Nauka Science

Nadiia Antonenko* Olga Deriabina** orcid.org/0000-0001-9047-3669 orcid.org/0000-0002-3478-2544

Preservation of Monuments of in (1990–2010) Ochrona zabytków architektury nowoczesnej na Ukrainie (1990–2010)

Keywords: monument protection activity, Ukrainian Słowa kluczowe: działania konserwatorskie, Modernism, the monument of modern architecture, modernizm ukraiński, zabytek architektury , DOCOMOMO nowoczesnej, Derżprom, DOCOMOMO

Introduction Due to the significant stagnation of preservation processes, most of the pieces of Ukrainian modern The global experience of preserving the heritage of architecture are in critical condition—thousands of modern architecture dates back to the period between unique modern buildings and structures are destroyed the 1940s and the 1970s, of the postwar rethinking of and disappear every year. In addition, the region- the value of cultural heritage, when systematic work al non-recognition of the value of of the twentieth- for identification and documentation of monuments century architecture significantly affected the status of of modern architecture began in and the Ukrainian avant-garde and Modernism of the So- the United States against the background of the trium- viet era in world rankings. phant progress of the international style.1 In Ukraine, Meanwhile, it should be noted that during the years the issue of the need to preserve modern architectural of independence, the growth of general interest in the heritage was brought up much later. The first modern future of Ukrainian modern architecture was still ob- monuments began to be included in the State Regis- served—both among scholars and ordinary citizens. ter of Immovable Landmarks of Ukraine only in the From time to time, thematic conferences and work- 2000s. The process unfolded so slowly that the pieces shops were held in the cities, interdisciplinary research of modern architecture still make up a small share of was conducted, books were published, public organ- the register among other landmarks. The Ukrainian izations were established to take care of the preserva- Branch of DOCOMOMO (International Committee tion of individual landmarks, excursions, exhibitions, for Documentation and Conservation of Buildings, and non-academic educational events were organized. Sites, and Neighborships of the Modern Movement) Up to this day, this kaleidoscope of events has not been was established only in 2012, although the global or- studied, but it is important to identify a real social in- ganization was founded and has been operating effec- terest in the preservation of the architecture and the tively since 1988 in over 80 countries of the world. capability of the cultural field to provide it.

* Ph.D., National University of Construction and Architecture * dr, Kijowski Narodowy Uniwersytet Budownictwa ** Ph.D., National University of Civil Engineering and i Architektury Architecture ** dr, Charkowski Narodowy Uniwersytet Budownictwa i Architektury

Cytowanie / Citation: Antonentko N., Deriabina O. Preservation of Monuments of Modern Architecture in Ukraine (1990–2010). Wiadomości Konserwatorskie – Journal of Heritage Conservation 2020, 62:7–15

Otrzymano / Received: 29.06.2020 • Zaakceptowano / Accepted: 15.07.2020 doi: 10.48234/WK62UKRAINE Praca dopuszczona do druku po recenzjach Article accepted for publishing after reviews

