RU 
EN Jiri Tourek
Charles University in Prague, Czech Republic
Phenomenology in architecture — and in theory of architecture in particular — is a result of reaction to late modernism after WWII and fatal crisis of the modernism. Christian Norberg-Schulz, one of world leading theoretician of his days (but today his theories seem to be mostly abandoned), proposes in his theories new basis for modern architecture. At the beginning it was structuralism and semiotics in his first book, “Intentions in Architecture”, but very soon he shifted his interest to phenomenology (and Heidegger) and started building his phenomenological theory. His first book on the theme was “Existence, space and architecture”, and he went on developing phenomenology in architecture for his whole life.
My first aim is — working from the point of view of a theoretician of architecture much informed by philosophy — to show the basis of his theory and problems that can be seen in it. My entry will derive predominantly from the book “Existence, space and architecture”, but taking into consideration his whole theoretical work. I would like to focus on the role of modernity (or lack of its role) in Norberg-Schulz’s theory. That is paradoxical, since his aim was to provide new basis for modern architecture, but that basis was constructed on hypothetical pre-modern experience of architecture. The key question to debate is if modernity was a break from tradition (as modernists believed) or a form of continuity (as proposed by Norberg-Schulz) and if it’s possible to base contemporary architecture on the same basis as before modern time. Norberg-Schulz’s attitude towards modernity shows limits of his theory and makes him a problematic source of ongoing phenomenological project in architecture. As his theory influences new architecture even today it is important to understand it well, so I would like to interpret him as part of historical turn and thus as a prototype of our situation today.
Lilia Kabanova
Petrozavodsk State University, Russia
The subject of Russian avant-garde is one of the most unexamined today, both as far as terminology and cultural- historical identity are concerned. The interpretation of avant-garde lacks the coherent criteria system, its categorization in scientific conceptual framework is deficient, key concepts and terms are not developed in a proper methodological way.
Ekaterina Kim
Sts. Cyril and Methodius School of Postgraduate and Doctoral Studies, Russia
There were several great eras between the Council of Trent (1545–1563) and the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965). We can see huge changes in history, culture and a man himself in that time. This concerns the religious art and the church architecture as well.
The theme of the paper is the liturgical space of West European Christian churches of 16th–20th centuries in relation to the theoretical works of theologians and architects. Eucharist and the Liturgy are essential for the Christian church. The space and the architecture embrace and frame these core issues. We can study the roots of substantial changes in the church architecture on the basis of theological experience. Since we deal with different research areas, the systematic approach is our choice.
The aim is to connect the requirements of devoted Christians and the changes in Catholic and Protestant church interiors and the sacral space. This would help us to understand the fundamental principles and reasons for variations in the layout and formation of liturgical space. It concerns the evolution of the church in past centuries, but will also help us to identify the problems of the contemporary Christian church building.
The paper is a part of doctoral thesis research dedicated to the sacral space theory by Rudolf Schwarz, one of the most profound thinkers and great architects of the 20th century.
Yury Volchok
Moscow Architectural Institute (State Academy); Research Institute of Theory and History of Architecture and Urban Planning, Russia
In 1926 N. M. Bakhtin (the eldest of the brothers) wrote, “Any genuine creative work perceives itself not as a start or continuation but as a revival — it is how this one and only law may be laid down”. The revival of the notion of “fine” has become one of the aims in matching historical and theoretical issues related to architectural criticism at the present stage of architectonic thinking integrated into the non-linear world perception. The return to one of the earliest interpretations of “fine” (by H. Poincaré) as a result of harmonious and complete internal structure of any integral unit provides intellectual content for visual perception of architectural form. The application of this notion may become a methodical basis for the establishment of the essentially “fine” dialogue between the history and the evolution within the logics of the “Grand-Time Architectonics” (M. M. Bakhtin).
The attention to the creative trends resulting from the Renaissance world perception in the architecture of the 1920s was rather strong and meaningful. I will illustrate it with two examples. The Dictionary of Art Terms was created by the National Academy of Art Sciences in 1923–1929. The notion of “architecture” had acquired by that time the stable possibility of various readings, and the authors preferred to include into the dictionary two articles: by A. G. Gabrichevskiy and M. Ya. Ginzburg. Ginzburg also used as the epigraph in his book Style and Epoch (1924) the words by G. WÖlfflin, “Movement starts simultaneously at many points. The old regenerates carrying everything with it, and, at last, a new style becomes a fact. But why did all this have to happen?” Fixing attention on the above issue, the author started the review of his colleagues’ works with examples form then current oeuvre of I. V. Zholtovskiy and explained that it was important to him to demonstrate how the “sense of a new form” and “the genetic value in a new style formation” reveal themselves.
Therefore, the process of revelation and validation of the “genetic” line in the establishment of the new, intellectually intensive world perception shall be in a due course revived in the contemporary architectural criticism.
Tatiana Yurieva
Saint Petersburg State University, Russia
Iconographic description of a contemporary Russian critic consists of paradoxes. However, critics create the foundation for future generations of art historians. Therefore it is necessary to comprehend both positive and negative feelings arising from the first encounter with the post-modern art space (1990–2015), created not only by artists, but also through the efforts of curators. There the question arises: what would be a warrant of truth? What traditions of Russian avant-garde can be traced in contemporary art? Where does the necessary expansion of terminology in art: from the canonical to non-canonical language, from standard to improvisation lead? How can we estimate the curators work at the “Manifesta-10”? Of course, the new generation has grown absorbing the traditions both of Russian and foreign art studies. The situation occurs, when critics are stronger thinkers than presented artists, but the reviews of exhibitions still follow the formula: nothing unless good. Being professor of Saint Petersburg University, who has great experience in working with young generation and director of Dyagilev Museum of Contemporary art, I might recall Aristotle and his dialogues at the Lyceum about the meaning of life and soul and ask the same question: how art helps us to live, to feel, to think? Another question asked by Confucius could be addressed to artists, curators and critics: Isn’t it him who knows that it will not work out, but still attempts to do it? Is it possible, that in spite of high intellectual level we are interested in the “light” version of artistic work?
- Heinrich Lützeler on Systematic Approach in Art Studies and Interdisciplinary Perspective
- Predisciplinarity — Pathway into Actual Eternity
- Scientific 3D-Reconstructions of the Architectural Monuments: Experience of the Moscow Institute of Architecture
- Interaction of Historic and Contemporary Architecture in Modernization of Museums: Strategies of the 20th–21st Centuries