ARTH 353 Final
But back in the 70s in the Soviet Union museums were the only way for artists to exhibit their art and find an audience. And remember a communist society there should be no private properties. So no private art galleries either only state-owned museums. So this situation in which the unofficial artists couldn't exhibit their art museums has led to the bulldozer exhibition. So this situation in which the unofficial artists couldn't exhibit their art museums has led to one of the most prominent events in the history of the late Soviet Union. So the so called bulldozer exhibiton. The event is often seen as a sort of coming of age of the unofficial Soviet Art. So the bulldozer exhibition took place in 1974 on the outskirts of Moscow, and was organized by a group of unofficial soviet artists and featured almost 30 painters, including the most prominent figures in the community, which I have already mentioned, Komar and Malamid (painted Lenin Hails a cab). So the organizers had deliberately chosen an outdoor space for the exhibiton some wasteland, field on the edge of the city that will be too far away to be of interest to the police and the security services but still be easily accessible by those invited to attend. So it goes without saying that if the exhibiton had been held in one of the city parks, or on the city streets, without fail, it would come under indvestigation. So all the participants received a private invitation prior to the event, asking to come and bring their paintings with them to be exhibited on the site in the open field. As you can see in the first two photos. However, as you might have guessed the organizers couldn't keep the event a secret. At the time artists who didn't go to the Artists Union or the USSR were treated with suspicion and they were under constant surveillance by the KGB. So shortly after the artists had gathered the exhibition was forcefully broken up by a large police force with bulldozers. So artists were running around in a desperate attempt to hide their paintings from the police who were using bulldozers to crush their artworks. So it's something that authorities branded the crackdown as a state-sanctioned clean-up of the park however, as it turns out, the organizers of the exhibition invited every foreign correspondent they knew and all of them showed up. So the bulldozer exhibition became one of the most documented events in the history of unofficial Soviet art. And what's more important is that the New York Times broke the story entitled Russian to disrupt modern art show with bulldozers on their homepage along with some paintings. So the next day is artists will find themselves known outside of the Soviet Union. What's more important is that the art critics and curators and private collectors around the world became aware of the existence of unofficial Soviet Art. Thus contrary to the initial attempts of the Soviet secret service to shut down the unofficial art scene. In fact, they gave it publicity. Shortly after the bulldozers exhibition, some of the unofficial Soviet artists were able to sell their artworks outside of the Soviet Union. Thus the global market effectively undermined the Soviet state. Now that we'll discuss the historical context in which the unofficial soviet art first appeared, let's take a closer look at the artistic movement itself.
The Bulldozer Exhibiton 1974
Mass events, stage celebrations were intact integral part of rev artAvant-garde artists were often mobilized to create these ephemeral, not permanent decorations for mass celebrations for mass events.Another very important performance was directed by was designed by Yuri Annekov an artist either and the performers supposedly referencing the storming of the winter palace but this event never actually happened at least not in that way. You don't need to know the details, you just need to understand that the mass event that was reproducing a historical event related to the rev was actually reproducing a fictional event official. And so it took place inside and just outside of the winter palace. And it's supposed to be some sort of recreated event of the Bolshevik revolution. So people should expect involved happened in this location just three years prior. And there were even tanks and armored cars enroll. And it was not historical reconstruction more like a mass performance, because it involved also, ballet dancers, for example, circus people, involved professional actors. But most participants were just regular people. Many, many students involved. And you see how this work of art erases the boundary between the participants in the audience, history and myth, history performance. And this was exactly the point. But as I said, it was directed by a theater directer Grandmaster. And so I mean, it was filmed the action just kind of follows the gradual organization of workers who then go into battle with are the monarchs, and there was action going on on multiple stages that were designed by foreigners that monarchies. The silhouette, expressionistic fantasy architecture. So this is all ephemeral architecture, it was disassembled. But before it was disassembled, it was filmed and people involved. So there's so many different flavors of performance presentation re-presentation going on. All right, gotcha. There were also sir search logs and fireworks at night. So it was a very spectacular thing and canons were firedIt was filmed
The Storming of the Winter Palace, set designs by Yuri Annenkov , 1920
So the Soviet artists we will be covering today were appropriating and subverting this official soviet imagery, to expose the mechanisms of the Proletarian society and the fakeness or emptiness of the communist ideology in the Soviet Union. All of these visual techniques of official soviet art or soviet realism are deconstructed by the unofficial official artists. this unofficial art wasn't officially recognized by the state. And as I explained, it wasn't as it wasn't recognized by the state, the unofficial artists couldn't get any commissions or publications and couldn't exhibit their works in museums.
Unofficial Soviet art
-made under Krushnev -one with competition with US amid coldwar -Krushnev called for elimination of an architectural style associated with stalin to distance his regime with stalin -more modernist facade allowed after the end of the Stalinist period -decoration was not a priority Know, to understand what kind of image of itself didn't the Soviet Union project to the west, the West, we have to check out another World Fair, and exhibition pavilion at the World Fair that took place in Brussels in 1958 -us and soviet pavilion were right next to eachother -USA, and USSR, the Soviet Union came out of World War Two, the victorious Rome report is more powerful word leaders. -they were located one next to another, and they're not as aggressively confronting as the Soviets and the Germans in 1937. But they are in a conversation, they are in a conversation with each other, and in the way that debate, debate. -And so it is the first realized example of this new representative public architecture under Krushnev (making building for the people) after selling some residential buildings, and this is a public building -This building is constructed out of new materials, aluminum, and a special kind of glass. -from a formal standpoint, from the way that from the standpoint of the way it works, it's nothing new -it was the most visited one, actually, people were encouraged to get a glimpse into the Soviet culture into the Soviet lifestyle, because iron curtain hard to travel in and out people wanted to know how it had changed after stalins death -not innovative looked out dated and old -socialist realist paintings portrayed inside -The inside did not look that modern social realist sculptures, podium, decorative materials -almost have art-deco vibes -contradictory message on the level of architecture Edward Durell Stone, The US Pavilion at the 1958 World's Fair in Brussels.