Wiadomości Konserwatorskie • Journal of Heritage Conservation • 62/2020 7 This study aims to analyze the achievements of and B. Yerofalov13 play a special part; they give a sys- monument protection activities concerning the archi- tematic idea of the role of monuments of architecture tectural heritage of the twentieth century in Ukraine and urban planning in the context of the development during 1990–2010, the results of which may become of Ukrainian Modern monument protection activities. the basis for further development of programs of meas- ures to protect the heritage of modern architecture. Prerequisites for the Formation of the Concept The study is based on the methods of historical and of Ukrainian Modern Architecture as genetic research, which allows us to identify the histor- a Cultural Heritage Site (1970–1980) ical sequence of events in the field of protection of the heritage of modern architecture and urban planning The processes of forming concepts of the monuments and to establish its periodization. The actual basis of of Modern architecture, which began in the USSR in the study is the chronicle of the organizational efforts the late 1960s and were completed in 1990 with the of the professional community and the public, which participation of a delegation of Soviet scientists at the were aimed at uniting advocates of the new architec- constituent First International DOCOMOMO INT. ture and the preservation of key architectural monu- Conference,14 were interrupted by Ukraine gaining in- ments of the twentieth century in Ukraine. The great- dependence. The preservation of Soviet heritage prop- est cultural value is the architecture of the so-called erty seemed inappropriate amid exposing some tragic Ukrainian avant-garde Modernism, the birthplace of historical facts concealed by the Soviet government which was Kharkiv.2 regarding Stalin’s terror, collectivization and artificial famines in the 1920s and 1930s, the fate of State of knowledge in the Second World War during 1939–1945 and the years after it, the persecution of Ukrainian dissidents in In the modern research field, there are practically no the 1960s and the of 1986. works devoted to understanding the formation of The process of forming Ukrainian national identity the practice of preservation of Modernist architec- was just unfolding, and cultural meanings were mixed ture in Ukraine. Thus, one of the leading promoters with political and historical contexts, as in Germany of the Ukrainian avant-garde, Professor O. Bouryak3 after the Second World War. Soviet architecture was analyses the current state and prospects of Ukrainian perceived by Ukrainian society in a range of attitudes— . He believes that the preservation of from aggressive illustrative propaganda of the totalitari- the Ukrainian avant-garde is possible only within the an regime to outdated architecture.15 framework of a large and long-term (and quite costly) In the 1990s, avant-garde architecture was of in- cultural and information project, as the problem lies terest only to some local historians who were inter- not so much in the field of monument protection, but ested in the history of their native lands and collected in knowledge and theoretical field—there are issues photographic and factual materials. Most publications of style attribution, confusion within the conceptual and articles were the result of search and collections framework. S. Smolenska in her study4 highlighted as far back as Soviet times.16 Only at the end of the the key issues of development of preservation efforts century the first suggestions for the renovation of an and analyzed the Register of Immovable Landmarks avant-garde building—the building of Derzhprom on of Ukraine for monuments of Modern architecture; in Kharkiv—were voiced in inner and also briefly described the period between 1990s academic circles. and the 2010s as the final stage in the loss of authen- ticity of Ukrainian Modernism. P. Rychkov considers STAGES OF FORMATION OF THE PRACTICE the outstanding objects of Kharkiv constructivism and OF PRESERVATION OF MODERN emphasizes the need to preserve not individual monu- ARCHITECTURE MONUMENTS ments, but Kharkiv as the „capital of constructivism” as IN UKRAINE a whole.5 P. Vesel6 attempted to compare the processes of Ukrainian monument protection in the preservation Stage 1. Interest in the Kharkiv Derzhprom buil- of modern architecture with the European ones. In the ding: beginning of the discussion on preserva- 7 context of the topic studied, the work of I. Kreiser is tion of the Ukrainian avant-garde (2000–2005) also relevant, who, unlike others, describes the devel- opment of interest in Ukrainian modern architecture, highlighting the most important turning points in In 2000 suggestions for restoration of the Derzhprom Kharkiv in the 1990s–early 2000s. Important research building (Fig. 1) were supported by the management works that allow the study of Ukrainian Modern ar- of the then Kharkiv Regional State Administration. chitecture in general, despite the historical affiliation The Head of the Administration personally addressed of Ukrainian lands with the territories of different the President of the Ukrainian Branch of ICOMOS states, are the works of O. Remeshilo-Rybchynska,8 L. Prybega with a request to establish an Internation- O. Mykhailyshyn, S. Linda S.,9 M. Pszczółkowski,10 Yu. al Council to recognize the Derzhprom building as a Bogdanova.11 Works of theorists N. Kondel-Perminova12 monument of international importance, and in May

