News about demolitions costantly come from Moscow, were the efforts of citizens and organizations as Arhnadzor, can’t stop the pressure of real estate market oligarchy, of which the main esponent is the wife of the mayor itself. No surprise that in this situation, organs due to preserve architectural heritage, as the Moscow heritage committee (Moskonansledie) do not really struggle to do their job…

Alexeev Mansion, 11 Bakhrushina Street demolished on July 25th
The building
www.archnadzor.ru
http://archnadzor.livejournal.com/
Interview with Arhnadzor

Through our local executive producer, we contacted Moskonansledie few weeks before our trip for an interview. The officers did not object to it, but we have been asked for an official written request, which we provided. Once in Moscow, we have been invited to a preliminary meeting in order to clarify the goal of our interview. Eventually, we met with two employees, in an old house of merchant -now the representative office of Moskonansledie- apparently emptied of other employees and human presence. They cautiously questioned us about the nature of our project and goals, and how we would  use this interview etc. We clarified in detail our background, our artistic and scientific approach, the reason for our involvement in this project about Moscow, how we are proceeding with our documentary project and the  interviews previously done. They required us to submit a list of questions that would have been asked during the interview, and promised us an answer asap. They did not assure us to release the interview, but they told us that it should be possible. We left with the confirmation of our impression regarding Russian public institutions as  an highly opaque bureaucratic machine. For the rest of the week, we have been pointlessly waiting   for an appointment. Not that they refused. Actually, our official request for an interview has been accepted, and signed by the Director of Moskomansledie.  But since then, everyday we received a message that may be the day after a meeting for the interview could have been arranged, which in the end never took place. Simply, in five days, they have not been able to find who among the “technicians” of  the public agency could be available for interview.

From our point of view, it’s not a big problem. Not that we think that the responses of Moskomansledie could have added so much to the film we are making! But, having had the opportunity to listen to so many voices telling us about the Narkomfin building and contemporary Moscow, from the descendants of Ginsburg and Milyutin -the extraordinary persons  which realized such a masterpiece-, to the inhabitants still living inside the building, from architects and scholars who are struggling for preserving its memory and conditions, to the entrepreneur who has bought most of the apartments to redevelop the building for commercial purposes, we have a quite definite view of the story. From these people narrations, and from our direct observations of the events, the image of Moscow’s institution does not appear chrystal clear, and its role appears biased and disputable. For the sake of correctness, we asked them to give their point of view. We have openly expressed our curiosities and perplexities to Moskomansledie’s representant, and if they don’t consider important to respond publicly, they are just  providing another mosaic piece for the picture, implicitly confirming many of the impressions captured in Moscow in particular about the Governmental agencies as being inefficient, disregarding their basic tasks, and strongly influenced by private interests.

NARKOMFIN – RUSSIAN TELEVISION from OGINO KNAUSS on Vimeo.

We are back again to Moscow. This time hot weather is accompanying us; an unusual hot season slows down even the constant flux of Muscovites in the streets. The Narkomfin itself seems to suffer even more the brightness of the sun light in the cracks of the walls. The big trees around the building are somehow soothing it. The Narkomfin is tiny and crowned by luxuriant vegetation, which seems to be a precious paradise in the surroundings made by huge and imposing multi-story buildings such as the American Embassy and wide 16 lanes urban road.

Nastya has already surveyed the place, and discovered some new developments of the story. Since few week there is a guard checking the Narkomfin. The guardian is a new entry and it was not there when we came last time.  He has been friendly with her  and promised to help us to meet the inhabitants.

We wait calmly under the trees the guardian of the Narkomfin, with the hope of him letting us into the building. After few minutes he appears: a sturdy but not tall man on his thirties with a big scar on the left chick, dark tattoos on the calves, and round peaceful face that did not fit with the military style clothes. He smiles sweetly when he clarifies to the translator that we are not allowed to enter the building. He does not want to be interviewed, and therefore we are not allowed to know for whom he is employed, who is representing and what is his duty at the Narkomfin. he only tells us that there vhave been a scandal about manouvres made at the Narkomfin, fueled by a TV report.

Good start! Things become more and more confused…

At this point of the story, we know that there are few residents living in the building. Some of them are renters of the public estate now in the hands of the local government. Some others are owners of flats acquired through usufruct or purchased.  All the residents who could afford better housing conditions left for the peripheries and for better-equipped flats long ago.

