Vkhutemas Training Anna Bokov Vkhutemas Training Pavilion of the Russian Federation at the 14Th International Architecture Exhibition La Biennale Di Venezia

Home , Alexander Rodchenko, Lyubov Popova, Varvara Stepanova, Vkhutemas

Pavilion of the Russian Federation at the 14th International Architecture Exhibition la Biennale di Venezia

VKhUTEMAS Training Anna Bokov VKhUTEMAS Training Pavilion of the Russian Federation at the 14th International Architecture Exhibition la Biennale di Venezia

Curated by Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design Anton Kalgaev Brendan McGetrick Daria Paramonova

Comissioner Semyon Mikhailovsky

Text and Design Anna Bokov

With Special Thanks to Sofia & Andrey Bokov Katerina Clark Jean-Louis Cohen Kurt W. Forster Kenneth Frampton Harvard Graduate School of Design Selim O. Khan-Magomedov Moscow Architectural Institute MARCHI Diploma Studios Moscow Schusev Museum of Architecture Eeva-Liisa Pelknonen Alexander G. Rappaport Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design Larisa I. Veen Yury P. Volchok Yale School of Architecture VKhUTEMAS Training

VKhUTEMAS, an acronym for Vysshie Khudozhestvenno Tekhnicheskie Masterskie, translated as Higher Artistic and Technical Studios, was conceived explicitly as “a specialized educational institution for ad- vanced artistic and technical training, created to produce highly quali- fied artist-practitioners for modern industry, as well as instructors and directors of professional and technical education” (Vladimir Lenin, 1920).

VKhUTEMAS was a synthetic interdisciplinary school consisting of both art and industrial facilities. The school was comprised of eight art and production departments - Architecture, Painting, Sculpture, Graphics, Textiles, Ceramics, Wood-, and Metalworking. The exchange between the departments was facilitated by the core curriculum that consisted of four preliminary courses: Graphics, Color, Volume and Space.

4 VKhUTEMAS Training | Russian Pavilion | Venice Biennale 2014 Anna Bokov 5 ARCHITECTS

SPACE

DOKUCHAEV KRINSKY LADOVSKY (1891 - 1944) (1890 - 1958) (1881 - 1941)

SCULPTORS

VOLUME

KANDINSKY BABICHEV KOROLEV LAVINSKY (1866 - 1944) (1887 - 1963) (1885 - 1963) (1879 - 1940)

CONSTRUCTIVISTS

GRAPHICS WORKING GROUPS GROUPS WORKING THE WORKING GROUP OF OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS OF OBJECTIVE GROUP THE WORKING GAN MEDUNETZKY G. STENBERG STEPANOVA RODCHENKO (c. 1889 - c. 1940) (1899 - c. 1935) (1900 - 1933) (1894 - 1958) (1891 - 1956) V. STENBERG (1899 - 1982) OBJECTIVISTS

COLOR

DREVIN UDALTZOVA POPOVA A. VESNIN (1889 - 1938) (1886 - 1961) (1889 - 1924) (1883 - 1959)

INKhUK (Institute of Artistic Culture) 1920 - 1924

VKhUTEMAS (Higher Artistic and Technical Studios) 1920 - 1930

The courses were initially lead by those faculty members who had At VKhUTEMAS a mosaic of progressive and conservative faculty con- joined the Group of Objective Analysis at the Institute of Artistic Culture tributed to a vibrant diverse environment where new ideas were forged (INKhUK), an organization established concurrently with VKhUTEMAS in heated debates. The school’s faculty counted such pioneers of Rus- in 1920, and led by Vasily Kandinsky. The principal goal of INKhUK was sian Avant-garde as Alexander Rodchenko and Varvara Stepanova, Al- to systematize the emerging modern movement into a scientifically exander Vesnin and Lyubov Popova, Boris Korolev and Anton Lavinsky, based program, known as the “objective method,” that could be used Nikolay Ladovsky and Vladimir Krinsky, El Lissitzky and Vladimir Tatlin, for educational and research purposes. The INKhUK –VKhUTEMAS Gustav Klutzis and Moisey Ginzburg. Their pedagogical contributions conglomerate formed special research “laboratories” within the made VKhUTEMAS an important center of modernist movement, en- school’s departments for exploring the “objective method” and devel- gaging pedagogy as a mode of experimentation. VKhUTEMAS teachers oping the primary “elements” of their respective disciplines – Painting, and students saw design education not just as a process of knowledge Sculpture and Architecture. transfer but as a vehicle for design innovation.

