Communist architecture features

Residential districts are even worse off than commerical districts, because the communists argue against the "cult of individualism" and propose that the population act like a hive, united in mind and purpose. The housing projects of all communist nations consist of grey, unpainted concrete laid out with more rigidity than your average suburban neighborhood. Each compound has its hive leader, a communist party member stationed on the first floor to monitor thedrones. Not a good sign.

Communist Architecture: We sacrifice form for a sense of pseudo-socialist homogenous unity. Enjoy our nightmarishdystopia."The masses demand of an artist honesty, truthfulness, and a revolutionary, socialist realism in the representation of the proletarian revolution."- (Literary Gazette, May 1932.)Socialist Realism is the officially sponsored Marxist artistic and literary aesthetic of the Communist countries. It came into existence after the Russian revolution in 1917: initial ideas were explored throughout the 1920s when Socialist Realism was still known as Heroic Realism. Maksim Gorky is one of the founders of social realism as it was proclaimed in the 1934 decree 'On the Reconstruction of Literary and Art Organizations'. In 1933 he published an important article, talking of "a new direction essential to us - socialist realism, which can be created only from the data of socialist experience." His ideas were adopted by the Russian artistic movement and formed the main source of Russian artistic doctrine.From 1932 every artist had to join the Union of Soviet Artists. Artists were forced to meet certain artistic rules: the techniques they were required to use were obtained from realistic and naturalistic traditions. Art had to project reality in strict harmony with the objective of socialism. It had to be attractive and comprehensible to the masses: people had to be inspired with admiration for the working man and his task of building Communism.In its early days there were four types of Socialist Realist paintings: domestic scenes, portraits of Soviet leaders, industrial and urban landscapes, and scenes on collective farms. During World War II, patriotic scenes from Russian history were added to the list. Some outstanding works were made in this early period, notably the paintings of Alexander Deineka (1899-1969), who portrayed collective farms, sports and scenes of Word War II, and Arkady Plastoc (1893-1972), who specialized in farm scenes. Isaak Brodsky (1883-1939) was possibly the most influential painter of his generation. Brodsky, a Jew, eventually became director of the Union of Soviet Artists. His old apartment in St. Petersburg has been a memorial museum since 1949 (though it's currently closed for reconstruction). Other famous artists that belonged to the school of Socialist Realism are Grigori Shpolyanski (1899-1980), Karel Stehlik (1912-1987), Karp Trokhimenko (1885-1980), Ivan Vladimirov (1869-1947), Boris Vladimirski (1878-1950) and Sergei Grigorev (1910-1980). Their works are displayed at The Russian Museum in St. Petersburg (Russia), Museum of Fine Arts in Bishkek (Russia), and Fleischer Museum in Scottsdale, Arizona (U.S.), amongst other museums.An important representative of literary Socialist Realism is Aleksei Peshkov. He was a Russian writer who helped development of socialist realism as the officially accepted literary aesthetic. His works include The Life of Klim Samgin, an unfinished cycle of novels.Even though Socialist Realism started out as a creative and refreshing art style, the style soon became overly academic and dull, resulting in numerous uninspired works of art. After the death of Josef Stalin in 1953 some relaxation of strictures was evident and censorship gradually toned down throughout the following decades. Initiated by the reforms of Mikhail Gorbachev, socialist realism died a slow death in the late 1980s.

Planning in the Soviet Union

In 1925 the first uniform building regulations 13 were issued by the

People's Commissariat of Internal Affairs (NKVD) of the RSFSR to

replace deficient local improvisation. They were concerned mainly

with problems of zoning. Two basic types of use districts were recognized:

industrial and residential; the latter to include administrative,

service and commercial facilities. Residential districts were to be

located beyond the range of harmful industrial influences and separated

from industrial districts by landscaping buffers, at least 330

feet wide. Both were to be interconnected by a reliable network of

transportation. Each use district was further broken down into fire

safety zones depending on the fire-resistive qualities of structures

situated therein. Local authorities were empowered to carry out more

detailed zoning. Non-conforming uses were to be combatted both

before their inception, by preventing the erection of unsuitable buildings,

and during their lifetime, by prohibiting major repairs and

renovation.

The block (kvartal), not larger than 825 feet by 825 feet (15.6

acres), was designated as the basic residential planning unit with

emphasis upon multiple dwellings, presumably of the communal kind.