8 Wiadomości Konserwatorskie • Journal of Heritage Conservation • 62/2020 mained in under-repaired condition with exposed con- crete walls with no plaster. The indifference of the city authorities to the future of the Derzhprom building was criticized at the public hearings „Anniversary View of Kharkiv.” The hearings were attended by the Head of the Department of Architecture and Restoration of the Faculty of Architecture of the Gdańsk University of Technology R. Cielątkowska, who was upset by the inaction of the Kharkiv city authorities and the slow- Fig. 1. Derzhprom Building, Kharkiv, 2016; photo by http://ukraina- 17 incognita.com/kharkivska-oblast/kharkiv/kharkiv-derzhprom-u-svi- down in the monument protection process. Howev- tovii-spadshchyni-yunesko. er, the activity of scientists did not lead to any practical changes—the movement for the preservation of the Derzhprom building and other modern monuments 2000 the regional expert commission for the technical gradually stopped. support of the Derzhprom building with the support of ICOMOS began operating. Stage 2. Ukrainian architecturalists joining the Restoration work on the building began under global discussion on the goals and prospects of the supervision of architect V. Novgorodov in 2003. protection of architectural heritage of the twen- It consisted of the restoration of exterior trim of the tieth century (2005–2007) walls—plaster, replacement of window blocks and stained-glass stairwells, fencing of parapets on roofs, During this period, higher educational institutions and balconies. added studies of the history of Ukrainian avant-garde Because the site was not included in the protection architecture to the state budget subjects of research registers and did not have the status of a monument, programs and curriculums of vocation-oriented uni- and there was no experience in the restoration of mod- versities.18 Among the highlights of these years was the ern buildings in Ukraine (in Soviet times, a few mod- participation of Ukrainian scientists in international ern buildings were restored only in the Russian Fed- events—in France, , and Poland. In December eration—e.g., ZIL Palace of Culture designed by the 2005, Professor O. Buryak took part in a workshop in ), the restoration did not involve care- Paris, organized by DOCOMOMO together with the ful selection of measures to preserve the authenticity of Department of Architecture and Heritage of the Min- the Derzhprom building. The selected plaster did not istry of Culture and Communications of France and even have any visual resemblance to the original stuc- the Center for Advanced Studies, which was dedicated co, the new window systems had a simplified geometry to the history and rehabilitation of European work- of profiles and filling with modern double-glazed win- men’s clubs. It was there that Professor O. Bouryak dows, and stained-glass systems were replaced by large met the then Head of DOCOMOMO M. Kashiato, single-glazed windows. A potential globally important who offered to establish a branch of her organization in monument was placed at risk. This catalyzed discus- Ukraine. Upon returning home, the Professor began sions on the need to give the building the legal status working in that direction. of a monument and introduce alternative restoration In 2006, the Ukrainian delegation took part in the solutions to the current project. International Scientific Conference „Heritage in Risk: In 2004, the first international research-to-practice Preservation of the 20th-Century Architecture and conference „Constructivism in Ukraine” was held World Heritage” in , which was jointly organ- in Kharkiv, organized by the Ukrainian Branch of ized by the ICOMOS, DOCOMOMO, and the World the ICOMOS together with the Kharkiv State Tech- Monuments Fund. Over 170 specialists from 30 coun- nical University of Construction and Architecture tries attended the conference. At the end of the event, (KhDTUBA). Among the foreign guests, the con- the Moscow Declaration on the Preservation of the 20th-Century ference was attended by Polish scientists, with whom Cultural Heritage was drawn up, which recognized the Kharkiv scientists had established close working rela- outstanding contribution of the Soviet avant-garde of tions a few years before the event. The results of the the 1920s and 1930s to global culture.19 It became a call conference were a resolution to present the Derzhprom to the leadership of the post-Soviet countries to launch building as a nomination for inclusion in the UNESCO state programs of international cooperation in the field World Heritage List and strong recommendations to the of historical and architectural research, restoration and management of JSC „Derzhprom” and municipal bod- protection of architectural monuments of the twentieth ies to revise the project. The requirements for the pro- century, including the creation of transnational projects ject were met only in a fragmented way—the authentic with CIS countries to include prominent avant-garde plaster was partially restored and the central stained glass monuments to the World Heritage List. windows on the main stairwells were replaced. Since 2007, Ukrainian academics became regular In December 2005, the restoration was abruptly participants of the International Conference in Gdynia suspended due to lack of funding and the building re- —„Modernism in Europe—Modernism in Gdynia,”

Wiadomości Konserwatorskie • Journal of Heritage Conservation • 62/2020 9 3). The Cinema, as well as the Derzhprom building of the day, appeared to be exposed to a new developer that intended to demolish it since it had no protection status. In 2010, Zaporizhia artist Yu. Barannik started to hold exhibitions dedicated to Zaporizhia construc- tivism in his art space „LENIN” (later, „Barannik”). He brought together like-minded people who initiated themed tours, as well as managed to include prominent pieces of the Zaporizhia avant-garde to the local lists of immovable landmarks. At the same time, O. Burlaka launched the Local Modernisms Project, dedicated to facilities built in between the 1960s and the 1980s in post-Soviet countries, initiated by the Austrian Curator Fig. 2. Old terminal of Kharkiv Airport after the restoration б 2017; G. Schöllhammer, which was supported by the Visual photo by O. Deriabina. Culture Research Center of the National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy. which later turned into one of the world’s most author- A showcase event that demonstrated the degree itative platforms for discussing current issues and pros- of involvement of the general public in the process of pects for the preservation of Modern monuments. preservation of modern monuments was the public discussion „Architectural Heritage of the Twentieth Stage 3. Preparation for the Euro 2012 Century: from Preservation to Use,” organized by K. Football Cup as a catalyst for monument Dmytrenko sponsored by Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung, protection processes (2008–2011) which took place in Kyiv Architect’s House in May 2011 on the occasion of the opening of the exhibi- Works on restoration of the Derzhprom building fa- tion „Constructivism and in Kyiv: cades were resumed in 2009 under public financing in 1924–1941–1954.”20 The discussion was devoted to the preparation for the Euro 2012 Football Cup. The mu- practical issues of using the monuments of the archi- nicipality initiated an architectural competition for the tectural heritage of the twentieth century in modern construction of a hotel within the complex of Freedom Kyiv. It was attended by theorists of architecture and Square on the site of a small park. culture researchers, historians, representatives of pub- Teachers and students of the Kharkiv State Techni- lic organizations, enthusiasts. cal University of Construction and Architecture were In June 2011, at the initiative of scientists of Kh- involved in the development of the program and par- DTUBA and the Lviv Polytechnic, an organizational ticipated in the competition. However, eventually, it meeting of the Ukrainian Branch of DOCOMOMO turned out that the competition was simulated and the took place in Kharkiv after six years of preparation, offer that was investment-attractive for the developer which served to consolidate professionals and the public was chosen, which did not have any theoretical justifi- not indifferent to the preservation of Ukrainian mon- cation of the concept—it destroyed the integrity of the uments of Modern architecture and the intensification square’s architectural complex with its scope in a pseu- of protection processes in Ukraine. The first two con- do-constructive way. The matter did not cause public ferences of the Ukrainian Branch of DOCOMOMO resistance, and in 2010 the hotel was built. „Ukrainian Architectural Avant-Garde. Definition and At the same time, also within the framework of con- Protection” and „Architecture of Ukraine. 1955–1975. struction for Euro-2012, Kharkiv University took part Second Wave of Modernism” took place in 2012 and in another project for the restoration of the old terminal 2013 in Kharkiv. Due to the conferences, Ukrainian of Kharkiv Airport (Fig. 2). Unlike the first one, it was modernist architecture became known to the world completed, and the authenticity of the monument of scientific community—they were attended by schol- Soviet architecture of the postwar period was preserved. ars from France, Finland, Germany, the United States, the Netherlands, Russia, Spain, and other countries. Stage 4. Establishment of the Ukrainian The measures also had a positive impact at the com- branch of DOCOMOMO and development of munity level. Roundtables with foreign experts, which a program approach to the preservation were devoted to, among other issues, the future of the of modern monuments (2011–2013) Derzhprom building, intensified the process of inclu- sion of the facility into the national register and the Gradually, the history of individual pieces of Soviet ar- tentative UNESCO World Heritage List. The region- chitecture and its aesthetics began to attract local his- al department of architecture started preparing docu- torians, non-academic researchers, public activists, and ments for the inclusion of the Derzhprom building in ordinary citizens. During 2006–2014, a rally to defend the national register. the Zhovten Cinema in Kyiv took place, initiated by the The invasion of the territory of Donetsk and Luhansk Cinema directorate and local public organizations (Fig. regions by Russian troops and the occupation of