6 VKhUTEMAS Training | Russian Pavilion | Venice Biennale 2014 Anna Bokov 7 1/2 year 3 years 2 YEARS

RSE PREL U IM V O CO IN E L Y IN STU A C U N S D ARCHITECTURE R L R 3 YEARS IO OO Y O A A CT T F Y M U & N S R S A P T N T L T C N E I S IA U E N R R O S M M I E E WO E T T ON O U R

I A T D A S E

L M R E P CERAMICS E S S D

E S R R

C S C U L P T U R E U U

M I

T R E O O

M E E

Y C BUILDING C

E METAL

T C

P A PRACTICAL BUILDING S DIPLOMA D

A Y

H Y

L L EXPIRIENCE - A R

N A

& C

C PROJECT I

BUILDING EXPERIMENTS A R

I A

C O N THEORY COURSES N

E I A E D

U DESIGN T M &

L R I M

BUILDING AND A C

I C L PRACTICE

E ENGINEERING T O M E L

S G G WORKSHOPS I W O O D O

E E N R

SCIENCES F L N N

N I P

S O R

A T D E T V PAINTING P

A S S R A E

T S I X P P

U E S I C A

P O C W Y O E L I T X E T

N T L R

E H T

IO COLOR A O M

R N N S E S

I A N K L T M S E R O C T , O GRAPHICS N HE O ACE I T CO R Y OF SP N W R S E LOR ITIO Y H L , COMPOS M R W E R A P P IT ME FO N A H NT OF I I A M AR Y THE OR Y LIM N R ATE R E TI G R IALS IN THE P NG

Bauhaus VKhUTEMAS Teaching Program Diagram, W. Gropius, 1922. Teaching Program Diagram, 1923. BAUHAUS VKhUTEMAS The historyTeaching of VKhUTEMAS program is closely diagr linkedam, G withropius that ofW the., 1922 Staatliches Like the Bauhaus,Teaching VKhUTEMAS Program was an Diagram, interdisciplinary 1923 school that Bauhaus in Germany. The two schools conducted student visits and consisted of both art and industrial departments. It also had a well-de- exhibitions, exchanged ideas through publications and correspondence veloped preliminary course. The interdisciplinarity and the core curric- and shared foundational values, disseminated by the key avant-garde ulum made VKhUTEMAS similar to the Bauhaus. Unlike the Bauhaus, protagonists, in particular, Vasily Kandinsky and El Lissitzky. How- which did not have an architecture department for the first eight years, ever, while both schools aimed for a new unity of art and technology, VKhUTEMAS trained architects from the very beginning. The schools VKhUTEMAS aimed to create the proletarian version of that unity, even- also differed greatly in size. The number of students and faculty at tually resulting in an ideological gap. VKhUTEMAS compared to Bauhaus exceeded roughly tenfold.

8 VKhUTEMAS Training | Russian Pavilion | Venice Biennale 2014 Anna Bokov 9 VKhUTEMAS Historical Timeline

1749 1825 1843 1918 1920 1924 1926 1930

Palace School of Architecture Moscow School of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture SGKhM 2 founded by Prince Ukhtomsky MUZhVZ Free State Art Studios 2 VKhUTEMAS VKhUTEIN Vysshiye Khudozhestvenno-Tekhnicheskiye Masterskiye Vysshiye Khudozhestvenno-Tekhnicheskii Institut Stroganov School of Applied Arts SGKhM 1 Higher Art and Technical Studios Higher Art and Technical Institute Free State Art Studios 1 INKhUK Institut Khudozhestvennoi Kulturi Institute of Artistic Culture

10 VKhUTEMAS Training | Russian Pavilion | Venice Biennale 2014 Anna Bokov 11 VKhUTEMAS: Development of the Preliminary Course