Aleksandr Boretsky, Iury Abramov, Viktor Dubov, and Anatoly Poliansky, The USSR Pavilion at the 1958 World's Fair in Brussels.
Gintovt is a part of this movement, he is against Western culture and neo liberalism is because he thinks that it's dull, because, for him, it's devoid of heroism and therefore it is just boring and Soviet ideology, at least in his interpretation are exciting. They are romantic, they're often there are erotically charged, young, violent. So he is aestheticizing a very specific aspect of Soviet culture and blows it up to unimaginable proportions and he claims to be an ultra conservative and hopes to produce works of art that would spark a conservative revolution in Russia. And he claims to be dead serious about it. In fact, he calls his style new seriousness, but then how serious is calling there aren't new seriousness. The question is, is he really serious? The question is, is this outright cold postmodern irony? Or is he for real? This ambiguity is what really fuels his work and I guess this is what accounts for his popularity. this is his cycle of work on Moscow of the future. It's an urban kind of Utopia, where the Soviet past is revived as an aesthetic form as an architectural form. And if we look at the materials that he uses, it combines noble materials like gold leaf with, down to earth, common materials like printing ink so the red is printing ink and then what you see as yellow is gold leaf. and then it also combines new media to digital editing techniques. This is a digitally edited photo that has been been reproduced as a stencil and then applied onto a canvas. But the paint the reading is applied with a hand so he's leaving his imprint on on the canvas. So it's a combination of new media and this very kind of primitive -comibnes aspects of egyptian architecture or symbols has zoomorphic creatures o this is Moscow of the future, but we have this complex airnotic, I guess technology with these Flying Stars he inserts incorporates these unrealized Soviet projects, both neoclassical Art Deco ish and constructivist projects into his panorama of Moscow of the future. so the city of Moscow The future is sacralized by the end the use of gold which is associated with icons and it has resurrected priests and warriors
Aleksei Gintovt, Victory Parade of 2937, 2010 gold leaf and red printing ink on canvas
So basically, we can group these arguments into three categories. So the first one is the presence of the sky almost half of the painting is dedicated to the sky the blue sky is clear. It's full of bright colors, as you mentioned. What's also important is the size of the paintings. You may see here, all of them are larger than two meters. Also, they all occur in summer on a really sunny day. So the paintings are full of optimism It's summer, the joy youth. the rise of color, And it is characteristics that the girls move exactly up so they don't go down the hill allegorically the artist depicts the Soviet people who move up together with the rapid development of the state of the country, and they are swiftly following for a brighter future as well. And you may also notice that these pictures are quite dynamic. we see the horizon behind us, and we have a very strong sense of perspective. And I want to emphasize this the presence of the horizon on all these three paintings how clearly visible line, from this visual perspective, we can actually predict the movement of the people. Looks like in a few moments, they will burst the boundaries of the picture because the picture itself is the present. While they are striving for the future. They're striving for a brighter future for the next day promised by the USSR.
Alexander Deineka, "The Expanse", 1944
It was like it was a model worker school, Initially, it was designed as a space for the workers to socialize and eat together and play chess, and maybe also hear some latest news and pronouncements speeches by leaders or local, local political party so members, because what you see over here is actually an extendable rostrum foldable law strokes so you could be able to, as a speaker, stand and address your audience and then it would fold into the wall. So lots of foldable furniture transformer furniture, this is, this is definitely what we can describe as constructivist furniture design. Because you know, for instance, Tabletop that could flip on both sides table. So you could kind of flip it for reading and writing or flip it up for eating and drinking but could only together read and write or eat. So you see all the ideological logical principles that stand behind furniture design, not to mention the rostrum in workers club, political speech is integrated into the role of the worker's leisure space.
Alexander Rodchenko, The Worker's Club, 1925. Presented at the Soviet Union pavilion for the 1925 Paris World Fair
the Soviet Union, however, there was almost no commercial advertisement So the Communist Party of the Soviet Union was the only seller and the only mass media as well as the only buyer and what the Communist Party was particularly keen to advertise to the situation. Not surprisingly itself, its leaders and its ideology, which is also known as state propaganda. So basically, the whole public space was filled with slogans and texts glorifying the Soviet union and promising a better future Every Soviet citizen was constantly bombarded by slogans and propaganda. So the only thing that an average Soviet citizen could do about this aggressive, intrusion of slogans and symbols in their everyday life was to ignore them. And that's what the whole country was doing, simply ignoring these slogans that very clearly became devoid of any meaning and Moscow conceptualists was the first to notice the absurdity of this situation and exposed the absurdity in their works if you imagine yourself there will probably not see the horizon because of this red banner. And once again, just as the case in the Bulatov painting the horizon is hidden by the red ribbon or banner in this case and considering that both artists belong to the same artistic group Moscow conceptualists, it's very much possible that monastery is deliberately referring to Bulatov, although more important is the fact that he understands the Soviet allegory of the horizon in a similar way as a promise of the future. And in his work, he hides this utopian future behind this clearly absurdist banner. Innovates the official soviet artwork langue using their propaganda images and slogans to transform them into something that is both playful and grotesque through the use of symbols, which they're originally intended as a means to dominate the individual.