Each residential block and clusters of blocks were to be designed for

organic unity. By fixing a minimum of 6,050 square feet of land for

each dwelling unit, it was calculated that enough space would remain

for greenery, playgrounds, dining halls, reading rooms and other

facilities shared by all residents. Not less than 10 per cent of the

area of a block was to be made available to such public buildings, and

another 10 per cent assigned to greenery, exclusive of trees planted

along streets. The overall density of construction within blocks set

aside for multiple dwellings three to four stories high was to range

from 10 to 30 per cent. Every 625 acres of new residential land was

to have at least one park of 12.5 acres or more, to be credited towards

the 10 per cent greenery norm and so interspersed as to permit anydwelling unit to find a green spot within a radius of 2,000 feet. But,as the Temporary Instruction candidly admitted, there were practicallimits to this generosity. Whereas higher density reduced air andlight and increased fire and health hazards, lower density inflated thecost of laying and maintaining streets, sewers and court yards. Forthe individual builder it also meant a higher land rent. As a consequence,considerably higher construction density was permitted incase of small dwellings: 10 to 40 per cent for two-story, and 10 to 50per cent for one-story houses. Also, the minimum size of lots forsingle-family homes built by individual citizens (construction lessors)was set at a modest 6,600 square feet (i.e., a lot equivalent to 66 feetby 100 feet, yet comparable to the average for an apartment houseunit).

By a decree 14 late in 1926 the government of the RSFSR ordered all

cities and other urban settlements to prepare, at their own expense,

plans for expansion and redevelopment and to conduct all their future

affairs in conformity with such plans. A year later, the Council

of People's Commissars (SNK) approved a list of over 50 cities,

fixing deadlines for the submission of their proposals.' Responsibility

for the actual preparation of the plans (each projected over a term of

at least fifteen years) was imposed upon the local sections of communal

economy in coordination with the local sections of health and

engineering. Every draft plan was then to be made available to the

public for examination and comment, not less than thirty days prior

to its being considered by the city soviet. Upon passage, the draft

was to be sent up to the NKVD for a higher level interdepartmental

review. The final approval rested with the Economic Council (EKOSO)

of the Republic, with the exception of the plans for Moscow and

Leningrad over which the SNK of the Republic had the final word.

As will be seen, the decree of 1926 remained a dead letter.

The already alarming population influx into cities gained momentum

after the inauguration of the first five-year plan in 1929 with its

drive for industrialization and collectivization of the country. There

was a certain parallel between England of a few centuries ago and

the Soviet Union of the late 1920s and the early 1930s. In either

case, the country had turned to industry. Promises of ample employment

and earning opportunities in manufacturing induced people to

abandon farming. In the Soviet Union the movement to cities wasaided by repressions and horrors wrought by the simultaneous drive

for collectivization of peasants, which bordered on consciously contrived

demoralization of the countryside. The spontaneous and chaotic

Industrial Revolution in England had produced seas of squalid

workers' tenements around the new factory towns. In the light of this

experience so much belabored by Marxist-Leninist theoreticians, it

was now for the Soviet system, equipped with both lofty ideals and

new institutions specifically designed for orderly economic development,

to avert the recurrence of similar calamity. This challenge the

Soviet Union failed to meet. From the final years of the NEP to the

late 1930s the population of most of the largest cities doubled or even

trebled.

In 1929 Sabsovich wrote:In order to create a socialist society, the existence of the materialand social premises (in the form of an extremely highlevel of development of production, the abolition of classes andthe socialization of all the tools and means of production) is notenough. What is also needed is a cultural revolution: man mustbe completely re-made, for which purpose the conditions of livingand forms of human existence must be radically changed.The conditions of living must above all be changed by theelimination of the individual household, of that "family hearth"which is and has always been the origin of women's slavery.Calculations of the number of workers that will be requiredin the different branches of social labour in 1942-3 lead to theconclusion that even if there is a steep rise in labour output,

a shortage of man-power in fifteen years' time can be avertedonly if all able-bodied men and women between the ages of 21and 49 are employed by the community on its essential services.Consequently the complete liberation of women-power householdslavery and the elimination of the individual household isnot only a task whose achievement would be desirable within thegeneral plan; but a task whose satisfactory solution is an un- avoidable necessity, one of the important prerequisites for a

realization of other fundamental objects of the general plan, including

above all the projected development of the productive

capacity of the entire country's economy.24

And, again:

Dwelling houses should be designed to accommodate two or

three thousand people. Such houses need no separate kitchens

or laundry rooms. They need no separate apartments and no

family rooms used in common. Each worker quartered in such

a house would have a small separate room for sleeping and sometimes,

perhaps, for leisure. There should be no rooms for cohabitation

of spouses.2

Note that, while ``dystopia'' is generally considered an antonym of ``utopia'', this is not necessarily the case. Dystopias are often called ``negative utopias''; they are often contrasted with ``positive utopias'' (since ``eutopia'' is pronounced the same as ``utopia'', it is not commonly used).Though it generally is taken in the positive sense, ``utopia'' does not have a necessary positive connotation. Etymologically speaking, ``utopia'' means ``nowhere'' or ``not a place''. The general positive connotation comes from Sir Thomas More's book. Thus ``negative utopia'' is not a contradictio in adjecto.

A Journey into Stalinist Moscow of the 1930s – 1950s

Text and photos Dr. Olga ZinovievaIn the early 1930s, Josef Stalin became the sole leader of Soviet Russia and was able to focus on the industrial development of the country that he had been fighting so vigorously for with his rivals. His political and economic reforms through the Five-Year Plans were to turn Russia into a leading world power. This was the realization of a provocative dream, considering the drama with the ruined economy, shortages, disruption of supplies and the brain drain caused by the October Revolution of 1917 and the Civil War that ensued.One of the urgent goals the Bolshevik Party set itself was to make people work very hard for the sake of the bright future. Stalin’s life experience and unfinished education at a theological seminary in Georgia had helped him recognize that art, music and architecture could inspire people to sacrifice themselves on the labor and agricultural battlefields. The role that monumental propaganda in different cultures had played in fostering such sacrifice was well known; whether it was a temple in Ancient Egypt or a Jesuit monastery. Stalin was a brilliant choreographer of mass ceremonies but he badly needed ceremonial locations, broad squares, straight avenues and lavishly decorated palaces.

Contemporary Moscow skyline, still dominated by Stalinist architecture

The constructivism of the 1920s, architecturally austere, almost complete devoid of any decor, could hardly support examples of dedicated labor or glorious pictures of Soviet prosperity.Moscow was to become the supreme world capital, the sacred city of communist ideology, the lifetime monument to Josef Stalin, the farther and the sun of the nation. With this mission fixed in their minds, the government centralized and structured all independent creative societies and individuals into unions of musicians, artists or architects. Prior to that, already in 1931, the last open competition for the project of the Palace of the Soviets on the site of the Christ the Savior Cathedral, where both Soviet and international architects worked was held. During the competition, directions to follow classical style with its symmetry, columns, porticos and decorations; to show the grandeur of soviet power had trickled down to competitor-architects. Never actually completed, the Palace of the Soviets, topped with a statue of Vladimir Lenin, became an architectural ghost on the Moscow skyline, influencing many of the buildings of 1930s-1950s.Classical style, originating from Ancient Greece but based on much older traditions, has appeared more than once in the course of history under different names of: classicism, neo-classicism, revival or pseudo-classicism due to certain economic and political conditions. In short, it has appeared in conditions of stability or when stability is desired. Stalin wanted to link his empire with the respectable past of Russia with its rich culture and history, and plaster the wounds of the Revolution. The Classical style was ideal for that. Russian classical churches and estates nearby served as brilliant inspiration. Adorned with pompous baroque features, classicism had convincing potential to tell stories in brick and stucco, giving advice, promise and warning.From the early 1930s, strong recommendations to use a fusion of artistic methods so that architectural ensembles should include sculptures, murals, mosaics, stain glass, and putting a strong emphasis on Egyptian art, were written about in the Soviet press.Aware of the new trends, Alexei Shusev, one of the most recognized church architects before the 1917 revolution, created Lenin’s Mausoleum in Red Square in the style of an Egyptian tomb with the immortal pharaoh-god in a glass sarcophagus. Red Square soon became hallowed ground where atheistic ceremonies were enacted. Very soon the presence of a pantheon of new soviet gods of labor, maternity, agriculture or sports in brass and stone would be felt in palaces, metro stations, parks and squares.

