конÑтруктивизм
Avant-garde journal design: Building Moscow [СтроительÑтво МоÑквы], 1927-1931
.
Below are some pretty stellar avant-garde journal designs by Gustav Klutsis, Vasilii Elkin, and El Lissitzky for the monthly architecture journal Building Moscow. It ran through the 1930s, but progressively became less and less modernist in terms of both form (layout, formatting) and content (projects, proposals) as time went on. Number eleven from the year 1928 shows Le Corbusier’s influential proposal for the Tsentrosoiuz, or central union administration building, in Moscow. Here he incorporated a number of elements from his League of Nations proposal, which had been rejected the previous year.
There’s also a note here that I’ve included from the fourth issue of  1929. Enjoy!
Журнал СтроительÑтво МоÑквы, неÑомненно, ÑтановитÑÑ Ð²Ñе более Ñодержательным. Им интереÑуютÑÑ ÑƒÐ¶Ðµ не только ÑпециалиÑÑ‚Ñ‹-Ñтроители и архитектора, но и широкие круги рабочей общеÑтвенноÑти. Ð’ Ñвете Ñтроительных задач МоÑквы — ответÑтвенноÑть органа МоÑÑовета вÑе более увеличиваетÑÑ. Continue reading
Panteleimon Golosov, Leningradskaia Pravda building in Moscow (1930-1935)
Panteleimon Golosov, 1932
The following is taken from the international art journal Docomomo. It is a serviceable enough text, if somewhat awkwardly translated from French. One gets a good sense of the project’s evolution from the remarks Forte makes, even if the context he provides is a bit superficial. Plus, he highlights a central point toward the end of this excerpt: cultural regression following upon political regression.
Repressed architecture: The Pravda publishing house in Moscow (1930-1935)
Riccardo Forte
Docomomo № 37
September 2007
.
The “heroic†building of the Pravda’s printing complex, sancta sanctorum of the communist doctrinal orthodoxy and ideological manifesto of Soviet power, was erected between 1930 and 1935 in the Muscovite district of Yamskoye Pole. Thanks to its symbolic content and programmatic commitment, it undeniably embodies an unrivaled episode in the history of modern architecture in Russia.
This prodigious building of colossal dimension, eulogistic icon of a new model of society which, forged upon the ideals of the Revolution, advancing towards the “glorious edification†of socialism and containing in its poetics of bold lines inspired by the vision of a civilisation machiniste, provided a most profound sense of that ideology of progress and aesthetics — a secular “religion of Utopia†— upon which the expectations of the modern movement were founded.
A manifesto of Utopia: The aesthetic search for the “supreme building”
.
In 1929 the Central Committee of the PCUS (Communist Party of the Soviet Union), in order to find a suitable solution for the growing production needs of the Pravda, the Bolshevik Party’s newspaper founded by V.I. Lenin in 1912, announced a national competition for a large-scale publishing house to serve as new headquarters for the newspaper, the regime’s official press organ. The plan for the editorial complex of the principal Soviet newspaper belonged in every respect to the vast modernization program which the Russian government embarked on in the mid-1920s. The period’s extraordinary intellectual effervescence and unprecedented creative fervor were such that the NEP (New Economic Policy) contributed in a decisive measure to the feverish construction activity in the public sector. Such activity was embodied by the realization of great infrastructures, services and industries, as well as in the creation of new organizational typologies, such as the “social condensers†(public housing, industrial  establishments, workers’ clubs), catalyzing centers of the new socialist culture, that are constitute the regime’s most significant experimental results.
The ambitious project launched by the Soviet leadership, whose intention was to emphasize symbolically their own hegemonic control of Russian society, simultaneously developing the device propaganda for the official party line from one boundary of the Union to the other, constituted for the avant-garde architects a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity and a formidable experimentation field for the new doctrinal directions and composition models that were formulated in those years. The competition’s prescriptions laid down that the functional units of administrative offices, newspaper offices and typographic works were to be integrated in a single large complex. The chosen site — today the area comprised between the Belorussky and Savyolovsky subway stations — was located in the Yamskoye Pole district, a strategic localization right in the city center, which at the time was still barely constructed. Continue reading
Narkomzem [Ðаркомзем] in Moscow, by Aleksei Shchusev (built 1928-1933)
Moisei Ginzburg, competition entry for the Palace of the Soviets (1931)
.
In previous posts, I’ve tried to give some sense of the magnitude of the international competition for the Palace of the Soviets project in Moscow. So far I’ve dealt with some of the entries by German architects such as Walter Gropius, Hannes Meyer, Erich Mendelsohn, and Hans Poelzig, as well as the Swiss architect Le Corbusier’s famous entry. This would turn out to be one of the last major Soviet competitions in which modernist proposals featured prominently. (Another competition, for the Commissariat of Heavy Industry [ÐаркомтÑжпром], took place in Moscow around 1933-1934, but only submissions from Soviet architects were considered).