Despite the denial of the guardian to let us inside the building, we can hang about the entrance and wait for some residents to pass by, somebody possibly sympathetic with us and approachable to video interview. The first passer-by is a man in his fifties, who accepts to talk but he quickly dismisses us with few words telling about the general Narkomfin’story repeating the mantra of the missed restoration works. Nothing new.

By chance after few minutes, we have another resident, who tells us that he has been living there for 30 years. His father once moved in the Narkomfin with the intention of residing there only three years but eventually he spent there all his life.  V. -our interviewee- tells about the Narkomfin out of his teen-ager’s memory, when the building was overcrowded by families who lived crammed in the apartments and by people who inhabited modest rooms without natural light and water put up in the left over spaces at the ends of the corridors. People living in this kind of spaces were obliged to depend on others people apartment for cooking and washing up. After all, this was the only way to use all the available space in a time of housing shortage, when also the ground floor under pilotis was overbuilt with new flats. By the end of the eighties, the Narkomfin ended his demographic upsurge. After the end communist period, the building turned toward a fate of continuous decay, inhabited by scattered families who have no decision making power regarding the destiny of the building.

During the interview a grouping of few people assembled near the entrance. They are young, trendy and speak English. That’s when we got to learn that there are new inhabitants in the building…

from Milyutin family archive
With courtesy of Ekaterina Milyutina – NLO Publishers, Moscow

see also:
NaARKOMFIN-THE MILYUTINS’ PENTHOUSE

from Milyutin family archive
With courtesy of Ekaterina Milyutina – NLO Publishers, Moscow

Hotel Yugoslavia is one of the most interesting and representative architectures of Novi Beograd. The beautiful hotel is out of service at the moment. It is still in a good shape, and most of the original furniture is in place. It has been bought by an international chain, and is waiting to be redeveloped starting from next spring, trasforming it in a luxury  hotel with half of the original rooms.

“Cheryomushki” (1963)
Directed by Gerbert Rappaport.
A screen adaptation of the Musical (operetta) written by Dmitriy Shostakovich.

The Irony of Fate, or Enjoy Your Bath!
directed by Eldar Ryazanov, 1975

El Lissitzky printing plant and Zhurgaz house are under threat of destruction
Your help in protecting these landmarks is urgently needed!

In 2007 staff members of the Russian Avant-Garde Fund discovered in a Moscow archive previously unknown blueprints for the printing plant of JSC Ogonek authored by El Lissitzky, a luminary of 20th-century art.
The grandiose plan, reminiscent of Lissitzky’s famous “horizontal skyscraper” projects,was not realized in full. Only one of the three planned buildings has been built. Lazar (El) Lissitzky, a canonical figure of 20th-century art history, is known primarily as an author of drawings, posters, and illustrator for leading art exhibitions. El Lissitzky’s architectural designs are well known to art historians, but most of them have not been carried out. The JSC Ogonek printing plant (1930) is likely to be the only extant building based on the blueprints of this master.

In the meantime, the Russian Film Industry Union (led by Nikita Mikhalkov) and JSC INTECO (led by Elena Baturina, the wife of Moscow’s mayor Yuri Luzhkov) are building an enormous, fully commercial apartment house in the inner yard of the Zhurgaz house, with numerous violations of regulations. The planned house is 44 meters high with a two-level underground 99-space parking lot, with the area allotted for construction being 0.315 hectares. The side outer wall of the Zhurgaz house has been turned into a part of construction site enclosure.
Heavy machinery passes by it dozens of times per day. In violation of law, the recognized architectural landmark has not been allotted a protective zone and all of the area around the house has been turned over to the construction site. Even more critically, for purposes of supplying the planned house with hot water, a project has been approved to route the municipal heating system through the walls and basement of the Zhurgaz house using pipes of a prohibited diameter (630/800 mm), temperature of 150ºC, and pressure of 9 atm. The pipes include welded joints. Any rupture would lead to catastrophic consequences for the Zhurgaz building and its residents. This detail, however, has not be sufficient to prompt even the slightest reduction of the planned 4300 squared meter area of the underground parking lot.
One may ask how this project was approved. Review of documents on which approval was based reveals gross improprieties and falsifications. Perhaps this question would be naive.
On 22 December 2009, a new, specially constituted commission catering to the interests of the Moscow construction industry recommended elimination of the Lissitzky printing house from the list of cultural landmarks under state protection.
Construction work next to the Zhurgaz house has been resumed.
Your help in protecting these landmarks is urgently needed!
You can help by sending a letter to the minister of culture of the Russian Federation Aleksandr Avdeev and to the mayor of Moscow Yuri Luzhkov.