1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 spring fall spring fall spring fall spring fall spring fall spring fall spring fall spring fall spring fall spring fall spring fall spring fall spring

N. Ladovsky, V. Krinsky, N. Dokuchaev N. Ladovsky V. S. Balikhin SGKhM 2 OBMAS (United Leftist Studios) (1881 - 1941) Free State Art Studios 2 S. V. Glagolev M. P. Korzhev K. Melnikov SPACE SPACE Architectural Design I. V. Lamtsov Department

Architecture V. A. Petrov I. Golosov Theory of Architectural Organisms M. A. Turkus

A. Lavinsky A. Lavinsky (1879 - 1940) N. I. Goldman B. Korolev Volume Studies R. R. Yodko VOLUME E. K. Murovtseva VOLUME Sculpture A. Babichev Deparment Sculpture Studies A. I. Teneta

L. Popova, A. Vesnin L. Popova N. T. Fedorov Color Construction (1889 - 1924) A. Vesnin S. V. Kravkov (1883 - 1959) G. G. Klutsis COLOR STUDIES A. Osmerkin Articulation of Form and Color A. A. Alabas A. Drevin COLOR Synchronism of Color K. N. Istomin I. Klyun A. D. Drevin Color on Plane V. L. Khrakovsky PAINTING A. Exter V. S. Toot Color in Space N. A. Udaltsova Painting

V. Baranov-Rossine Department Color Breakdown A. Rodchenko L. A. Bruni SGKhM 1 (1891 - 1956) Free State Art Studios 1 N. Udaltsova P. Ya. Pavlinov Volume in Space GRAPHICS S. V. Gerasimov DRAWING A. Rodchenko Construction M. S. Rodionov

ONE-YEAR COURSE TWO-YEAR PRELIMINARY COURSE ONE-YEAR PRELIMINARY COURSE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PRELIMINARY COURSES ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CORE DEPARTMENT WITHIN THE THREE DEPARTMENTS

12 VKhUTEMAS Training | Russian Pavilion | Venice Biennale 2014 Anna Bokov 13 VKhUTEMAS Philosophy: New Approaches for a New Society

VKhUTEMAS was not simply an educational institution, but an agent of social change. It aimed to bring education to the masses and the masses to the growing industrial production. This could only be achieved through radical educational experimentation: the old pedagogy no longer worked, as the influx of thousands of students from the countryside could not be trained using bespoke apprenticeship or elitist academic methods.

The situation raised fundamental questions about design education that continue to resonate today: Is there an alternative to the academic and apprenticeship models? How can one teach something that has not yet been done, something that has no precedent? How do you teach that to hundreds of students with diverse backgrounds?

In response, the teachers and students of VKhUTEMAS developed an approach without precedent in which the process of teaching and learning served as a vehicle for venturing into the unknown. The school’s “objective method” aimed to provide for all, creating a unified pedagogical approach across different fields - from painting to architecture. It was based on primary “elements” and their “properties,” creating a solid formal foundation and allowing for synthetic thinking across disciplines. The method relied on the newest scientific discov- eries and technological achievements and on the most progressive artistic trends. But the ultimate goal of the objective method was to integrate artistic culture with industrial production – to bring “art into life.”

The mass-training methodology that VKhUTEMAS invented relied on a set of prescribed operations, a very basic algorithm of step-by-step written instructions, given out to students in the form of assignments as part of the Core Curriculum of four introductory courses: Graphics, Color, Volume and Space, required for all students

Space. Articulation of Volume and Space, 1922. 14 VKhUTEMAS Training | Russian Pavilion | Venice Biennale 2014 Anna Bokov 15 The Heart of VKhUTEMAS Training

The most innovative pedagogical method at VKhUTEMAS was designing directly in model. While model making as such was not new, traditionally it was based on something that already existed and then modeled. The method used in Space and Volume courses was fundamentally different. When starting a model, students were not aware of its final outcome; the result was formed as part of the process of making.

Students were given assignments in the form of written instructions and were asked to translate these into three dimensions. The models were by definition abstract, thus already suggestive of modernist forms. There was no scale or function – not unlike the early laboratory art constructions by the VKhUTEMAS teachers Rodchenko, Tatlin, or El Lissitzky.