Moisei Ginzburg was the chief theoretician and, besides the Vesnin brothers, probably the most accomplished practitioner of architectural constructivism in the Soviet Union. His project for the Palace of the Soviets, jointly carried out with A. Gassenpfliug and S. Lisagor under the supervision of A.F. Loleita, a specialist in matters of construction, and S.Ia. Lifshits, an acoustic technician. It was without a doubt one of his most futuristic proposals to date, almost resembling a landed spaceship faced toward the Kremlin.
One might perhaps compare it with his earlier submission to the 1922-1923 Palace of Labor competition, in terms of its scale and purpose, as the architectural historian Selim Khan-Magomedov has done. But formally, Ginzburg’s vision for the Palace of the Soviets was much more advanced. The multi-tiered central building was designed with stepped storeys parabolically curved upward toward a skylight crowning the dome. His scheme for its main thoroughfares and points of access would have accommodated huge crowds of visitors and personnel, with a series of platforms, ramps, and stairs expediting circulation into and out of the Palace.
Courtyards and terraces were to surround the different structures in the ensemble, with covered walkways connecting them to one another. Not only with respect to its internal composition was the Palace of the Soviets meant to be broadly accessible, either, as the building was easily open to approach from without. The variety of volumes included in Ginzburg’s plan may have clashed stylistically with the preexisting urban fabric of Moscow, but it would have been spatially integrated rather elegantly.
A few paragraphs pertaining to Ginzburg’s Palace of the Soviets appear below in the original Russian, extracted  from Khan-Magomedov’s book on Moisei Ginzburg. See also his excellent Narkomfin building.
ПоиÑки новых типов общеÑтвенных зданий в первом периоде творчеÑтва Гинзбурга завершаютÑÑ ÐºÐ¾Ð½ÐºÑƒÑ€Ñным проектом Дворца Советов (1932 г.), который выполнÑлÑÑ Ð¸Ð¼ ÑовмеÑтно Ñ Ð. ГаÑÑенпфлюгом и С. ЛиÑагором при конÑультации Ð.Ф. Лолейта (конÑтрукциÑ) и С.Я. Лифшица (акуÑтика). По маÑштабу и роли в анÑамбле центра МоÑквы Дворец Советов Ñравним Ñ Ð”Ð²Ð¾Ñ€Ñ†Ð¾Ð¼ труда (ÐºÐ¾Ð½ÐºÑƒÑ€Ñ 1922-1923 гг.). Близка даже в какой-то мере и программа Ñтих зданий (большой и малый залы и Ñ‚. д.). Ð¡Ñ€Ð°Ð²Ð½Ð¸Ð²Ð°Ñ Ð²Ñ‹Ð¿Ð¾Ð»Ð½ÐµÐ½Ð½Ñ‹Ðµ Гинзбургом проекты Дворца труда и Дворца Советов, разделенные вÑего девÑтью годами видно, какой большой и Ñложный творчеÑкий путь прошел их автор. Объемно-проÑтранÑÑ‚Ð²ÐµÐ½Ð½Ð°Ñ ÐºÐ¾Ð¼Ð¿Ð¾Ð·Ð¸Ñ†Ð¸Ñ Ð”Ð²Ð¾Ñ€Ñ†Ð° Советов необычна по трактовке Ð´Ð»Ñ Ð¿Ñ€ÐµÐ´Ñ‹Ð´ÑƒÑ‰ÐµÐ³Ð¾ творчеÑтва Гинзбурга. Как правило, в более ранних проектах он иÑпользовал два композиционных приема: членение Ð·Ð´Ð°Ð½Ð¸Ñ Ð½Ð° отдельные корпуÑа, Ñоединенные крытыми переходами (павильонный тип), или Ñоздание Ñложной композиции из Ñоединенных между Ñобой различных по форме и величине объемов. Continue reading
Moisei Ginzburg, Gosstrakh apartment complex in Moscow (1926)
.
Photos and floor plans of Ginzburg’s famous housing mass (zhil’massiv) in Moscow.
Moisei Ginzburg, Gosstrakh apartment building in Moscow (1926), under construction
Moisei Ginzburg, Gosstrakh apartment building in Moscow (1926), view from the rooftop, photo 1927
Moisei Ginzburg, Gosstrakh apartment building in Moscow (1926), view from the rooftop, photo 1927
Moisei Ginzburg, Gosstrakh apartment building in Moscow (1926), early photograph
Moisei Ginzburg, Gosstrakh apartment building in Moscow (1926), early photograph
Vladimirov, V. Exterior view of the house-commune for State Insurance (Gosstrakh) employees showing the ground floor boarded up, 21 Malaia Bronnaia Street, Moscow, 1927 or later
Moisei Ginzburg, Gosstrakh apartment building in Moscow (1926), early photograph