Aleksandr Avdeev, Minister of Culture, Russian Federation.
Russia, 125993 GSP-3, Moscow, Maly Gnezdnikovsky per., d. 7/6, str. 1,2
Fax: +7 495 629 72 69
Email: info@mkrf.ru

Yuri Luzhkov, Mayor of Moscow.
Russia, 125032, Moscow, Tverskaya, 13
Fax: +7 495 620 20 70
Email: major@mos.ru

Contacts:

Elena Olshanskaya
(chairman of Zhurgaz condominium management)
Russia, 127473, Moscow, 1 Samotechny per., 17A kv. 3
Fax/phone: +7 495 681 27 65
Cell phone: +7 916 189 63 31
Email: elena.olshanskaya@gmail.com

Marianna Evstatova
(chief curator of “Russian Avantgarde” Heritage Preservation Foundation)
Email: mevstratova@gmail.com

(Video: Watch this video on the post page)

Da: Elena
Data: 03 gennaio 2010 19:13:18 GMT+01:00

… Comment allez-vous?  J’espere que vous vous avancez avec le film sur la maison de Narcomfine et les autres projets interessants.

Chez nous ca va un peu triste.  Avant les fêtes du Nouvel An la commission de Vladimir Resin (le premier assistant  du maire de Moscou) a décidé d’exclure l’imprimerie  El Lissitski et quelques autres bâtiments de la liste des monuments protégés par l’État. Les intérêts des constructeurs sont plus hauts que l’héritage architectural.  La  décision n’est pas définitive avant qu’elle soit signee par le maire de Moscou.

“…Cette semaine, deux jours plus tard après l’incendie à Potapovsky, la commission interdépartementale de Vladimir Resin  a décidé de laisser en effet sans protection “la maison de Bykov”, “les chambres de Gur’ev”, ainsi que l’imprimerie dans le 1-er  Samotiotchny, 17, brûlee auparavant, – la seule construction réalisée de l’architecte mondialement connu El Lisitski. Le gouvernement de la ville laissant les incendiés sans la protection de la loi, ressemble au médecin qui a refusé l’aide à la personne avec les brûlures lourdes”. Rustam Rakhmatullin

http://izvestia.ru/moscow/article3136991/
http://jst-ru.livejournal.com/66435.html

Nous luttons avec cette tendance, mais, malheureusement, l’aide des amis européens n’est assez forte. Je vous serai reconnaissante si vous pouviez vous adressez aux institutions et aux gens que vous connaissez avec la demande d’envoyer les télégrammes ou des lettres au maire de Moscou et au ministre de la culture de la Russie pour poser une seule question: comment  est-il possible de detruire le bâtiment unique qui etait costruit d’apres les plans d’ El Lissitski, un des classiques de l’art constructiviste au monde?

Voici les adresses:

ALEXANDRE A. AVDEEV , le Ministre de la culture de lа Russie:
7/6, Malii Gnezdnikovski per.,125993,  GSP-3, Moscou
(Министр культуры РФ АВДЕЕВ А.А.
125993, ГСП-3, Москва, Малый Гнездниковский пер., д. 7/6, стр. 1,2)

Yurii Louzhkov, le maire de Moscou
13, rue Tverskaya
Moscou, 125032
(Мэр Москвы Юрий Лужков
13, Тверская ул. Москва 125032)

Merci a l’avance, je vous vous souhaite beaucoup de bonheur dans la nouvelle année,

Elena

Constructivism is one of the most exciting, important, productive, inventive avant-garde movements of the first half of the 20th century. It developed in many cities of the Soviet Union and not only in Moscow. Developments took place in Leningrad, in Ukraina, even in the Caucasus, and were connected to a series of contemporary movements. The founders of constructivism knew extremely well what was happening in Germany. In France, for instance they had contacts with most of the progressive and inventive architects and they presented their work to the Soviet audience at the time of the exhibition on the modern architecture they organized in the building of the Vkhutemas in 1927.
But constructivism had a peculiarity, if you look at the spectrum of all the movements that developed since the end of WWI. The constructivists had an aesthetic agenda, a technological agenda, but also, and maybe first of all, a social agenda. Constructivism aimed not only at changing architecture, at changing the range or the spectrum of building types, working on the communal houses, on worker’s clubs. Using the medium of architecture, constructivism aspired to contribute to the so-called cultural revolution, to contribute to what the bolscheviks then called “the reconstruction of everyday life”.

J.L. Cohen, interviewed by OK

Camera Frederic Fasano