Andrei Monastyrski, "Slogan 77" (1977) winter land with red banner
It's an example of historicism eclecticism, But overall, it's very, it looks very outdated. Despite the fact that Milan was the center of industry, the center of innovation, industrial capital, basically, the center of highly industrialized society, eccelectic cae styles that look like it looks like it's been assembled from miscellaneous elements from spolia assembled different miscellaneous pieces of historical architecture So you might remember making the soviet pavillion lots of steel and glass, there are five geometric shapes and undecorated surfaces and industrial materials, right. Almost an industrial kind of aesthetic overal So young Italian architects are looking at this. And they understand that Italian architecture is outdated and if he wanted to promote Mussolinis image abroad as a new and modern ruler and fascist regime. Italian architecture just kept change, causes turn to rationalism. But their desire to revolutionize Italian architecture, desires to offer architectural courses will be inspired by technology by industry. Rather than history historical precedents are has definitely also paved the way change toward rationalism -represents time of change -But their desire to revolutionize Italian architecture, desires to offer architectural courses will be inspired by technology by industry. Rather than history historical precedents are has definitely also paved the way change toward rationalism .So overall, modernist Soviet German French architects experiments of the futurists as well asItalian buildings that were constructed for the purpose of industrial purpose, they all inspired architects of the next generation to produce architecture that would look different and is aligned with the standards of European architecture at this point, modernist architectural production so in 1926, a group of seven architects t takes on this mission of revolutionising Italian architecture and announces their vision of modern Italian architecture in several publications and several exhibitions and this is Giuseppe Terragni from as their leader, they were all graduates of the Milan Polytechnic, young architects who had just graduated all in their mid 20s.
Armando Brasini, Italian pavilion at the 1925 Paris World's Fair.
Taking a place that was very politically loaded. That had powerful ideological connotations a place that embodies Nazi values, for example, in this case, and just putting it to a completely different views mundane so transform it into something mundane, something non political something with a completely different purpose with an idea that this would somehow kind of layer over the traumatic memories and neutralize the initial meaning of this place and you know, sanitize somehow sanitize the memory of this place. So given a new meaning and new memories, make new memories completely unrelated to the initial use of the building on this site. Like hosting a rock concert or a fair right on the zepplin stadium, or transforming the former marching grounds into a parking lot or hosting a car racing band on the site. Neutralize the structures meaning.
BANALIZATION
Boris Groys played an important role in bridging the gap between the western and eastern contemporary arts. He was born in East Berlin and although he was raised in the Soviet Union, he had a great position to go outside of the country. That is outside of the Iron Curtain, and he also spoke German and French. So he became sort of an ambassador in the West for the Moscow conceptualist as well as for the unofficial Soviet art in general. I would like to conclude my lecture was an excerpt from Groys. First of all, I hope it will encourage you to read him because as I mentioned, he is a growing scholar and the most influential figure in contemporary art, but it's also interesting to see him discussing the Moscow conceptualist movement, the movement he was a part of many decades ago. -Groys lived in Moscow and served as a research fellow at the Institute of structural linguistics in Moscow, and although Groys was never an artist, he certainly made an impact on the unofficial soviet artworks through his, lectures, essays, and talks. You have to understand that it was a very small community of like-minded people, and most of them had good versatile education. So they would gather together to discuss new art books, especially in French infrastructure this theoretical discussion, led by Groys find its way into the paintings, installations, and performances. So in his talk, he mentions that Moscow conceptualists tried to erase the line that divided the east and the west and thus unite the ideologically divided world he even says here that the end of unofficial Soviet art preceded and announced the end of the Cold War t trying to show that there is much more in common that unties east and west than divides them. Also, the fact that the Moscow conceptualists were exposing the emptiness and fakeness of the communist ideology while at the same time post-modernist art in the West, exposed the fakeness and emptiness of the Western capitalist society. In both cases, they're working with empty symbols.
Boris Groys
Also designed by the winner of the palace of the soviets. And this building is rather small, is important, it was meant to represent the Soviet Union, on the international arena at this specific point in time during Stalins regin. So if we compare the 1925, world fair, right? 12 years of difference between good, you can actually observe how much how much Soviet architecture has changed. And the direction it was going once again, we have this tiered structure that we've seen with the Palace of the Soviet hierarchical organizational. And once again we have this ribbed tired facade that emphasize the verticality. Vertical energy that elevates the sculpture and The gesture continues into sculpture. and the sculpture, is actually the main feature of the pavillion. So that the pavillion looks more like a podium for the sculpture, which is much more momumental than an independent building. Why was sculpture privilege over architecture at the World Fair where the soviet union was demonstrating to the world, what it was all about under stalin. It is much, much, much easier to express principles and values of socialist realism, principles of socialist realism, in sculpture in something figurative. Then in architecture in architecture in 1937, architects were still trying to figure out how to express socialist realist discourse, the social realist idiom, in architectural form. And you know, now when we see the sculpture, as this example, of very conservative, almost reactionary aesthetic but actually. The sculpturer herself was quite innovative and it was interactive with avant garde french sculptor, and it was met well by the public and critics so it was appreciated by the western press and public at that time. One last thing I want to say before I let you go, I want to draw your attention to the fact that we're in 1937 when the international political climate is really heating up, you know, Nazi Germany was getting more agressive/ strict/ radical, Italy has just invaded Ethiopia, in Spain, Franco was fighting the Civil War with help of Germany and Italy. So talatarian regimes are on the rise, and there are a few of them that compete for world domination. And the way the Soviet Union Pavillion is positioned is really important. Opposite to it is the German civilian with the Nazi eagle and the swastika on top, they stand one opposite to one another in the spirit of civility and confrontation. That translates into architecture and also into the way the exhibition grounds are structured. It's kind of like an architectural standoff between the Soviet Union and Germany. We're going to come back to the German pavilion to talk about national socialism in Germany under Hitler. It's quite funny story because of the stability of the sphere.The architect of the German Pavillion Albert Speer was waiting on the USSR to complete its paviilion to know its final height in order to surpass it in some way. And this is the reason he added the eagle at the very end, when he saw that the USSR pavillion exceed their He added this massive eagle on top of it. I think the German pavilion exceeds two centimeters or something, but it just comes to show how this competition between two world leaders to military in countries unfolded in architecture.