10 Wiadomości Konserwatorskie • Journal of Heritage Conservation • 62/2020 in 2014 limited the possibility of holding mass events involving foreigners. DOCOMOMO Ukraine’s activ- ities were suspended until 2017. Later, during the period from 2017 to 2019, three international conferences of DOCOMOMO Ukraine were held in Kharkiv, but they no longer had such wide international publicity. Meanwhile, higher education institutions continued to study the architecture of the twentieth century and cooperate in other interna- tional projects. Thus, during 2016–2019, the Kharkiv and Odesa National Universities of Construction and Fig. 3. Zhovten Cinema in Kyiv after the restoration, 2015; photo Architecture took part in the research and education- by https://uk.wikipedia.org/. al project „Unloved Heritage of the ‘Socialist City‘? Strategies for Planning Sustainable Urban Develop- ment of Large Settlements from the 1960s and 1970s” Ukraine and the of Ukraine, attract- with the support of Volkswagenstiftung, which aimed ing the attention of international monument protection to study areas of large scale residential development in organizations, as well as legal proceedings.23 In 2018, post-Soviet countries.21 according to the court decision, the results of the „ten- der” were canceled, as well as the decision to start con- Stage 5. Stagnation of monument protection struction work; the claims of the municipal authorities processes through new socio-political conditions were also not sustained. This action became an inspir- in Ukraine and inclusion in the processes ing example of community victory over a corrupt state of the Ukrainian community (2014–2015) system. Due to the protest campaign, the process of the Derzhprom building’s inscription onto the State Register The events of 2014 affected the cohesion of civil society of Immovable Monuments of Ukraine was accelerated, in the general and inspired establishment of public or- and in January 2018 the Derzhprom building became ganizations, the activities of which were aimed at solv- a monument of national importance, which allowed it ing problems related to the development of Ukrainian to be included on the Tentative UNESCO World Her- cities. One of the focuses of such organizations was itage List. The process of the further promotion of the the preservation of Ukrainian architectural heritage, in Derzhprom building to the World Heritage List in 2019 particular the architecture of the twentieth century. was again deadlocked due to systemic reasons by the An additional incentive for activists was the adop- operation of departments of the Ministry of Culture tion in 2015 of Law On the Condemnation of the Com- of Ukraine. munist and National Socialist (Nazi) Regimes, and Prohi- Another positive example of the victory of bition of Propaganda of Their Symbols, which required Ukrainian public activists was the preservation of public discussions with the involvement of general the UkrISTEI building (the so-called „Dish”) (Fig. public to define the boundaries of the concept „com- 4). In 2017, the #savekyivmodernism initiative group munist symbols” when it came to the loss of 70 years’ was formed in Kyiv, the members of which decided piece of .22 In parallel with the to unite to exercise public control over the condition discussions, various educational initiatives aimed at of prominent buildings of Ukrainian Modernism raising awareness of the value of twentieth-century of 1960–1985. During 2017–2019, they conducted a architecture began to develop among the population, protection campaign, which involved the author of such as themed tours, public lectures, organization of the project—architect F. Yur’yiv, and with the wide educational events (e.g., the educational program of support of the Ukrainian architectural community as Living History Studios Soviet Past of Ukraine: Forget or well as the international community, an alternative Remember, 2017). restoration project was developed for the building, In 2017, events took place that became another cat- the main purpose of which was to recreate the original alyst for protection processes aimed at preserving the appearance of the institute and preserve the concert Derzhprom building. The reason was the initiative of hall with unique acoustics. the Kharkiv municipality to hold a pseudo-tender and Projects with involvement of the community, ded- install a huge pseudo-classical column in the middle icated to research and activities to preserve the archi- of the Modernist Freedom Square, in front of the tectural heritage of the twentieth century started to be Derzhprom building, which was immediately popu- developed in the territory of Ukraine. In 2018, Ukrain- larly called „scarecrow.” Non-governmental organi- ian artists and cultural researchers from Uzhhorod, zations NGO „City Reforms,” NGO „Kharkiv Anti- Kharkiv, and Kyiv proposed nominating the central Corruption Center” and architect-activist B. Volynskiy modernist quarter of Maly Gagaliv in Uzhhorod to the held a campaign to protect Freedom Square, which World Heritage List. That same year, research of the included protests, the involvement of regional and Sixth Village (Socialist City) in Zaporizhia was started, national media, appeals to the Ministry of Culture of aimed at the development of scientific and design doc-

