectural Design, Japan Architect magazines), and become prize-winners, impressing the jury with the scale of their ideas. Projects made only on whatman paper could never be realized, which partly contributed to the fact that architects could depict even the craziest ideas, turning them into full-fledged works of art.

Architects, limited by ideological and political frameworks, created on paper a new world in which there were no labels or boundaries - complete freedom and independence, a utopian parallel space.

The founders of the movement are considered to be Alexander Brodsky, Ilya Utkin, Mikhail Belov and Maxim Kharitonov. The locomotive of the “wallets” was Yuri Avvakumov, thanks to whom the movement took on full-fledged forms and came out into the world. It was he who collected archives of works and organized exhibitions, curated and directed architects.

Architects always initially present a project for a future object, and only then, if approved, the implementation stage begins. Why did the sketches created during that period turn into a whole separate direction? The fact is that the architects initially understood that their ideas would never come to fruition, so they approached design on Whatman paper from an artistic point of view, giving the work a special graphic quality and symbolism. Competitions in which masters were able to express themselves gave rise to the attention of the world community to Soviet architects. Their works were exhibited in the West as part of projects dedicated to, which aroused interest abroad.

It is impossible to determine the style and manner of the architects who worked within the “paper” framework - everyone experimented for their own pleasure, without abandoning their own aesthetic principles and guidelines. Each project was accompanied by an explanatory note, which turned into a full-fledged literary work - with a hero, plot and special mood.

The fact that the drawings remained drawings forever allowed the project itself to be perfect. Often, during implementation, adjustments are made that change the ideal concept and are related to technical features. The “wallets” did not face such a problem. “The term “paper” was ambiguous and partly inaccurate. It's not just about paper, it's about commitment to pure ideas, pure forms. The point is the futility of the plan,” says Alexander Rappaport.

In an interview in the early 2000s, one of the representatives of Paper Architecture, Ilya Utkin, told how it all ended: “And it ended when it became interesting to implement all this with my own hands... No, it didn’t really end. It didn’t end because it’s business as usual. Now I’m making projects - after all, at first I have to draw the same paper architecture, architecture-idea, propose one or another version of the structure. After all, this is the same thing, this is sketch work, only then turning into stone and with such difficulty. So now, I think, another period has arrived: the period of architectural practice.”

In 2010, Yuri Avvakumov described an interesting story in his blog: back in 1983, together with Mikhail Belov, they developed a project for a vertical competition in order to send it to a competition in Japan. The drawing was called “Funeral Columbarium”. “27 years have passed and the future has arrived. A vertical cemetery is being built in Mumbai. Finally, someone besides us realized that this was smarter than building on bones when there was a shortage of city land,” said Avvakumov.

Today, alternative projects of young Soviet architects have become classics, and the direction of “Paper Architecture” itself has become the art of utopia.