Boris Iofan, Soviet Pavilion at the Paris World Fair (Exposition Internationale des Arts et Techniques dans la Vie Moderne), 1937. Sculpture « Worker and Kolkhoz Woman » by Vera Mukhina, 1937.
another official project under cmh that had to do with seeking out official Nazi art. So not avant-garde, not historical masterpieces, but official, National Socialist art approved by the state. And it was a project headed by Captain Gordon Gilkey who was a professor from Oregon, and Capitol jokey was charged with carrying out a pledge that you have on the screen made by FDR at the Yalta Conference in 1945, to quote remove all Nazi and militarist influences from public office and from the cultural and economic life of the German people. So this was considered to be key for the successful transition of the Germans into you know, a democratic government, removal of artworks or official artworks are groups that were produced under Hitler and endorsed by his state. So in other words, his job was to seek out and oversee the seizure and removal of you know, so-called militaristic artworks in Germany, his mission was to strip Germany of propaganda art after World War Two, and he called it a confiscation program. during the war, many artworks were hidden for safety by the Nazi Party for example The Reich Chancellery and the Führerbunker Complex which was Hitler's office where he stored paintings that he had purchased. There were also less obvious and hard-to-find places like the salt mines. so all in all, this team confiscated or you know requisitioned somewhere around 9000 pieces of art. Well, shortly after those 9000 were shipped to the US because they were shipped to the US. Shortly after that came restitution claims legal claims made by owners. Ask the people who have purchased them or acquired them in some other way. Asking for these pieces to be returned to them. And the first place came from artists and their families. For artworks that were not overtly political that did not contain or swastikas or eagles, and most of the time they came from those who were just struggling financially and were trying to recover any possessions that they could then sell for money in order to survive. So they petitioned the US government for the return of individual artworks And the US had no problem returning artworks that did not have any overt political meaning content significance in 1981, legislation came through to repatriate all of the German art in US possession. All except those that fit one of the three major categories of artworks so we kept 586 pieces in total. They kept portraits of Hitler for ex Hubert Lanzinger The Standard Bearer, ca 1935, oil on canvas and they also kept Hitlers watercolors
Confiscation Program
destroying something, tearing something down completely or partially or moving symbols is one way And this is just one way of going about it and something that has been done especially right in the aftermath of World War Two when Germany was occupied by Allied forces who were very aggressively trying to demystify Germany Many, many nazi buildings, many nazi monuments that have been destroyed have been completely erased. Or, as I mentioned, sometimes buildings themselves stand but symbols that identified them as belonging to that specific regime to the national socialist regime to that problematic past were being removed. So like swastikas, eagles, and so on. And this process of removing entire buildings, parts of buildings, or symbols identifying them as belonging to the nazi regime is called denazification.
DENAZIFICATION
"Difficult heritage" (Sharon Macdonald) A past that is recognized as meaningful in the present but that is also contested and awkward for public reconciliation with a positive, self-affirming contemporary identity Something that for many Germans again brings up very traumatic memories, and for others feelings of guilt. But again, this is something that is at the same time an integral part of German identity and German history and something that they cannot just forget or whitewash, well, I mean, theoretically they can, but this is not considered an acceptable way of proceeding in democratic countries, and so is something that they have to overcome or something that they have to process somehow integrate it into their contemporary identity. All these buildings that you've seen the semester buildings constructed on your work are examples of difficult heritage are examples of material domains of a very difficult part of a traumatic past. This concept of difficult heritage is not set in stone, The category of difficult heritage is not fixed it is in constant flux
Difficult heritage
Official Soviet Art, Art approved by the Soviet state are held in the US in a storage room. underground storage room. In the US. It's an image of a warehouse, warehouse an army base at Fort Belvoir, Virginia. And it's owned by the United States Army Center of Military History abbreviated as cmh. And what is Cmh Well, this is what their official website says. roughly 600 Nazi artworks end up at an army base in the US and why are they doing that
Emil Scheibe, Hitler at the Front, 1942-43
In a somewhat strange hybrid manner of hyper-realistic photography. It shows a group of people in typical Soviet dress walking along the beach toward the sea and the horizon. The line on the horizon, however, cannot be seen, because it is countered by a flat supremacist from a giant red line that seems to be superimposed on this conventional picture. Cutting horizontally across the entire painting now lets us compare it with the sublime images that dominated the official art before. As we have already discussed, breathtaking panoramics and wild nature are common topics for landscape painting. Show the sky the vastness of the expanse and the visibility of the horizon connoting optimism, progress, and vision of a brighter future. So the movement toward the sea and the sun that we see is an allusion to the optimism of the officials over some years. The figures in the picture are also dressed in the typically modest bright of time, manner of time, but unlike the standard Stalinist painting there is nothing fantastic about this look. Right. Also what strikes us is that their backs are turned to the viewer, so we don't see their smiling faces and confident gaze. Moreover, the giant red line that covers the horizon is the red and yellow ribbon of the order of Lenin which is the highest merit so instead of being a symbol of merit the ribbon obstructs at the same time because the ribbon is simply superimposed on the painting it also signals to the viewer that the flatness of this work the flat ribbon thus destroys the perspective and the spatial illusion created by the movement of the individuals think of how crucial this feeling of movement that is beyond our perspective that goes beyond the borders of the painting was for the artworks that we discussed earlier. What I've just explained is how a lot of standing works on a conceptual level on the conscious level of symbols, iconography, and ideas. His painting also works on the subconscious level. In order to achieve emotional consciousness by using the most beautiful landscape that is the sea background and progressively covers it with a red ribbon. the artist further develops the same device. He combines the illuminated 3-dimensional realistic picture with suprematist flatness. it blocks the horizon, it obstructs the vision for the utopian future. Uses space to destroy the dynamic perspective picture of the picture
Erik Bulatov - Horizon (1972)
Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe, 2003-2004, architect Peter Eisenman, engineer Buro Happold, Berlin, Germany. And this is the Holocaust memorial in Berlin. It was designed by architect Peter Eisenman to commemorate the victims of the Holocaust and it's a huge area of coverage with over 2000 concrete slabs or blocks arranged on a grid pattern on regular pattern and that you can walk around or inside you can actually go inside and immerse yourself in this monument almost become a part of this monument. And, you know, the the kind of mood that it conveys this is solemn, haunting even grim. People talking about confusions dis-orientation and anxiety, grim, uneasy, isolating confusing feelings. And this is exactly the effect that Eisenman was going for. it does not feature any people only abstract geometrical forms and this is precisely the point. You know, we've been discussing this at length in my 339 class last week. Architecture has other means of communicating communicating ideas. It has the power to communicate ideas directly through the body through the embodied experience. of abstract forms in space. So it can act on the level of sensations of the body of bodily movement That makes you feel a certain way instead of telling you the story of the Holocaust or depicting victims or actual events in a figurative way.