At the heart of VKhUTEMAS training was the premise that humans were conditioned to learn faster through social interaction. The notion of “performative sociality” used by archeologists for describing the evolutionary advances in material culture applied to VKhUTEMAS as well. Working collectively in a laboratory-like interdisciplinary setting, the large body of VKhUTEMAS students produced a rich repository of proto-modernist forms.

16 VKhUTEMAS Training | Russian Pavilion | Venice Biennale 2014 Anna Bokov 17 GRAPHICS THE COURSE GRAPHICS IS NOT ABOUT DRAWING WHAT YOU SEE BUT IS ABOUT “CONSTRUCTING” A DRAWING WITH PRIMARY GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS.

Graphics. A. Rodchenko, Construction [“Initiative”], Student A. Akhtyrko, 1921. Graphics, initially called “Graphic Construction on a Plane,” was conceived by Alexander Rodchenko as an alternative to a conventional drawing course. Traditionally drawing focused on the representation of human figure, still life or nature. The course Graphics was not about drawing what you see, but rather aimed at “constructing” a drawing with primary geometric elements.

Rodchenko experimented with articulating the distinct perceptual qualities of elemental forms. Graphics exercises were designed around a set of compositional constraints and simple sequential operations, using basic geometric figures, such as circles, triangles, and squares. These had to be arranged along specific types of trajectories, “initi- ating” a composition. Rodchenko defined several parameters in this recombination game from proportion of a working field to the elements themselves and the relationships between them. This clear set of instructions made the course universally accessible for anyone with or without prior artistic training.

Graphics. A. Rodchenko. Construction [“Initiative”] Assignment, 1921.

18 VKhUTEMAS Training | Russian Pavilion | Venice Biennale 2014 Anna Bokov 19 COLOR

Color. L. Popova, Color on a Plane, Student E. Bugrova, 1923.

This course was based on the notion of color as a primary element in any painting. Like traditional academic drawing, painting also focused on representing reality as closely as possible. The 20th century marked a paradigm shift when painting was no longer mimicking the world but instead aimed to construct a new one.

The underlying structure of the course Color was based on both scientific knowledge and artistic experiment. Starting with breaking down the spectrum of a rainbow, color theory has been a subject of scientific quest for centuries - from Aristotle to Albers. The primary and second- ary color range formed a basic color circle, such as the one studied in Gustav Klutzis’s exercises.

These methodological aids demonstrated how colors could be com- bined based on either contrasting or complimentary properties. The course experimented with the full chromatic range: from complimentary to contrasting color schemes, to explorations of the entire pallet.

The main unit of the course Color, designed by Lyubov Popova and Al- exander Vesnin, claimed to distinguish between the superficial impres- sion of an object and its coloristic essence. Students were encouraged to analyze the nature of form relative to color. Color was conceived as a primary element and even as a form of energy that does not simply cover up an object but “constructs” it.

20 VKhUTEMAS Training | Russian Pavilion | Venice Biennale 2014 Anna Bokov 21 Color. G. Klutzis, Color and Architectural Volume, Student V. Kolpakova, 1928.

THE COURSE COLOR WAS CONCEIVED AS A PRIMARY ELEMENT AND EVEN AS A FORM OF ENERGY THAT DOES NOT SIMPLY COVER UP AN OBJECT BUT “CONSTRUCTS” IT.

22 VKhUTEMAS Training | Russian Pavilion | Venice Biennale 2014 Anna Bokov 23 VOLUME Volume. Dynamic Composition, c. 1920.

The course Volume was an alternative to age-old practices in sculpture training. It was initially influenced by Cubism, as two of its founders Anton Lavinsky and Boris Korolev were followers of this artistic movement.

Volume exercises ranged from cubist analysis of still life and live models to abstract volumetric compositions. Students were asked to produce such compositions by exploring the properties and dynamics of a given volume in space or by articulating a relationship between volume and its weight. Some exercises focused on how to show the intersec- tions of objects, using a kit of primary forms, such as cube, sphere, cylinder, or pyramid. Another set of exercises challenged students to compose various contrasting materials in relation to one another. Other assignments examined transition from simple to complex - from the basic geometric figures to elaborate decorative ornaments. The course Volume taught one to deconstruct complex natural and artificial forms using cubist analysis and basic geometry.

