Newcastle University – School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape
1
Newcastle University – School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape
Europe experienced unprecedented change after World War II. Alongside the descent of the Iron Curtain, the reconstruction to resolve the housing crisis took place across the Continent. 12 During the first ten years of the post-war era, both western countries and the Soviet Union and its alliance erected pioneering examples of collective apartment followed by numerous successors. All the edifices on both sides have the same ambition to improve people's life; meanwhile, have distinct differences. However, a dramatic transit of concept about architecture across the Iron Curtain can be seen during this time. Communal dwellings, which seem to be a communist accommodation type, shows the different background as well as an intertwined association in the field of architecture between the West and the Eastern Bloc. Taking the Kotelnicheskaya Embankment Building and the Unité d'habitation (Fig. 1) as examples, this essay will endeavour to underline the social-historical situation and the architectural concept resulting in the difference evolving in a more extended time span.
1
Fig. 1 Left: The Kotelnicheskaya Embankment Building, Moscow Right: The Unité d'habitation, Marseille
The Unité by Le Corbusier and the Kotelnicheskaya Embankment Building by Chechulin both finished in 1952 are undoubtedly the apex of the post-war apartment in their blocs and have their characteristic features. However, one should not be ignored is that they share the same idea to make the edifice an ensemble of a block containing all the
1 Andrei V. Ikonnikov, Russian architecture of the Soviet period, trans. by Lev Lyapin (Moscow: Raduga Publishers, 1988), p. 229. 2 Mateusz Gierszon, ‘Architect-activist. The socio-political attitude based on the works of Walter Segal’, Journal of Architecture and Urbanism, 38 (2014), 54-62, (p. 56).
Newcastle University – School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape
2
facilities. In the Unité, facilities are ranging from a shopping arcade to a kindergarten, 3 while its Soviet counterpart features even a cinema. 4 Then the differences lie in their form and appearance. First should be their method to soften the scale of the massive structure. Here Le Corbusier introduced the pilotis, which had become a motif in his works. The eight-meter-high pilotis free up the ground and unlock views of pedestrians (Fig. 2a). 5 In Moscow, Chechulin created a vertically stepped silhouette, fits in naturally with the architectural landscape of the city (Fig. 2b). 6 The difference is also evident between their layout. The building in Marseilles has a rectangular plan (Fig. 3a), making it a slab block, while the plan of the Kotelnicheskaya Embankment Apartment shows a three-beam plan outline (Fig. 3b). 7 This difference brings the distinction between the spatial arrangement of their units. Le Corbusier's scheme has 23 various apartment types, with a surface area ranging from 15.5 sq.m. to 176 sq.m., and the vast majority of them are 98 sq.m. split-level units (Fig. 4). 8 Meanwhile, Chechulin's design has a limit choice with four, between 60 sq.m. and 141 sq.m. However, the most characteristic feature distinguishing them is their façade. The Unité discloses its concrete superstructure, using a colour scheme to soften the austerity of the bare surface (Fig. 5a). 9 In regard to the one in Moscow, although applying the modern construction technology of steel frame, 10 it was finished with granite panels, 11 decorated with arches, friezes and cornices (Fig. 5b), and crowned with a spire echoing the Kremlin towers. 12 The style of the block and other skyscrapers erected in the late-Stalinist era, have varied definitions from neo-classical to neo-Gothic, or, as Khan-Magomedov named, 'Stalin's Empire Style'. 13 Regardless of these terms, they reveal an apparent trend back to architectural tradition while the modernist architecture swept America and Europe.