Wiadomości Konserwatorskie • Journal of Heritage Conservation • 62/2020 11 ways unique, always associated with a certain era, with certain artists. Every monument is destroyed forever, wounded forever.”25 B. Yerofalov considered the reason for the decline of monument protection in Ukraine was the rudimentary nature of the mechanisms inherited from Soviet times, where centralized management, budget (state) money was spent primarily on the registration of monuments (description, research, to a lesser extent, cataloging), and then on one-time repair (restoration). However, this only led to the decline of the industry, as the life of the monument could be maintained only when it was included in the financial and economic systems.26 Fig. 4. Visualization of the restored UkrINTEI building in Kyiv, N. Kondel-Perminova developed these concepts about 2019; project of #savekyivmodernism initiative group; photo by the systematic organization of monument protection, https://pragmatika.media/news/v-otkrytom-dostupe-pojavilsja-pro- ekt-rekonstrukcii-kievskoj-tarelki/. considering the monument of architecture and urban planning as an immovable antique, which involved in- teraction of three areas—culture, law, and finance. She umentation for the inclusion of the Sixth Village in the proposed adaptation and implementation of American tentative UNESCO World Heritage List. national programs to recreate the uniqueness of his- Outside the framework of higher education es- torical cities. Prospects for gradual and simultaneous tablishments, in 2017, Zaporizhia hosted the Inter- deployment in four directions: design (improvement national Conference „Universality of the Phenomena of the appearance of urban areas through the restora- of Zaporizhia Modernism and the School. Is- tion of buildings and structures, construction of new sues of Modernist Heritage Preservation.” The confer- buildings and landscaping); organization (reaching a ence was held as a part of the large-scale project „Bau- consensus between all stakeholders); promotion (ad- haus – ,” which included an exhibition at vertising of monuments to attract buyers, potential the „Barannik” Gallery, the project „My Socialist City” investors, business); economic restructuring (strength- from the NGO „Garden City,” as well as a workshop ening the economic base of the area, creating new op- on the revitalization of urban settlement (micro rayon) portunities).27 involving Ukrainian and German students. The project Because of this, ensuring the preservation of the was organized by the Consulate General of Germany in heritage of Ukrainian modern architecture is possible Donetsk in partnership with the NGO „Urban Forms upon condition that, on the one hand, a normal archi- Center,” the „Barannik” Gallery, and Professor Thom- tectural market with all functioning channels of repro- as Flierl. The conference resulted in the opening of the duction of architectural professionalism is developed, Zaporizhzhya Constructivism Museum. and on the other hand, monument protection activi- An important event in 2019 was the publication ties based on outdated principles of centralized man- of a book by non-academic researchers O. Bykov and agement inherited from the Soviet system are restruc- Ie. Gubkina Soviet Modernism. Brutalism. Postmodernism. tured. Fulfillment of these requirements will ensure Buildings and Structures in Ukraine of 1955–1991, the the sustainability of procedures for the identification, main purpose of which was the attempt to rethink the selection, and protection of architectural monuments, period in global historical and political contexts. The and the protection of monuments will be less depend- study was the first attempt to inventory the architec- ent on current political, social, and economic process- ture of Ukrainian postwar Modernism.24 In 2020, the es. Among the key measures, the following should be authors are in the process of preparation of a large-scale mentioned: exhibition dedicated to the history of Ukrainian archi- • conducting historical, architectural and multidis- tecture, where considerable attention will be paid to ciplinary studies of of the the architecture of the twentieth century. twentieth century; • the popularization of scientific knowledge about Prospects for further development of the modern monuments in Ukraine and abroad, con- domestic system of inventory and preservation ducting PR campaigns, publishing topic-specific of Modern architectural heritage directories, manuals, books, organizing excursions, public lectures, discussions with the involvement Today the architectural heritage of the twentieth cen- of government officials and foreign experts; tury in Ukraine requires special attention from the • publication and regular updating of professional state and the community—thousands of potential educational literature—textbooks for architectural monuments of modern architecture continue to be and humanities universities; development of edu- destroyed and lose their authenticity annually. „Their cational programs aimed at educating students— losses are irreparable, since cultural monuments are al- courses, summer schools, extracurricular activities;