Ex of Memorialization
Rock-im-Park festival on the Zeppelin field since 1980's up until current times the zeppelin field has been used for the venue of a huge rock festival in Nuremberg Norisring - track for motor racing events by the Zeppelin tribune
Examples of BANALIZATION
Zeppelin Stadium and Zeppelin Grandstand at the NSDAP Rally Grounds in Nuremberg, Germany, c. 1937. Architect: Albert Speer On April 22, 1945, a victorious U.S. Army destroyed one of the greatest symbols of Germany's Nazi regime: a giant marble swastika that overlooked the Zeppelintribüne, Adolf Hitler's most powerful pulpit, at the heart of the Nazi party rally grounds. So, immediately after the war this architectural ensemble the entire nazi party rally grounds was denazified. All of this swastikas were removed. Then later in the 60's or 70's both of the hands of the collonades on the either side of Hitler's rostrume, on the tribune were removed as well. So I'm talking about the grandstand. This long building with the central rostrum across from the two collonades on either side of it. The reason being on the ceiling inside the galleries there was a meander motif and meander motif it's something that is quite frequently used and it's a decorative piece in neoclassical architecture in general. And you know, since the national socialist regime was actually laying claim to the Greco Roman heritage, they use it a lot, but it does look like a series of interconnected swastikas and so on an overall local community expressed their concern for the use meander motifs. So they came to see the galleries and the city administration decided instead of just removing the mosaic they decided to remove the galleries altogether.
Examples of DENAZIFICATION
Congress Hall at the NSDAP Rally Grounds in Nuremberg, Germany, 1935. Architects: Ludwig and Franz Ruff. > Documentation Center Nazi Party Rally Grounds, 2001. Architect: Günther Domenig. -And so, in this case, museumification education entailed. A certain transformation of the building itself. A deconstructivist architects Gunther Domenig was commissioned to transform the Congress hole into a documentation center. So right now, the structure that he added to the historical building houses, sort of an archive and, and an exhibition center. So he was commissioned to transform the building into a documentation center, and this is what he decided to do. This is what he decided to add. And I really want to draw your attention to the way in which he chooses to work with the original structure. So there's definitely this stylistic contrast between the two structures, he does not try to blend in right. He does not add something neoclassical. He adds a post-modernist contemporary building a very clean steel and glass structure that pierces through the original building. I'd like to like to compare this composition to Elysee skis poster "beat the whites with the red wedge" in both cases, you know abstract formscommunicate ideas about the past, and this struggle between different value systems. And in this case, it's going to be you know, National Socialism and democracy. In the poster case between communism and monarchism. So, Gunthers addition to the Congress Hall, it's very eloquently didactic. It's didactic, it's educational in its form. It just very clearly communicates who the bad guy is, who the guy is, and that you should not be like the bad guys and you know, even on the level of abstract forms of architectural forms, this becomes clear But I feel like the most eloquent part is on the outside because we can really see how he Pierce's this building within his structure instead of building on it layering new structures on it or just building something next to it. he integrates it in a way that communicates this contrast between different value systems. inherently didactic, it's educational, and it's meant to show teach you a lesson channel your thoughts in a very specific way
Examples of MUSEUMIFICATION
And the morning of our motherland is one of the most popular and important examples to be official soviet art, it is exemplary for the period of high Stalinism which extended from the end of world war two down to Stalin's death. This painting was completed in 1938. And was immediately hailed by critics by the official critics and the human public alike as an outstanding achievement, and in the following year, it was awarded the highest honor or accomplishment in the Soviet Union. In this time, the Stalin Prize. and here Stalin stands in a field at daybreak, he is actually basking in the sunlight and dressed in a white uniform his gaze extends beyond the frame of the painting and into the direction of the morning sunlight. This image, therefore not only celebrates the victorious presence, it's important to remember that this painting was made after the Second World War, but also to show the country's continued development promising an even brighter future for the Soviet people in the upcoming years. he gazes over the horizon beyond the border of the picture, and it goes into the future thus his gaze transcends both the boundaries of the picture and the boundaries of time.