Kenneth Frampton, Modern Architecture: A Critical History, 4th edn (London: Thames & Hudson World of Art, 2007), p. 227. 4 Moscow City Government, ‘Highrise Apartment Building at Kotelnecheskaya Embankment’, Discover Moscow, [n.d.] < https://um.mos.ru/en/houses/highrise-apartment-building-at-kotelnecheskaya-embankment/> [accessed 22 April 2018] 5 Jacques Sbriglio, Le Corbusier: the Unité d’Habitation in Marseilles (Berlin: Birkhäuser Publisher, 2004), p. 60. 6 Ikonnikov, p. 240. 7 Ibid, p. 239. 8 Sbriglio, PP. 74-76, 240. 9 Sbriglio, P. 58. 10 Owen Hatherley, Landscapes of Communism: A History Through Buildings (London: Penguin Random House UK, 2015), p. 213. 11 Moscow City Government. 12 Timothy J. Colton, Moscow: Governing the Socialist Metropolis (Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1995), p. 329. 13 Svetlana Golovina and Yurii Oblasov, The Architecture and Artistic Features of High-rise Buildings in USSR and the United States of America during the First Half of the Twentieth Century’, E3S Web of Conferences, 33 (2018), <https://www.e3s-conferences.org/articles/e3sconf/abs/2018/08/e3sconf_hrc2018_01032/e3sconf_hrc2018_01032.html> [accessed 22 April 2018] (p. 2). 3
Newcastle University – School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape
b
a Fig. 2 a. Elevation of the Unité d'habitation and the pilotis
b. Elevation of the Kotelnicheskaya Embankment Building and its stepped silhouette
3 a
b Fig. 3 a. Plan of the Unité d'habitation b. Plan of the Kotelnicheskaya Embankment Building
Newcastle University – School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape
Fig. 4 The split-level units in the Unité d'habitation
4
a Fig. 5 a. The details of the the Unité d'habitation b. The details of the Kotelnicheskaya Embankment Building
b
Newcastle University – School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape
Nonetheless, Russian-Soviet architects were not always divorced from the Continent architecture innovation. Contrarily, they are members of the pan-European modernist movement. After the Revolution, the constructivist architects emphasising on industrialisation and collectivisation 14 became active. In 1925, some young architects found the Association of Contemporary Architect and soon began to propagate their views in their magazine. Moreover, they held a fraternal competition aimed to develop a new formula of communal dwellings, and a version of interlocking duplex flats with a central corridor emerged in the competition inspired Le Corbusier (Fig. 6), becoming the prototype of the units in the Unité d'habitation. 15 Meanwhile, Le Corbusier himself also have notable interactions with the Soviet Union. In 1928, he was invited to design the government headquarter in Moscow, and then visited the communist country in the same year. In the following years, he was enthusiastic about working on the scheme from the Soviet Union, assuming the new-emerged government will embrace his concept of modern architecture and society. 16
5 Fig. 6 The interlocking duplex flats with a centre corridor, designed by Ol, Ivanov and Lavinsky, 1927
The group of modernist architecture in USSR kept active until it met serious official critics in 1930. 17 In one aspect, after the civil war and the successful completion of the first five-year plan, the Soviet government started to shift the focus of the work to the construction of the national identity and ideology, with a de-emphasis on industrialisation. 18 Stalin's new theory of 'socialism in one country' conflicted with the internationalism theme of modernist architecture as well. 19 Furthermore, the requirement of a socialist aesthetics which can be convinced by all people also forced the official Katerina Clark, ' The ‘New Moscow’ and the New ‘Happiness’: Architecture as a Nodal Point in the Stalinist System of Value', in Petrified Utopia: Happiness Soviet Style, ed. by Marina Balina and Evgeny A. Dobrenko (London: Anthem Press, 2009), pp. 189-200 (p.191). 15 Frampton, p. 174. 16 Frederick Starr, 'Le Corbusier and the USSR: New Documentation', Cahiers du Monde Russe et Soviétique, 21 (1980), 209-221 (pp. 209-215). 17 Hugh D. Hudson, Blueprints and Blood: The Stalinization of Soviet Architecture, 1917-1937 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), p. 87. 18 Clark, pp. 193-197. 19 Hudson, p. 69. 14
Newcastle University – School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape
aesthetic turn to classicism. 20 The masterplan of the reconstruction of Moscow in the 1930s has already revealed the tendency. In regard to the proposal of Palace of Soviets (Fig. 7), as Colton suggested, underline the codeword of 'monumental', becoming the guideline in the following years. 21 Moreover, the eager to triumph over the West results in a trip for a group of Soviet architects to New York in 1934, with the belief that Communism will trounce if combined with American technology. 2223 Then the neo-Gothic edifices in Manhattan (Fig. 8) became the prototype of Stalinist Skyscrapers. Meanwhile, the modernism architecture has spread throughout the West with the advocate of CIAM, which have a strong connection with the Left. 24 Le Corbusier, having broken with the USSR, kept optimising his solution to high-density dwellings and urban planning, inspired by the Soviet pioneers and Fourier's Phalanstery. 2526 An intertwined association was emerged, with an official communist typology based on American prototype and an international style adopting the socialist concept. The Kotelnicheskaya Embankment Building and the Unité d'habitation are typical examples.
