[{"@context":"http:\/\/schema.org\/","@type":"BlogPosting","@id":"https:\/\/wiki.edu.vn\/all2en\/wiki32\/postconstructism-wikipedia\/#BlogPosting","mainEntityOfPage":"https:\/\/wiki.edu.vn\/all2en\/wiki32\/postconstructism-wikipedia\/","headline":"Postconstructism \u2014 Wikipedia","name":"Postconstructism \u2014 Wikipedia","description":"Entrance pavilion of Kultury-Radialnaya park in Moscow drawn by Georgii Kroutikov and V.S.POPOV (1935, demolished in 1949). Note the fine","datePublished":"2020-04-28","dateModified":"2020-04-28","author":{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/wiki.edu.vn\/all2en\/wiki32\/author\/lordneo\/#Person","name":"lordneo","url":"https:\/\/wiki.edu.vn\/all2en\/wiki32\/author\/lordneo\/","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/44a4cee54c4c053e967fe3e7d054edd4?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/44a4cee54c4c053e967fe3e7d054edd4?s=96&d=mm&r=g","height":96,"width":96}},"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Enzyklop\u00e4die","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/wiki.edu.vn\/wiki4\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/download.jpg","url":"https:\/\/wiki.edu.vn\/wiki4\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/download.jpg","width":600,"height":60}},"image":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/upload.wikimedia.org\/wikipedia\/commons\/thumb\/7\/7a\/ParkKulturyoldvest.jpg\/300px-ParkKulturyoldvest.jpg","url":"https:\/\/upload.wikimedia.org\/wikipedia\/commons\/thumb\/7\/7a\/ParkKulturyoldvest.jpg\/300px-ParkKulturyoldvest.jpg","height":"212","width":"300"},"url":"https:\/\/wiki.edu.vn\/all2en\/wiki32\/postconstructism-wikipedia\/","wordCount":4720,"articleBody":" Entrance pavilion of Kultury-Radialnaya park in Moscow drawn by Georgii Kroutikov and V.S.POPOV (1935, demolished in 1949). Note the fine and square columns without a marquee. The Post -structivism was a transient architectural style that existed in the Soviet Union in the 1930s, succeeding the constructivist architecture typical of the Stalinist architecture of the beginnings, before the Second World War. The term postconstructiviste was forged by Selim Khan-Magomedov, an architecture historian, to describe the change in the production of avant-garde artists towards Stalinist neoclassicism [ first ] , [ 2 ] . Khan-Magomedov data the postconstructivism from 1932 to 1936, but the construction deadlines and the immensity of the territory on which this style applied lengthened until 1941. The existence of this style is accepted, but the explanations of Khan-Magomedov considering its evolution as a natural process within the architectural community, rather than as a derivative of a state interventionism, is debated.   (This part is inspired by the Khan-Magomedov book Soviet Avant-Garde Architecture , vol.1, Avant-garde to postconstructivism and beyond [ first ] ) The context [ modifier | Modifier and code ] In 1932 -1933, during the competition of the Palais des Soviets, the State sent a clear message to the architects, telling them that the era of experiments was over and that the new constructions were to follow the classic canons. At that time the architect’s profession was divided into three generations: Old neoclassical architects (most of them fifties or sixties), such as Ivan Fomine, Alekse\u00ef Chtchoussev or Ivan Joltovski. The excellence of their training [ 3 ] And their experience enabled them to tackle all styles successfully – Art Nouveau, neoclassicism, constructivism. The younger movement of various avant-garde (shared between rationalism and constructivism). With the exception of the Vesnine brothers, few constructivists had acquired professional experience before the First World War; The war, the 1917 revolution and the Russian civil war stopped any new construction for a decade (1914-1926). In 1927-1929, former theorists, Nikolai Ladovski, Moisei Ginzburg, Ilya Golossov, set out to public debates to embark on architectural and urban practice. In 1933 they had barely seven years of experience when they were already starting to be a certain age. And finally the agitated students of the proletarian school, members of the Vopra: the promotion of 1929 (Arkady Mordvinov, Karo Alabyan). Trained by the major figures of constructivism to a style which they taxed as “sterile avant-garde”, they completely disregarded classical culture and had no experience. They compensated for this lack by their pro-communist faith, leading attacks and accusations, particularly against Ivan Leonidov. Birth of a style [ modifier | Modifier and code ] According to Khan-Magomedov, Ivan Fomine and Ilya Golossov were two precursors of this style. They converged on the same style from two different universes – neoclassicism [ 4 ] and constructivism. The concept of Fomine, easily formulable, erected in steel and granite in Moscow (Dynamo building), was well understood by inexperienced youth. \u201cThe youth instinctively