Volume. Intersection of Volumes.

THE COURSE VOLUME TAUGHT ONE TO DECONSTRUCT COMPLEX NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL FORMS USING CUBIST ANALYSIS AND BASIC GEOMETRY.

24 VKhUTEMAS Training | Russian Pavilion | Venice Biennale 2014 Anna Bokov 25 VKhUTEMAS. Space, Exhibition of Student Work, 1927. 26 VKhUTEMAS Training | Russian Pavilion | Venice Biennale 2014 Anna Bokov 27 SPACE “IN THE PERCEPTION OF THE MATERIAL FORM AS SUCH, WE CAN RECOGNIZE THE EXPRESSION OF ITS QUALITIES:

1) GEOMETRIC – RELATIONSHIP OF SURFACES, CORNERS, ETC.; 2) PHYSICAL – WEIGHT, MASS, ETC.; 3) MECHANICAL – STABILITY, MOBILITY; The course Space was the first pedagogy developed to train a large 4) LOGICAL – ARTICULATION OF SURFACE AS SUCH AND OF SURFACE number of students in the fundamentals of modern architecture. De- BOUNDING VOLUME. veloped by Nikolay Ladovsky, Vladimir Krinsky and Nikolay Dokuchaev as a foundational architecture course, Space is paramount not only DEPENDING ON THE ARTICULATION OF SIZE AND QUANTITY WE CAN for its innovative pedagogy but also as an experimental laboratory for TALK ABOUT: developing new architectural language. A) STRENGTH AND WEAKNESS; The course was based on a study of psychology of perception as a B) GROWTH AND INVARIABILITY; generator of a new syntax of plastic form. For Ladovsky the “objective,” C) FINITENESS AND INFINITY. also known as “psychoanalytical,” method was perceptually and expe- rientially determined. It was based on, in his words, the “economy of Nikolay Ladovsky, 1926. psychic energy” and “the fundamental human need to orient in space.”

Ladovsky established the following properties of form: geometric, Space. N. Ladovsky, Articulation of Mass and Balance, 1923. physical, mechanical and logical, as the pedagogical basis for the course. These properties developed into assignments on articulation of Form, Space, Volume, Rhythm, Structure, Balance and Mass and Weight.

As part of the teaching method students used clay to visualize space. Clay, a malleable material used throughout history for anything from ceramic pots to brick walls, automatically prompted a connection between mind, body and matter. Clay’s shapelessness and materiality tapped into, what psychologists call, “embodied cognition,” allowing one to distance from the familiar and make a cognitive jump - ultimate- ly arriving at new forms.

28 VKhUTEMAS Training | Russian Pavilion | Venice Biennale 2014 Anna Bokov 29 ARCHITECTURE OPERATES WITH THESE “QUALITIES” AS DEFINED VALUES. AN ARCHITECT CONSTRUCTS FORM, INTRODUCING ELEMENTS THAT ARE NOT TECHNICAL OR UTILITARIAN IN THE REGULAR SENSE AND CAN BE CONSIDERED “ARCHITECTURAL MOTIVES”. ARCHITECTURALLY SPEAKING, THESE “MOTIVES” NEED TO BE RATIONAL AND SERVE THE HIGHEST TECHNICAL HUMAN NEED TO ORIENT IN SPACE.”

Nikolay Ladovsky, 1926.

Space. N. Ladovsky, Mass and Rotation. Space. N. Ladovsky, Mass and Weight.

Space. N. Ladovsky, Articulation of Space in a Cube. 30 VKhUTEMAS Training | Russian Pavilion | Venice Biennale 2014 Anna Bokov 31 OBMAS: ABSTRACT & APPLIED EXERCISES 1920-22 CORE DEPARTMENT: ABSTRACT EXERCISES 1923-26 ARTICULATION OF GEOMETRICAL QUALITIES OF FORM SURFACE “In the perception of the material form as such, we can recognize the expression of its qualities:

1. Geometric – relationship of surfaces, corners, etc.;

Articulation of Geometric Qualities of Form Smithy with Two Forges Water Tower Grain Storage Tower 2. Physical – weight, mass, etc.; Tone and Relief Vertical Rhythm Horizontal Rhythm Vertical & Horizontal Rhythm ARTICULATION3. Mechanical OF THE PHYSICAL – stability, AND MECHANICAL mobility; PROPERTIES OF FORM (MASS AND WEIGHT) FRONTAL SPACE 4. Logical – articulation of surface as such and of surface bounding volume.

