“STORMY APPLAUSE, EVERYONE GETS UP”: FOREIGN GUESTS AT THE FIRST ALL-UNION CONGRESS OF THE SOVIET ARCHITECTS
Authors: Конышева Е.В. 
Published: January 2022

Статья посвящена участию зарубежных архитекторов в Первом съезде советских архитекторов в 1937 г. Задачами публикации поставлены, во-первых, реконструкция подготовки и участия иностранных делегатов в форуме, во-вторых, анализ оценки зарубежными мастерами советской архитектуры 1930-х гг., представленной в их докладах, и, в-третьих, выявление специфики медийной интерпретации докладов иностранных специалистов. Публикация основана, прежде всего, на анализе документов Союза советских архитекторов и Всесоюзного общества культурной связи с заграницей (ВОКС), хранящихся в российских архивах. Для реализации этих задач в статье рассмотрена несколько ключевых аспектов. В первой части публикации показана специфика международных связей Союза советских архитекторов, цели и формы международных контактов. Рассмотрены принципы подбора потенциальных зарубежных делегатов съезда и показана ключевая задача - демонстрация интереса к съезду первых лиц мировой архитектуры и громкий международный резонанс. Реконструирован сам процесс отбора и приглашения иностранных специалистов и его результаты. Во второй части статьи проанализированы доклады иностранных гостей и выявлены те проблемы, которые видели зарубежные специалисты в советской архитектуре. Показано, как доклады иностранных гостей подвергались цензуре при освещении их в советской профессиональной прессе. В качестве итога представлен тезис, что ни съезд, ни участие в нем иностранных гостей не получили широкого резонанса за рубежом. Участие небольшого числа зарубежных архитекторов в съезде не принесло желаемого результата - утверждения СССР как мирового архитектурного центра. Профессиональный взгляд зарубежных специалистов на проблемы советской архитектуры не был воспринят и оценен, а их участие рассматривалось организаторами исключительно с точки зрения укрепления международного имиджа советской архитектуры.
The article is focused on the participation of foreign architects in the First Congress of the Soviet Architects in 1937. The objectives of the publication are, at first, the reconstruction of the preparation and participation of foreign delegates in the forum, secondly, the analysis of the evaluation by foreign masters of Soviet architecture of the 1930s, presented in their reports, and, thirdly, the specificity of the media interpretation of foreign experts’ reports. The publication is based, primarily, on the analysis of documents of the Union of Soviet Architects and the All-Union Society for Cultural Relations with Foreign Countries (VOKS) stored in Russian archives. They are compared with official documents, publications in the Soviet and foreign professional periodicals, and with sources of personal origin. The first part of the publication considers the specifics of the international relations of the Union of Soviet Architects, the goals and types of international contacts. It is alleged that the Soviet architecture of the 1930s was not isolated and there was a mutual interest and desire to maintain professional ties between the Western and Soviet architectural communities. At the same time, in the international activities of the Union of Architects, there were two key aspects: first, the study of Western practice and exchange of experience; second, the propaganda of achievements of Soviet architecture abroad, and it was the later aspect, which played a dominant role. In this context, the principles of selection of potential foreign delegates to the Congress are considered and the key task is shown - demonstration of interest to the Congress of the premier persons of world architecture and loud international resonance. The process of selection and invitation of foreign specialists and its results have been reconstructed. It was demonstrated that the Union of Soviet Architects focused its attention on inviting “the most outstanding masters”, regardless of their views, and this approach opposed the anti-modernist discourse within the Soviet professional field. Among the preferable persons for participation at the Soviet congress, there were such leaders of modernism architecture as Le Corbusier, J. J.P. Oud, W. Gropius, L. Mies van der Rohe, L. Hilberseimer, B. Taut, and others. At the same time, a tribute was given to F. L.Wright, H. van de Velde, P. Behrens, H. Poelzig and other representatives of a wide range of architectural trends. The article also considers other motives of the leaders of the Union of Soviet Architects, which determined the choice for a particular candidate. The final list of foreign participants of 28 persons was approved by the supreme power - the Politburo of the Central Committee of the AUCP(b), but only 18 foreign architects took part in the Congress, among whom were F. L. Wright, A. Lurcat, F. Jourdain, and others. The second part of the article analyzes reports of foreign guests (F. L. Wright, F. Jourdain, A. Lurcat, S. Breines, M. Lods, and others) and identifies problems that foreign experts saw in Soviet architecture. First of all, they spoke about the "formalism" of the new Soviet architecture, the eclecticism and irrelevance of its language. They saw the reason for this in the primacy of the artistic and aesthetic principle in Soviet architecture, generated by the separation of the profession of an architect from the engineering profession, design from construction and industry, and artistic imagination from functional feasibility and technical capability. In turn, Soviet architects in their reports criticized Western architecture for the priority of function and technology over the “architectural image”. The article shows in detail how the critical reports of foreign guests were censored when translated into Russian and entered into publications of the professional literature. Finally, the author presents the thesis that neither the Congress nor the participation of foreign guests in it has received wide resonance abroad. The participation of a small number of foreign architects at the Congress did not bring the desired result - the establishment of the USSR as a world architectural center. The professional opinion of foreign specialists on the problems of Soviet architecture was not received and appreciated, and their participation was considered solely from the point of view of strengthening the international image of Soviet architecture.