12 Wiadomości Konserwatorskie • Journal of Heritage Conservation • 62/2020 • development of municipal development programs overcoming many archaic remnants in the organ- taking into account the potential of modern archi- ization of architectural research and training of ar- tectural monuments in strengthening the cultural chitects – the inheritance of politically dependent attractiveness of the area; Soviet mechanisms of selection of monuments and • decentralization of inventory processes and creation their inclusion in monument protection registers, of an authoritative consulting scientific institution with the slow general development of monument based on existing ones (departments of specialized protection activities in the years of independence, universities or DOCOMOMO Ukraine), which the low general level of public responsibility, insuf- could control the quality of processes and provide ficient popularization of knowledge about the cul- methodological, technical and professional advice; tural significance of the architectural heritage of the • development and deployment of inventory pro- nineteenth and the twentieth century, and a whole grams of various topics and scope (since there has range of interrelated national economic, social, cul- been an increase in the role of non-professional tural and political issues. structures in recent years, it will be appropriate to 2. Five stages of formation of monument protection introduce methods similar to the inventory pro- practice aimed at preserving the modern archi- grams of the Netherlands, which involved a wide tectural heritage in Ukraine have been identified, network of volunteers and third parties); deployment of which depended on the interest of • documentation of monuments and their complexes state bodies in the restoration of certain structures following modern standards of international mon- as image projects, local history and scientific re- ument protection organizations; search by individual scholars, enthusiasts, interest • based on the accumulation of scientific knowledge in the issue of public organizations, diverse inter- and the results of inventories, the inclusion of the action with foreign scientists and relevant interna- monuments of modern architecture and urban tional organizations. planning in the monument protection registers— 3. It is proposed to further develop some tasks that local, state, UNESCO World Heritage List. would ensure the institutional effectiveness and systemic integrity of all work related to the study Conclusions and protection of the entire national heritage of Modern architecture: deployment of a system of 1. It was found that the inclusion of the concepts historical, architectural and multidisciplinary stud- about the monuments of modern architecture in ies; formation of a decentralized inventory system Ukraine was associated with the delay of some re- for study and preservation of the monuments of forms in Ukraine that would have a positive impact Modern architecture; development of municipal on the functioning of the entire system of architec- development programs; initiation and development tural and urban planning activities, including on of pedagogical and educational programs.

References / Bibliografia

Source texts / Teksty źródłowe architecture and urban planning in the modern socio-cul- Antonenko Nadiia, Monument of modern architecture in tural context „Modern Problems of Research, Resto- the context of architectural culture of the second half of the ration and Preservation of Cultural Heritage” 2008, twentieth century, Ph.D. Thesis, Kharkiv 2019, p. 240. No. 5, p. 94–111. Bouryak Alexander, Rusanova Mariia, Why the magnif- Kondel-Perminova Nataliia, Preservation of architectural icent architecture of early Ukrainian modernism is little and urban heritage of Ukraine in the context of urban de- known in the world and is not popular in Ukraine, Archi- velopment, „Modern Problems of Research, Restora- tecture of the 20th century research and populariza- tion and Preservation of Cultural Heritage” 2009, tion in Gdynia and Europe, Modernizm w Europie No. 6, p. 92–116. – modernizm w Gdyni, Gdynia 2019. Kreiser Iryna, The Fate of the State Industry in Our Hands, Cherkasova Ekaterina, The public value of the architectural Bulletin of the KhDAMG, 2008, No. 12, p. 82–86. heritage of the Soviet avant-garde. Methods of preserving Paper for the Proceedings of International Conference objects of architecture and urban planning, „Problems Of „Heritage at Risk. Preservation of 20th Century Theory And 2008”, No. 8, Architecture and World Heritage” Moscow, April p. 128–135. 17–20 2006. Erofalov Boris, Post-Soviet city, Kyiv 2002, p. 112. Remeshylo-Rybchynska Olena, Baev Andrij, Rybchyn- Gubkina Yevgeniya, Soviet modernism. Brutalism. sky Adrian, On the problem of preserving the heritage of Post-modernism. Buildings and structures in Ukraine residential architecture of functionalism in Lviv, „Bulletin 1955–1991, Kyiv 2020, p. 258. of the National University Lviv Polytechnic” 2013, Kondel-Perminova Nataliia, Integration of monuments of No. 757, p. 310–314.