Fyodor Shurpin - "The Morning of Our Motherland" (1948)
The State declares art (and culture as a whole) to be an ideological weapon and a means of struggle for power.The State acquires a monopoly over all manifestations of the country's artistic life.The State constructs an all-embracing apparatus for the control and direction of art.From the multiplicity of artistic movements then in existence, the State selects one movement, always the most conservative, which most nearly answers its needs and declares it to be official and obligatory.Finally, the state declares war to the death against all styles and movements other than the official ones, declaring them to be reactionary and hostile to class, race, people, Party or State, to humanity, to social or artistic progress, etc.
Igor Golomstock, 1990 (Scholar) Ideas of Art under Totalitarianism
This, these were these were ideas in the air. Even among the most progressive, modernist architects, the constructivists. Were working on a new type of residential architecture for a new type of organization of people in the House Communes. Save money, fix the housing crisis, limit private space, So it's it's a very strict machine that the building itself of course, you could use it in a different way. But this was kind of implied in the architecture So it's an apartment block. And it was actually designed for hiring employees of the commesariate of finance. It's made in reinforced concrete desire to reform social conventions to reform the human psyche through architecture It was a utopian idea. A community that made very little private space. spent most of their time together in the community. In some collective form of activity was a form of labor or lesiure, right. And it has gotten so big that it can really be called the house commune movemnt. many different architects subscribe to these ideals of creating new residential architecture, minimize private space and maximize public space. And timeframe wise, I would say that developed between 1925 and 1930, when there was this call to order in the Arts and Architecture as well. And again, there were some very utopian projects, and only just maybe a handful more has actually been realized. But they all believe these architects they all believe that the house can use is the best way to solve the housing crisis in Moscow and St. Petersburg for major cities that were overcrowded but also streamlining the usage of resources, minimizing waste, and facilitating the redistribution of resources for any communist state replace this individualistic mentality with this collectivist social mentality -often constructivists think, most of them were stopped in 1930, when the state finally realized that there were people, not politicians, architects, the creative class, who were, you're meddling with the lifestyle of so many people -housing for everybody, regardless of their social status, regardless of your employment status of your productivity levels
Ivan Nikolaev, Communal House of the Textile Institute, 1929-1931.
Here, as you can see they capitalized on the imagery of the communist mass culture in the red flag, the red star as well as the figure of Lenin himself and his famous gesture, which is usually perceived as him showing showing the way to the communist utopia here he is using the same gestures to hail a cab. So the Soviet artists we will be covering today were appropriating and subverting this official soviet imagery, to expose the mechanisms of the Proletarian society and the fakeness or emptiness of the communist ideology in the Soviet Union.
Komar and Melamid - Lenin Hails a Cab in New York (1993)
Created an international image for constructivism because he designed the Soviet Pavillion in the 1925 Paris World Fair. Iit represents the Soviet nation, US Soviet state, on the international arena, and world fair. I'm just thinking if we have time. So me and your group design the Soviet Union. And then the guy who designed the poster for us publishing house from last class, designed wonderful interiors for this. So as I said, the goal was to show off the Soviet states top notch achievements in architecture, engineering, and to demonstrate that Soviet Union is a progressive, modern state, just without the evils of capitalism.So what we have here are two triangular volumes, right. two volumes on a triangular plan tand they're connected to a stairway. Uses a lot of Glass steel, industrial materials cost to use like aluminum plywood. (reminds paintings of the factory w/ a modular frame. This is a reference to industrial architecture. We're talking about for creating a new proletarian culture reference industrial buildings in architecture.Inside-So inside one of the exhibitions was actually the monument for the 3rd party International, by TatlinAnd there was also a room the workers club designed by Rodchenko. Before the crackdown and call to order for art and architecture so it was a chance for constructionist to shine -more freedmon before the crackdown -time when much more radical progressive ideas were circulating than would under the height of stalin reighn So this was a time of creative freedom, incredible creative freedom and just new opportunities for people -have to come up with a distinctive visual language for the new communist modern art and architecture -what is architecture appropriate for a modern communist state -I just want to mention that this is a moment in Soviet art when we're not get cut off from the west. -were coming up with a new formal language or new conception of communist Soviet architecture -created soon after constructivism has been consolidated from a big philosophical approach to to artistic production in the vkhutemas, consolidated as a movement and as a very distinctive style. -So as I said, the goal was to show off the new Soviet states top notch achievements in architecture, engineering, and to demonstrate that Soviet Union is a progressive, modern state, just without the evils of capitalism
Konstantin Melnikov, the Soviet Union pavilion for the 1925 Paris World Fair
And then there's another strategy, museum education. A strategy for processing difficult past that is turning National Socialist buildings into museums where you would use artifacts from the period, put them on display and retell the story of the place in accordance with your current values to educate the public in these matters, tell them about the dangers for example, of totalitariansim. Tell them about the horrors and consequences and this is exactly what happened to another building and then somebody rally grounds the Congress call this portion shaped structure for party congresses for political speeches.
MUSEUMIFICATION
sites of memory But they are designated sites that are imbued with special meaning and connected to the past. They are special kinds of places where you come specifically to think about the past to reflect on the past and your right to either mourn the victims or sometimes to celebrate heroes, these are the two main ones. So you can come there to moutn victims of some tragic event or celebrate heroes. Another reason we created memorials is for is because they they create a stronger sense of collective identity. They are public structures where you will come to commemorate either commemorates, you know national heroes celebrate national heroes, collectively appreciated and extolled or more victims of any event that has touched many lives, not only your personal family history, so they do create a stronger sense of collective identity. They are also thought to play a role in healing in processing historical trauma through this collective communion and commemoration.