6
However, another critical factor is the local architecture landscape associated with history. Marseille, although founded around 600 B.C.by Greek colonists, lacks significant architectural heritage. Without a tradition of consciously conserving any relic of the city, the unceasing rebuilding process results in this situation. The only city landmarks proving its history are some Greek ruins and several architectures constructed over the last few centuries. 27 Moreover, Marseille has a distinct cultural context apart from other French cities. In the early nineteenth century, a host of nationalities began to settle in the city, creating its multi-cultural flavour. 28 The aftermath of World War II destroyed the old port area of Marseille but left less stress on the architect to keep within the constraints of tradition as well, making a modernist scheme possible. On the contrary, Moscow has a robust archaic nature. The masterplan for the reconstruction of Moscow emphasising on tradition was not only a political decision, but also a comprise with the reality. The pattern of high-rise landmark revealing the city's spatial structure, at the same time, is a historical feature of Moscow urban architecture, while most of these landmarks were churches, cathedrals and towers crowned with spires in the pre-revolutionary era. 2930 Regarding the post-war restoration, the proposal had a twofold priority. Apart from underscoring the victory of the Great Patriotic War, the revival of the rich silhouettes which had been outweighed by the increasing average building height is Clark, p. 198. Colton, p. 259. 22 Golovina and Oblasov, p.2. 23 John S. Adams, 'Monumentality in Urban Design: The Case of Russia', Eurasian Geography and Economics, 49 (2008), 280-303 (p. 292). 24 Frampton, pp. 248-261. 25 Ibid., pp. 178-185, 224-230. 26 Alban Janson and Carsten Krohn, Le Corbusier, Unite D'habitation, Marseille, 2nd edn (Stuttgart: Edition Axel Menges, 2007), p. 7. 27 Sbriglio, pp. 36-37. 28 Ibid., pp. 37-38. 29 Ikonnikov, p. 234. 30 Sofiya D. Tugarinova, '“Seven Sisters” Ensemble: High-rise Contructions Project Development in Moscow in the 1940—1950s', Art and Literature Scientific and Analytical Journal TEXTS, 15 (2016), 2542 (p. 25). 20 21
Newcastle University â&#x20AC;&#x201C; School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape
equally essential. 31 Thus the Stalinist skyscrapers became the landmark on a new scale, echoing the vertical of old Moscow, and a stepped, spire-crowned form became the scheme after evaluation.
7
Fig. 7 The proposal of the Palace of Soviets
31
Ikonnikov, pp. 229, 234.
Newcastle University â&#x20AC;&#x201C; School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape
8
Fig. 8 Woolworth Building, New York
Newcastle University â&#x20AC;&#x201C; School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape
Another significant factor that should be noticed is the interference from the authorities and hence the autonomy of the architect. Le Corbusier and Chechulin were both appointed directly by the state to take over the project, and this is a common situation under the ultra-centralised post-war reconstruction system. 3233 Nevertheless, the interaction between architects and authorities diverged in the following design process. In Marseille, Le Corbusier was supposed to have more power. Although the team consisted of half of its architects from Marseille, Le Corbusier's concept still setting an authoritarian tone. Furthermore, he received permission not to comply with all the existing regulations except those concerning health and safety. The local government had smooth cooperation with the architect as well, not only providing him with four alternative sites but also calling for more budget on the project from the state government. 34 Therefore the UnitĂŠ, though not under his full control, became an experiment on the architect's concept. In contrast, the Soviet architecture, those of Moscow in particular, had a strong influence from Stalin and his comrades since the 1930s. Kaganovich, the first secretary of the Moscow city committee between 1931 and 1935, as Colton declared, was a sycophant truckling to Stalin's ego. 35 He and his successor, Khrushchev, take Stalin's comments as the guideline of the urban design throughout the Stalinist era. Documents also revealed that Stalin engaged in the design process of the projects in Moscow directly. 36 In regard to the Kotelnicheskaya Embankment Building and other post-war Stalinist skyscrapers, there is an assumption that the spire was his idea. 37 Then the architecture became a materialisation of the will of the authorities rather than the concept of the architect or a spontaneous architectural movement. Moreover, this contradiction led to the radical change towards Modernism after the death of Stalin, and the Kotelnicheskaya Embankment Building became one of the traces of that era. In conclusion, the different design of the two buildings is not a result of a single factor. Rather, they are both the exemplary design based on the requirement. Profoundly rooted in the typology and context of their site, they are pioneers offering a creative solution for the post-war apartment towards a higher living standard as well. Furthermore, they reveal the transit of architectural concept during the first half of the 20th century. However, the two buildings, especially the one in Soviet, are exhibits of the ideology compete between the East and the West, and the evidence of twisted social concept because of the politic.
32 33 34 35 36 37
Colton, p. 329. Sbriglio, pp. 134-135. Ibid, pp.135, 139-148. Colton, pp.249-253. Tugarinova, pp. 32-33. Hatherley, p.210.
9
Newcastle University â&#x20AC;&#x201C; School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape
List of Figures Cover
Left: accessed from: https://liveinmsk.ru/up/photos/album/2easttwo/3539.jpg [accessed 24 April 2018]. Right: accessed from: http://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/denkmal/liste_karte_datenbank/de/denkmaldatenbank/bilder/Cha/02/09040533d1.jpg [accessed 12 April 2018].