followed those who managed to declare their position clearly. Youth believed that this period was a self-sufficient cultural state, not a transition to something else \u201d [ first ] . In 1933-34, Golossov in publicly finished with the avant-garde. He returned to neoclassicism, nevertheless trying to avoid literal quotes from the past. For example he used square section columns instead of traditional circular section. The square columns, slender and without marquee became the trademark of this emerging style. Golossov’s responses during public competitions inspired many followers by their style. Original projects by Ivan Fomine and Ilya Golossov (never executed): Ivan Fomine. Koursk station in Moscow, 1933 Ivan Fomine. Hall of Koursk station, 1933 Style identification [ modifier | Modifier and code ] Khan-Magomedov defined the postconstructivism as ” A neoclassical envelope without the neoclassical details. \u00bbGolossov and its followers deliberately replaced historicizing models (columns, capitals, friezes and cornices) by others of their own invention – to stand out from a pure neoclassical renewal. The main volumes respect the conventional rules and are generally perfectly symmetrical. Buildings of Ilya Golossov and Vladimir Vladimirov in Moscow: Ilya Golossov. Yauzsky, 2, 1936-1941. Ilya Golossov. Yauzsky, 2, detail. Vladimirov. Aviazhilstroy , duplex with octagonal columns. Vladimirov. Aviazhilstroy , loggia. The gratitude [ modifier | Modifier and code ] Postconstructivism benefited from naturally hostile reactions to the avant-garde and backward-looking eclecticism. This style was perceived as new, and at the same time allowed to build prestigious buildings according to the taste of the provincial elite. Another advantage in the midst of a period of generalized rationing was that, unlike constructivism, this type of construction minimized the use of steel and cement, returning to more traditional masonry with parquets and partitioning. This explains the dissemination of postconstructivism in the 1930s. Evolution – from constructivism to postConstructivism and Stalinist architecture [ 5 ] : Moscow \u00c9cole 518 d’Ivan Zvezdin, 1933-1935 Immeuble Schosse Entuziastov, De Guryev-Gurevich et Zaltsmann, 1935-36 Immeuble Schosse Entuziastov, De Guryev-Gurevich et Zaltsmann, 1935-36 Leningrad Sverdlovsk et Kou\u00efbychev Buildings in Kou\u00efbychev, Matveyev and Bosim, 1936 Hospital in Sverdlovk, from Yugov, 1936-1939 Buildings in Sverdlovsk, Oransky, 1936 La Fin [ modifier | Modifier and code ] As early as 1936 the left wing of the “1929 promotion” and even younger (Mordvinov, Alabyan) had acquired some experience of practice. These architects were missing the classical teaching that the old constructivists had received; This lack of competence warned them of any desire to reinvention of a neoclassical heritage, but all they were capable of was to lively copy. The result was that they rejected their avant-garde teachers and engaged in a purely neoclassical style. They could not be satisfied with postconstructivism, because they had no capacity to innovate – unlike Golossov or Fomine. At the same time, in 1936, Fomine died and Golossov became too old, leaving the field free to the new generation. Another group of young architects seeking academic training frequented the workshops of Joltovski and other old neoclassical architects. They too converted beyond the postconstructivism directly to the Stalinist canons. Their old mentors were still active and benefited from the support of the state. There was no longer any need to invent new forms or a new style. Postconstructivist projects were prolonged as best they can a few years before the Second World War definitively burns this movement. The role of the State [ modifier | Modifier and code ] Authors like Dmitry Khmelnizky [ 6 ] Appreciate Khan-Magomedov’s studies made on the 1920s and 1930s but they do not agree with him on the origins and the evolution of the beginnings of Stalinist architecture [ 7 ] and agony of constructivism. Khan-Magomedov barely mentions the role of the State (or Stalin Personally) in these events, presenting the disappearance of the avant-garde as a natural evolution within the community of architects. He admits that the profession was manipulated by young people in the “1929 promotion”, but he did not study the forces that have shaped and directed these attacks. He says nothing about the personal influence of Stalin or the rise of terror. Khan-Magomedov analyzes the political attacks carried out in 1929-1931 by the Vopra, but forgets to mention that they participated in a fierce national campaign. As Khmelnitsky sums it up, the “postconstructivism was” born from terror “. The very term is misleading. Traces of constructivism in postconstructivism of the 1930s is the result of an indecision and not of a tradition. “We” prohibited constructivism without determining what to do in place, … which gave sick architecture. Establish