Memorialization
Well, you dropped it all know that in 1943 Rosewood established the American Commission for the Protection and salvage of artistic and historical monuments in war areas. areas in which we refer to as monuments men, you probably seen the movie monuments man.that commission assembled a team, this team of arts and monuments officers, known as Monuments Men, who did what well, they raced around Europe, liberating artworks that Nazis has stolen from other European museums from Jewish families from private collections and churches and in castles and what not, both avant garde so examples of what the Nazis would consider degenerate and historical masterpieces, old masters. Baroque artists. Artworks looted by the Nazis, So the monuments men were going around searching for stashes of artworks in order to liberate them.
Monuments Men
ex. Erik Bulatov, Andrei Monastyrski, Boris Groys However in the late 60s, early 70s, there were three or four small artistic groups that fell under this general umbrella term of this unofficial Soviet art. I will be focusing on the most influential and I would say the most successful of these groups the Moscow Conceptualists. As the term itself implies, this movement was located in Moscow this geographical self-identification is important because of the old rivalry between the two capital cities in Russia. That is the rivalry between Moscow and St. Petersburg. So when we talk about Moscow conceptualists regional identification is important, the emphasis of it being in Moscow indicates the willingness to work with these very down-to-earth issues such as the mundane reality and the everyday experience of the average Soviet citizen. So the Soviet artists we will be covering today were appropriating and subverting this official soviet imagery, to expose the mechanisms of the Proletarian society and the fakeness or emptiness of the communist ideology in the Soviet Union. All of these visual techniques of official soviet art of soviet realism are deconstructed by the unofficial official artists. Moscow conceptualists were the first to notice the absurdity of the soviet slogans and propaganda everywhere situation and exposed the absurdity in their works Moscow conceptualism emerged organically in the Soviet Union precisely because it is the underside of local ideology. The reality presented by Soviet ideology existed as an elaborate process, huge and expansive movie set, and conceptualism invites us to work behind the scenes to recognize the spectral and absurd side, of the Soviet ideology and propaganda. This time it is not a painting, but a performance by a Moscow conceptualist artist. The performance entitled slogan 77 and was performed in 1977 and built as you can see on the screen, so it's 10 meters long it was hung between on the outskirts of Moscow. And the slogan in white, passive letters, reads, I don't complain about anything. I almost like it here, although I have never been here before and know nothing about this. Boris Groys coined the very term Moscow conceptualists in 1979 You have to understand that it was a very small community of like-minded people, and most of them had good versatile education. So they would gather together to discuss new art books, especially in French infrastructure this theoretical discussion, led by Groys find its way into the paintings, installations and performances. And as you might already have noticed, Moscow conceptualists, first and foremost were working with the language they were working with concepts and ideas, rather than with the form in fact today we had the chance to discuss the key paintings, as well as the performance. So the artistic medium used by this movement was not of primary importance. So in his talk he mentions that Moscow conceptualists tried to erase the line that divided the east and the west and thus unite the ideologically divided world he even says here that the end unofficial Soviet art preceded and announced the end of the Cold War t trying to show that there is much more in common that unties east and west than divides them. Also, the fact that the Moscow conceptualists were exposing the emptiness and fakeness of the communist ideology while at the same time post-modernist art in the West, exposed the fakness and emptiness of the Western capitalist society. In both cases they're working with empty symbols.
Moscow Conceptualists (unofficial soviet artists)
another way of dealing with Nazi heritage in popular culture has been its sexualization. So the reduction of National Socialism and fascism as well from these scary, murderous political regimes to their attributes, clothing, uniform, haircuts and then the transformation of these attributes into erotic fetishes. ex. Lady Gaga, Alejandro, 2008 -homoeroticism, clothing, uniform, haircuts, bdsm aspects, dance -militarized choreography
Nazixplotation/ Nazi Exploitation
So, that being said, the cultural climate is slightly changing in the 70's. And I'm sure they discussed how Soviet art was organized from an institutional point of view. So let us quickly go over it again. As it will be important for today's discussion. Basically, being an artist in the Soviet Union was considered a profession a full-time job. And if you wanted to practice the job, if you wanted to paint the goal, which is whatever it is that you wanted, you absolutely needed to be a member of the Organization for the Artists Union of the USSR. So in the Soviet Union was possible for you to learn how to paint by yourself, but if you wanted your art to be exhibited, if you wanted your art to and yourself to be eligible for commissions, you absolutely needed to be a member of the Artists Union of the USSR. This membership as any other membership function both as on the one hand the Artists Union made sure that artists are employed and have some basic income and usually that amounts to working as decorators, making illustrations for newspapers and magazines, children's books, and other stuff. And even so, if a soviet artist was particularly lucky and were noticed by the state officials he could receive a commission to make paintings glorifying the communist party, or its leaders. And these paintings, his official paintings will then be exhibited in the museum's reprinted newspapers and ultimately become a part of the Soviet canon. This kind of art approved and supported by the state to the Artists Union of the USSR became known among the critics and art historians as the official Soviet art, -So basically, we can group these arguments into three categories. So the first one is the presence of the sky almost half of the painting is dedicated to the sky the blue sky is clear. It's full of bright colors, as you mentioned. What's also important is the size of the paintings. You may see here, all of them are larger than two meters. Also, they all occur in summer on a really sunny day. So the paintings are full of optimism we see the horizon behind, and we have a very strong sense of perspective. And I want to emphasize this the prescense of the horizon on all these three paintings how clearly visible this line, from this visual perspective, we can actually predict the movement of the people. Looks like in a few moments, they will burst the boundaries of the picture because the picture itself is the present. While they are striving for the future. They're striving for the brighter future for the next day promised by the USSR.