Wiadomości Konserwatorskie • Journal of Heritage Conservation • 62/2020 13 Rychkov Pyotr, Kharkov as a capital of Soviet-Ukrainian ence, Eindhoven, September 12–15, 1990, p. 33. modernism, „TEKA Komisji Architektury. Urbanistyki Cherkes Bogdan, National identity in the architecture of the i Studiów Krajobrazowych” 2008, vol. IV A, p. 116–133. city, Lviv 2008, p. 268. Smolenskaya Svitlana, Architecture of avant-garde mod- Engel Barbara (ed.), Mass Housing in the Socialist City. ernism in Ukraine: genesis and heritage, Kharkiv 2017, Heritage, Values, and Perspectives. Case Studies in Ger- p. 477. many, Russia, and Ukraine, Łódź 2019, p. 240. Smolenska Svitlana, Ukraine: The Destruction of the Soviet Likhachev Ddimtriy, Ecology of culture / The past to the Heritage. Heritage at Risk, 2015, p. 133–135. future, Moscow 1985, p. 50–62. Vesel Pavlo, Architectural heritage of Ukraine of the Soviet Lwów nowoczesny / Lviv and modernity, Kraków 2017, p. 357. period, the criteria for recognizing its objects as „monu- Mykhaylyshyn Olena, Linda Svitlana, Kościoły rzymskoka- ments” and the chances of state protection, „Urban Plan- tolickie międzywojennego Wołynia: ich powstanie i zachow- ning and Spatial Planning” 2013, No. 64, p. 87–95. anie w kontekście pamięci/zapomnienia, „Zarządzanie w kulturze” 2016, vol. 17 (3), p. 243–261. Secondary sources / Opracowania Pszczółkowski Michał, Kresy nowoczesne. Architektura Chepkounova Iryna, Some questions on the restoration of con- na ziemiach wschodnich II Rzeczypospolitej 1921–1939, structivist buildings, illustrated with the Tsentrosoyuz Building, Łódź 2016, p. 156. Moscow (, 1928–35), Paper for the Proceed- Zvonitsky Eduard, Leibfreid Alexander, Derzhprom, ings of First International DOCOMOMO Confer- Kharkiv 1992, p. 73.

1 N.V. Antonenko, Monument of modern architecture in the urban heritage of Ukraine in the context of urban develop- context of architectural culture of the second half of the twen- ment, „Modern Problems of Research, Restoration tieth century, Ph.D. Thesis, Kharkiv 2019, p. 240. and Preservation of Cultural Heritage” 2009, No. 6, 2 S.O. Smolenskaya, Architecture of avant-garde modernism p. 92–116. in Ukraine: genesis and heritage, Sc.D. Thesis, Kharkiv 13 B. Yerofalov, Post-Soviet city, Kyiv 2002, p. 112. 2017, p. 477. 14 I. Chepkounova, Some questions on restoration of construc- 3 3 A. Bouryak, M. Rusanova, Why the magnificent archi- tivist buildings, illustrated with the Tsentrosoyuz Building tecture of early Ukrainian modernism is little known in the in Moscow (Le Corbusier, 1928–35), Paper for the Pro- world and is not popular in Ukraine, Architecture of the ceedings of First International DOCOMOMO Con- 20th century research and popularization in Gdynia ference (Eindhoven, September 12–15, 1990), p. 33. and Europe. Modernizm w Europie – modernizm 15 B.S. Cherkes, National identity in the architecture of the w Gdyni, Gdynia 2019. city, Lviv 2008, p. 268. 4 S.O. Smolenskaya, op. cit. 16 E.M. Zvonitsky, A.Y. Leibfreid, Derzhprom, Kharkiv 5 P.A. Rychkov, Kharkov as a capital of Soviet-Ukrainian 1992, p. 73. modernism. „TEKA Komisji Architektury, Urbani- 17 I.I. Kreiser, The Fate of the State Industry in Our Hands, styki i Studiów Krajobrazowych” 2008, vol. IV A, Bulletin of the KhDAMG, 2008, No. 12, p. 82–86. p.116–133. 18 E.T. Cherkasova, The public value of the architectural 6 P. Vesel, Architectural heritage of Ukraine of the Soviet pe- heritage of the Soviet avant-garde. Methods of preserving riod, the criteria for recognizing its objects as „monuments” objects of architecture and urban planning, „Problems Of and the chances of state protection, „Urban Planning and Theory And History Of Architecture” 2008, No. 8, Spatial Planning” 2013, No. 64, p. 87–95. p. 128–135. 7 I.I. Kreiser, The Fate of the State Industry in Our Hands, 19 Paper for the Proceedings of International Confer- „Bulletin of the KhDAMG” 2008, No. 12, p. 82–86. ence „Heritage at Risk. Preservation of 20th Century 8 O.I. Remeshylo-Rybchynska, A.A. Baev, A.A. Rybchyn- Architecture and World Heritage”, Moscow, 17–20 sky, On the problem of preserving the heritage of residential ar- April 2006. chitecture of functionalism in Lviv, „Bulletin of the National 20 K. Dmitrenko, Architectural heritage of the twentieth University Lviv Polytechnic” 2013, No. 757, p. 310–314. century: from preservation to use, https://ua.boell.org/ 9 O. Mykhaylyshyn, S. Linda, Kościoły rzymskokatolickie uk/2011/02/05/arhitekturna-spadshchina-hh-stolit- międzywojennego Wołynia: ich powstanie i zachowanie w tya-vid-zberezhennya-do-vikoristannya (accessed: kontekście pamięci/zapomnienia „Zarządzanie w Kultu- 26 VI 2020). rze” 2016, vol.17 (3), p. 243–261. 21 B. Engel (ed.), Mass Housing in the Socialist City. Her- 10 M. Pszczółkowski, Kresy nowoczesne. Architektura na itage, Values, and Perspectives. Case Studies in Germany, ziemiach wschodnich II Rzeczypospolitej 1921–1939, Russia, and Ukraine, Berlin, p. 240. Łódź 2016, p. 156. 22 S. Smolenska, Ukraine: The Destruction of the Soviet 11 Lwów nowoczesny / Lviv and modernity, Kraków 2017, Heritage, „Heritage at Risk” 2015, p. 133–135. p. 357. 23 Y. Gubkina, O. Hatherley, Modernist Kharkiv: behind 12 N. Kondel-Perminova, Preservation of architectural and the battle to protect avant-garde architecture in post-Maidan