parallels with the rest of Europe is useless. There is no “European parallel”, even the Nazi architecture has not reached this “. The Art Deco factor [ modifier | Modifier and code ] The postconstructivism has emerged at the same time as Soviet adaptations of Art Deco. Examples of this style, as in 1934 the Lenin Library of Vladimir Chtchouko, can be confused with postconstructivism. In fact Chtchouko was experienced in neoclassicism, and this library was an essay on variation of a classic proletarian style with an Art Deco vocabulary. The situation within the profession was even more diverse than what Khan-Magomedov showed. Likewise, Vladimirov buildings illustrated above are often categorized as an Art Deco adaptation. Public recognition and preservation [ modifier | Modifier and code ] The general public is mostly ignorant of this concept of Post -structivism . Real estate agents qualify it rather as Stalinka (Early Stalinism), and this is the way this style is perceived by the majority. In Moscow these buildings are gradually demolished and rebuilt (see: facadism); The demolition of postconstructivist buildings, with a few exceptions, goes unnoticed, even with those who take care of preservation. A recent example of a building lost forever is the A.A. Samoilov building On Novy Arbat in Moscow, razed in 2006 [ 8 ] . Dangerous buildings [ modifier | Modifier and code ] The buildings of the years 1920-1930 used an already old technology (masonry, stucco, floors and wooden partitions), as well as materials and a poor quality workforce. This mediocre quality of origin, aggravated with inadequate maintenance, led them to a rapid decline. Apart from a few well -maintained buildings for easy class, the style Stalinka is in bad condition. THE February 10, 1999 , a fire in a Samara police station built in 1936 made 57 victims [ 9 ] . The February 13, 2006 , the constructivist building of the The truth built by Panteleimon Golossov is destroyed by fire, killing a person and wounding four [ ten ] , [ 11 ] . Reconstruction [ modifier | Modifier and code ] A real reconstruction of constructivist buildings or Early Stalinka is a challenge. Their structure is low, and often requires complete demolition. School 518 (Baltchoug in Moscow) is a good example, drawn in 1933 by Ivan Zvezdine (1899-1979) [ twelfth ] And finished in 1935. Roked by Khan-Magomedov, the only postconstructivist building on the list of national monuments, the school was rebuilt in 2001 according to standard security standards. Most report walls And all the interiors of 1935 were completely rebuilt without preserving anything [ 13 ] . \u2191 A B and C En Russe: S.O. Khan Magomet. \u201cArchitecture of the Soviet avant -garde.\u201d T1. Moscow. Stroyizdat. 1996 (S.O. Khan-Magomedov, “Soviet Avantgarde Architecture”, 1996)  \u2191 \u00c9dition anglaise de 1987\u00a0: Khan-Magomedov, “Pioneers of Soviet Architecture: The Search for New Solutions in the 1920s and 1930s”, Thames and Hudson Ltd, (ISBN\u00a0 978-0-500-34102-5 )  \u2191 The academic training of Tsarist Russia was long. Joltovski graduated in 11 years, fomine in 17 years.  \u2191 It should be noted that Ivan Fomine (like Alekse\u00ef Chtchoussev) succeeds in any style whose constructivism – he produced according to demand.  \u2191 Black and white photographs: “XXX Years of Russian Federation (1917-1947)” of the Academy of Architecture (Moscow), edition 1950. Most of these shots were taken before 1941.  \u2191 En russe\u00a0: Dmitry Khmelnitsky, “Stalin and Architecture”, 2004, www.archi.ru  \u2191 En russe\u00a0: Dmitry Khmelnitsky, “New versiond of History”, 2000, www.archi.ru  \u2191 In Russian: gallery of photographs on www.wbb.ru  \u2191 In Russian: radio interview with the head of the Russian firefighters, February 10, 2000 Echo.msk.ru  \u2191 En Russe: Anna Kuprina. “The perpetrators in the fire of the ‘Pravda’ were not found.” 07\/12\/2007, www.smi.ru  \u2191 In English: “Fire on ulitsa pravda comparable to manezh fire for the russian avant-gard ‘, izvestia, 20.02.2006, ‘ Moscow Architecture Preservation Society \u00bb ( Archive.org \u2022 Wikiwix \u2022 Archive.is \u2022 Google \u2022 What to do ?)  \u2191 In Russian: Zvezdine biography on the ‘ School site 518 \u00bb ( Archive.org \u2022 Wikiwix \u2022 Archive.is \u2022 Google \u2022 What to do ?)  (consulted the September 4, 2017 )  \u2191 Gallery of photographs, interior spaces before and after the reconstruction on the ‘ School site 518 \u00bb ( Archive.org \u2022 Wikiwix \u2022 Archive.is \u2022 Google \u2022 What to do ?)  (consulted the September 4, 2017 )   "},{"@context":"http:\/\/schema.org\/","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"https:\/\/wiki.edu.vn\/all2en\/wiki32\/#breadcrumbitem","name":"Enzyklop\u00e4die"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"https:\/\/wiki.edu.vn\/all2en\/wiki32\/postconstructism-wikipedia\/#breadcrumbitem","name":"Postconstructism \u2014 Wikipedia"}}]}]