Depending on the articulation of size and quantity we can talk about: Articulation of Mass and Weight Warehouse Frontal Relief Frontal Spatial Composition Deep Frontal Space Organization of Space Above a Horizontal Plane ARTICULATIONa. Strength OF THE PHYSICAL and Weakness; AND MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF FORM (MASS AND BALANCE) DEEP SPACE b. Growth and Invariability; c. Finiteness and Infinity. ”

Nikolay Ladovsky, Foundations of Architecture Theory, 1926

Articulation of Mass and Balance Restaurant and Dock Organization of Space Inside Cube Organization of Deep Frontal Space Organization of Deep Space on a Horizontal Plane ARTICULATION OF STRUCTURE SPACE AND VOLUME

Structural Lever Airport Gate Articulation of Structure of a Beam Articulation of Space witin Volume Using Planes Volumetric Composition Based on Mass ARTICULATION OF DYNAMICS, RHYTHM, AND PROPORTIONS ON A PLANE FORM

Articulation of Dynamics, Rhythm, Proportions on a Plane Articulation of Fiorm: Rectangular Box Articulation of Form: Cylinder Articulation of Form: Rotation of Form ARTICULATION OF SPACE MASS AND WEIGHT

Articulation of Space: Left - Deep Space, Right - Shallow Space Outdoor Market Articulation of Mass and Weight in a Volume Volumetric Composition on Mass and Support ARTICULATION OF DYNAMICS, RHYTHM, RELATIONS AND PROPORTIONS VERTICALLY TRANSFORMATION

Transformation of a Vertical Plane Texture Transformation Transformation of Tension Structure Articulation of Dynamics, Rhythm, Proportions Vertically Skyscraper

32 VKhUTEMAS Training | Russian Pavilion | Venice Biennale 2014 Anna Bokov 33 1. Color. Analysis of Achromatic Levels, 1927. 2. Color. Analysis of Achromatic Levels, 1927. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 3. Color. Color on a Plane, 1923. 4. Volume. Intersection of Forms, 1921. 5. Volume. Dynamic Composition, c. 1920. 6. Volume. Arrangement of Geometric Forms. 7. Space. Articulation of Form, Mass and Weight. 9 10 8. Space. Articulation of Mass and Weight, 1922. 9. Graphics. Construction (“Initiative”), 1921. 10. Graphics. Construction (“Initiative”), 1921. 22 11. Graphics. Construction (“Initiative”), 1921. 12. Graphics. Construction (“Initiative”), 1921. 11 12 13. Graphics. Construction, 1921. 14. Color. Color and Architectural Volume. 15. Color. Color and Architectural Volume. 16. Graphics. Construction (Transition), 1921. 13 17. Graphics. 5-minute Figure Drawing. 18. Graphics. 5-minute Figure Drawing. 19. Space. Vertical Transformation. 23 20. Space. Vertical Transformation. 14 15 21 21. Space. Articulation of Volume and Space, 1922. 22. Space. Articulation of Mass and Weight, 1927. 27 23. Space. Articulation of Mass and Balance, 1923. 24. Space. Geometric Properties of Form, 1920. 16 17 18 19 20 24 25 26 25. Space. Articulation of Form. 26. Space. Articulation of Form and Rotation. 27. Space. Organization of Space within a Cube.

34 VKhUTEMAS Training | Russian Pavilion | Venice Biennale 2014 a

Published by Pavilion of the Russian Federation at the 14th International Architecture Exhibition la Biennale di Venezia 2014

Curated by Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design Anton Kalgaev Brendan McGetrick Daria Paramonova

Comissioner Semyon Mikhailovsky

Text and Design Anna Bokov