Apartment building for the Military Engineering Academy (Ivan Golosov, 1934-1936, Yauzsky Blv., 2/1) shows many similarities with the Egyptian idea of the eternity of the existing power

No other epoch could boast of the use of so many symbolic decorative elements borrowed from different cultures, religions and historical periods. Ancient symbols were used out of context and have been perceived as Soviet emblems since then.The 1935 Master Plan of Moscow Development initiated monumental changes to the city. With total property ownership, means and funds concentrated in the hands of the state; which was both the sole client and executer, and with cheap, almost slave-labor, the government was able to rebuild the city in a record time. The main streets, including current Tverskaya and Prospect Mira were broadened, houses were either demolished or moved away. A new ring of squares around the Kremlin was created, the Moskva and Yauza rivers were decked in granite embankments and crossed 11 bridges. In 1937, Moscow was connected with the Volga River by a canal, with ports, locks and embankments all lavishly decorated with sculptures of Lenin and Stalin. The first Metro line was opened in May 1935; and before Stalin’s death in 1953, 40 underground palaces [stations] were created along the 50 kilometer- long line. The new city design was comprehensive, and included construction of new factories, schools and universities, hospitals, department stores, offices, apartment buildings and parks. One can find evidence for this all over the city now. Decding whether to praise or criticize the work is complex. A lot of beautiful churches and monasteries, as well as romantic wooden houses disappeared, but a new capital was erected – we should not forget that when in 1918 the Soviet government changed its seat from St. Petersburg to Moscow, it had not been the capital city for 200 years.In 1939 All-Union Exhibition of Agriculture, now VVTs was opened as a huge outdoor propaganda venue. A true paradise on Earth with palaces of dairy products, gardens and orchards, stables, monuments to horses and portraits of the heroes of agricultural labor. The most famous Soviet sculpture of the Worker and the Kolkhoz Woman created by Vera Mukhina for the International Exhibition in Paris of 1938 made a journey back home and was mounted there. They wrote songs and made movies about it, guides told convincing stories of the wellbeing of Soviet collective farmers. After WWII, the place was renamed as the All-Russian Exhibition of Economic Achievements and became even more triumphant with new palaces for all fifteen Soviet Republics, industry pavilions, recreational parks, lakes, fountains and statues of leaders.

Fairytale view of the All-Union Exhibition of Agriculture (now All-Russian Exhibition Center) in Prospect Mira. Ceremonial Square of Collective Farms and the “Stone Flower” Founrtain (architect Konstantin

Topuridze, sculptor Prokopiy Dobrinin, 1954) and Pavilion of the Ukrainian SSR (architects Alexei Tatsii, 1939)

One can define two periods of Stalinist architecture: before WWII, when it was an eclectic mixture of classicism and baroque, enriched with Russian national traditions and an equally eclectic empirical style after the War. World War II of 1941-1945 being a cultural phenomenon contributed a lot into to Soviet music, literature, art and architecture. It is amazing that regardless of all the hardships endured, construction never stopped in Moscow, it just slowed down. Already in 1943, the Council for the Reconstruction of Destroyed Cities was established. Soviet architects created a Napoleonic anthem to victory. The shapes of the buildings became more elaborate, balconies and cornices heavier, arches bigger. More weapons, including contemporary armaments and ancient helmets and spikes, as well as banners, drums, horns were used to show the glory of the army, which ensured the victory.The seven towers or high-rise palaces, which appeared on the Moscow landscape between 1947 and 1953, presented the peak and the farewell of the Stalinist era. They have become definitive landmarks, reminiscent of both Kremlin towers and Russian temples at the same time. Towering into the skies they were palaces where the Soviet elite worked, studied and lived: two apartment buildings, two hotels, two office buildings and the Moscow State University. Designed by seven groups of architects they followed the same style but have their unique characteristics, elaborately decorated with sculptures, ceramics, mosaics and natural stone.Being very controversial, Stalinist architecture is not easy to understand: some people consider it very heavy and imposing, others could see the work of very talented architects. Best to view it in full light as it was created for a dream, some kind of a fairy tale, where the sky is always blue and the sun is bright.

Bucharest urban planning