Text
Fig 1. Left: accessed from: https://www.rutraveller.ru/icache/u_k/u/KuchinaLara/al269698/465292_1600x1200.JPG [accessed 24 April 2018]. Right: accessed from: https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5658/21977343463_2e7cfdcff8_k.jpg [accessed 24 April 2018]. Fig 2a. Accessed from: https://cdn-s3.touchofmodern.com/products/000/147/492/8ae13e8a80a566b6fb8fa9f330a4c510_large.jpg?1416337355 [accessed 24 April 2018].
10
Fig 2b. Accessed from: http://ussr.totalarch.com/sites/default/files/gallery/skyscraper_kotelnicheskaya_009.jpg [accessed 24 April 2018]. Fig 3a. Accessed from: https://dl.58pic.com/16861158.html [accessed 24 April 2018]. Fig 3b. Accessed from: http://ussr.totalarch.com/sites/default/files/gallery/skyscraper_kotelnicheskaya_003_0.png [accessed 24 April 2018]. Fig 4. Accessed from: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/38/ca/16/38ca16c4da1ad232ffe02397279b5dd0.jpg [accessed 24 April 2018]. Fig 5a. Accessed from: https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1303/5187795931_6521a4955f_o.jpg [accessed 24 April 2018]. Fig 5b. Accessed from: https://liveinmsk.ru/up/photos/album/2easttwo/3538.jpg [accessed 24 April 2018]. Fig 6. Kenneth Frampton, Modern Architecture: A Critical History, 4th edn (London: Thames & Hudson World of Art, 2007), p. 174. Fig 7. http://russiatrek.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/moscow-palace-of-soviets-6.jpg [accessed 24 April 2018].
Newcastle University â&#x20AC;&#x201C; School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape
Fig 8. Accessed from: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/29/cd/5e/29cd5e207b27238a46c1afba5a5b49a3.jpg [ac-cessed 24 April 2018].
11
Newcastle University – School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape
Bibliography Adams, John S., 'Monumentality in Urban Design: The Case of Russia', Eurasian Geography and Economics, 49 (2008), 280-303. Clark, Katerina, ' The 'New Moscow' and the New' Happiness': Architecture as a Nodal Point in the Stalinist System of Value', in Petrified Utopia: Happiness Soviet Style, ed. by Marina Balina and Evgeny A. Dobrenko (London: Anthem Press, 2009), pp. 189-200. Colton, Timothy J., Moscow: Governing the Socialist Metropolis (Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1995). Frampton, Kenneth, Modern Architecture: A Critical History, 4th edn (London: Thames & Hudson World of Art, 2007). Gierszon, Mateusz, 'Architect-activist. The socio-political attitude based on the works of Walter Segal', Journal of Architecture and Urbanism, 38 (2014), 54-62.
12
Golovina, Svetlana, and Yurii Oblasov, The Architecture and Artistic Features of High-rise Buildings in USSR and the United States of America during the First Half of the Twentieth Century', E3S Web of Conferences, 33 (2018), <https://www.e3s-conferences.org/articles/e3sconf/abs/2018/08/e3sconf_hrc2018_01032/e3sconf_hrc2018_01032.html> [accessed 22 April 2018]. Hatherley, Owen, Landscapes of Communism: A History Through Buildings (London: Penguin Random House UK, 2015). Hudson, Hugh D., Blueprints and Blood: The Stalinization of Soviet Architecture, 19171937 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994).
Ikonnikov, Andrei V., Russian architecture of the Soviet period, trans. by Lev Lyapin (Moscow: Raduga Publishers, 1988). Janson, Alban, and Carsten Krohn, Le Corbusier, Unite D'habitation, Marseille, 2nd edn (Stuttgart: Edition Axel Menges, 2007). Moscow City Government, 'Highrise Apartment Building at Kotelnecheskaya Embankment', Discover Moscow, [n.d.] < https://um.mos.ru/en/houses/highrise-apartmentbuilding-at-kotelnecheskaya-embankment/> [accessed 22 April 2018]. Sbriglio, Jacques, Le Corbusier: the Unité d’Habitation in Marseilles (Berlin: Birkhäuser Publisher, 2004).
Newcastle University – School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape
Starr, Frederick, 'Le Corbusier and the USSR: New Documentation', Cahiers du Monde Russe et Soviétique, 21 (1980), 209-221. Tugarinova, Sofiya D., '"Seven Sisters" Ensemble: High-rise Contructions Project Development in Moscow in the 1940—1950s', Art and Literature Scientific and Analytical Journal TEXTS, 15 (2016), 25-42.
13