Official Soviet Art (Soviet Realism)
-And one project one architectural competition, that has definitely set the tone for architecture, under Stalin and in the Soviet union was the competition, in which, you know, Stalin himself was very much active, was very much invested. And he did play a major role as the jury was the project and the competition for the Palace of the Soviet Union, I would say general agreement between different architects competing in this competition and was that the house console it shouldn't be nice for time timeless ne0-processes. So it's a tiered structure and there are two types of tiers rectangular tiers and circular tiers those levels looks like so the part is on a rectuangular base while the upper parts are on a circular base. It's like a telescope. It's a telescoping structure, right. -It's my monumental in the sense that it's very large, massive structure. -monumental statue of Lenin on top -neoclassical elements that are vary paired down and simplified. -almost like this huge pedestal, -it mixes neoclassical elements with art-deco very rhythmic ribbed decor -important because it defined what socialist realism meant in architecture gave an indication of what would be the standard -I want to reiterate that even though this building was never completed, it influenced stalinist architecture after the war, and all of the technological developments that were accumulated in the process of construction technology and all of these industries that formed around this project, they contibuted to further the development of Soviet architecture.
Project for the Palace of the Soviets by Boris Iofan, construction started 1937.
Svomas independent, grassroots formed Vkhutemas in which all of these different workshops came together, both Applied Arts and fine arts. So there was a wide variety of disciplines and taught. Initially it was almost a grassroots initiative. As Svomas were very local and very independent. But then there's this pull towards centralization. There's this, there's this pull towards more state control. In the 1920s Even in the art there's this pull towards centralization already in the 1920s Pull towards more state control, more organization, more communication, more standardization of artistic education and practices. But still, you have to understand that this was a completely new educational system, nothing like this ever existed in Russia. And everybody involved was very proud and happy to be part of this very innovative educational system. But now that the artists had this new educational system, they had to come up with a new distinctive visual image for the new communist modern art. But then there's the question, what is modern communist art. Some believed that it had to do with representing a distinctive subject (contemporary events, revolution heros, modern people, industrialized cities, technology). On the other hand other people believed that subject donsn't matter because what makes something modern would be the style and form of representation. And at Vkhutemas both view had their proponents. So both these trends we're developing at Vkhutemas, we're talking about this major new institutional, educational institution that formed in Moscow in 1920.They were coming up with a new visual language or new conception of communist Soviet arts. And there were two trends, two main trends that emerged in the process. Avand-Garde (OST) realist w/ contemporary (AkhRR) So two approaches to Soviet reality and two very different ways of representing form.
Vkhutemas - Higher Art and Technical Workshops/studios Building of the Moscow School of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture by Vassily Bazhenov, 1780-1790, Main building of Vkhutemas from 1920 to 1930.
So architecture. As you know, at the beginning, there was these traditionalist architects at Vkhutemas had the upper hand. They were the main predominance, dominance however they became much less popular, fewer students attended them, gradually was becoming clear that was a mass needed new architecture and new design that will be different from everything that is associated with pre revolutionary Russia.Gradually, onward workshops, architectural workshops, were coming to the fore and being more popular among the students and they were more promoted by the state. They were becoming more and more influential. And there was one that I would like to talk to you about, it was headed by Nicola Ladovsky . He came up with this whole new course on space on theories of space on perception of space, very innovative. And his role in you know, designing this curriculum was to develop the student's ability to develop this very acute understanding of space of volumes, in space and of movements things, like why certain values and spatial configurations appear as dynamic to us and others appear as static. He rejected the kind of architectural education that was based on copying over and over again, surgical precedents, elements from previous historical styles. If you really wanted this new style to come out of the exploration of space of the way human body behaves in space and perceive space. Completely new pedagogical approach This is a new method of teaching architecture. And this is the environments where constructivism from a philosophical approach to art, consolidated as a movement and as a very distinctive style. You'll only see constructivist posters, sculpture. But it's really the architectural medium that you know, made constructivism into an internationally recognized real movement. Into a distinctive movement-LADOVSKY DID CURRICULUM ONLYLeading figures who laid the way for this movement: Aleksandr Vesnin, Moisei Ginzbug, Konstantin MelnikovThey formed the (OSA) organization of contemporary architects (for constructivists)Also has jornal OSA that was published internationally-Key elementsSo once again, you see young Soviet architects. coming up with this new architectural language by drawing on industrial architecture and integrating technology in a way that aestheticizes it and makes it into a stylistic feature of the new regime.
constructivist architecture
in the last couple of decades irony emerged as another important device for dealing with difficult heritage or totalitarian regimes. You know, because memorialization you know, denazification. All these dominant strategies in Germany for example of dealing are all very serious. They're very solemn heavy. art and mass culture that are also engaged in the process of reflecting on difficult heritage in a very different way so I'm talking about individual artists and fashion designers and movie directors. And some of them are not solemn or didactic at all. Some of them some of this popular visual culture processes difficult past through different means through humor and through irony. So the tone here is comical, it's grotesque or open ended ex. such as the film inglorious bastards made by Quentin Tarantino made in 2009
irony
Hitler Goes Pop, Yvonne Delhey
reading
Hudson-Foundations of Stalinism in Architecture
reading
THE PALAZZO DELLA CIVILTÀ ITALIANA From fascism to fashion, author Somma 2020
reading
THE PHILOSOPHICAL IMPLICATIONS OF RUSSIAN CONCEPTUALISM Mikhail Epstein
reading
The Palace (discusses palace of the soviets), Zubovich
reading
Undesirable Heritage: Fascist Material Culture and Historical Consciousness in Nuremberg Sharon Macdonald
reading
DE-STALINIZATION AND THE BATTLE AGAINST "EXCESS", Zubovich
reading krushnev period 1958 world fair
OSA and the peoples dreams Hudson
reading organization of contemporary architects USSR construcitonists)