14 Wiadomości Konserwatorskie • Journal of Heritage Conservation • 62/2020 Ukraine, available at: https://www.calvertjournal.com/ Moscow 1985, p. 50–62. articles/show/8568/modernist-kharkiv-battle-pro- 26 B. Yerofalov, Post-Soviet city, Kyiv 2002, p. 112. tect-avant-garde-architecture-maidan-ukraine. 27 N. Kondel-Perminova, Integration of monuments of ar- 24 Ye. Gubkina Soviet modernism. Brutalism. Post-mod- chitecture and urban planning in the modern socio-cultural ernism. Buildings and structures in Ukraine 1955–1991, context, „Modern Problems of Research, Restoration Київ 2019, p. 258. and Preservation of Cultural Heritage” 2008, No. 5, 25 D.S. Likhachev, Ecology of culture / The past to the future, p. 94–111.

Abstract Streszczenie

This paper provides a historical and genetic analysis of Artykuł przedstawia historyczną analizę oraz gene- organizational efforts of the professional community and zę działań organizacyjnych społeczności zawodowych the public, which were aimed at preserving the monu- i społeczeństwa, których celem było zachowanie za- ments of Ukrainian architecture of the twentieth century, bytków ukraińskiej architektury XX wieku oraz rekon- and reconstruction of the process of formation of activ- strukcja procesu formacji działań, a które miały miejsce ities that unfolded during the period between the 1990s w okresie pomiędzy latami dziewięćdziesiątymi XX wie- and the 2010s. The conditions of its development and the ku i drugą dekadą XXI wieku. Warunki ich rozwoju oraz main reasons for the stagnation of the processes are clari- główne przyczyny stagnacji tych procesów zostały wy- fied: delay in several reforms related to the general devel- jaśnione opóźnieniem wielu reform związanych z ogól- opment of the system of architectural and urban planning. nym rozwojem systemu planowania architektonicznego The determined driving forces of the process are public i urbanistycznego. Ustalone siły napędowe procesu to authorities interested in the implementation of image władze publiczne zainteresowane realizacją projektów projects, the research community, public activists, relevant o charakterze wizerunkowym, środowisko badawcze, international organizations. The periodization has been aktywiści publiczni oraz odpowiednie organizacje mię- worked out, five stages of formation of the practice have dzynarodowe. Przedstawiono periodyzację obejmują- been singled out, which differed from each other in the cą 5 etapów formowania się praktyki, które różnią się following essential features: support from the authorities, między sobą następującymi cechami: poparciem władz, degree of involvement of the public, research community stopniem zaangażowania społeczeństwa, społeczności and international organizations, the scale of extension and badawczej oraz organizacji międzynarodowych, skalą performance results. The promising areas of development zasięgu i efektywnością. Istnieją obiecujące obszary dla of monument protection activity in Ukraine concerning rozwoju działalności konserwatorskiej na Ukrainie od- the preservation of modern architecture are offered: con- nośnie do ochrony nowoczesnej architektury: prowa- ducting research, popularization of modern architecture, dzenie badań, popularyzacja nowoczesnej architektury, development of municipal programs, decentralization of rozwój programów miejskich, decentralizacja procesów, processes, implementation of international standards, de- wprowadzanie międzynarodowych standardów, rozwój velopment of themed educational programs. tematycznych programów edukacyjnych.

Wiadomości Konserwatorskie • Journal of Heritage Conservation • 62/2020 15