The new national states that emerged on the European map in 1918 following the collapse of the great European empires in the wake of World War I became enthusiastic participants in the race to modernise, hoping to keep pace with global trends and become more European in the process. Renewal was the central goal of many European cities. This was particularly so in the newly restored cities or those newly designated as administrative capitals such as Kaunas, which became the provisional capital of the Republic of Lithuania from 1919 to 1939. These cities faced similar challenges: ridding themselves of imperial pasts, architectural legacies and symbols, changing their urban environment, creating new political centres and constructing new government facilities. The question of national architects became similarly important. Through the lives of the modern architects who were compelled to change their citizenship or suffered exile, forced migration or genocide, we can study the effect of social and political change, and in particular political ruptures. This paper follows how architects, collectively as well as individually, developed as a modern group of socially engaged intellectuals in 1930s. It then considers how they reacted to political changes, such as the first communist occupation of Lithuania in 1940, the subsequent Nazi occupation in 1941, and the return of the Red Army in 1944, when most of the architects in private practice emigrated to the West. Finally, it illustrates how those architects who remained adapted to the new political rule in Soviet Lithuania in the 1950s.
Evaluation and preservation of modern architecture in contemporary Lithuania is complicated because it is not based on thorough scientific research. However the number of protected buildings and sites is rather numerous and exceeds 350. The list of protected monuments is based on different criteria since it combines “relic” monuments from the Soviet list, and new inscriptions based on momentous research (usually when the building or site is in danger). Therefore the paper is focused on the problem of identification and transmission of the values of modern architecture in Lithuania. It analyses the situation of selection, evaluation and inscription as well as chronological, aesthetic and typological representation of the listed objects. Special attention is paid to the problem of public reception of modern architecture in Lithuania. Santrauka Žvelgiant į moderniosios architektūros vertinimą ir apsaugą šiuolaikinėje Lietuvoje, galima pastebėti, kad LR kultūros vertybių registre išties yra nemažai šio laikotarpio objektų. Tačiau kalbant apie jų verčių identifikavimą ir perteikimą visuomenei susiduriama su dideliu informacijos trūkumu, nes Lietuvoje nėra atliekami sistemingi moderniosios architektūros paveldo tyrimai, o paveldosaugoje nėra šio paveldo interpretacinio diskurso. Siekiant išsiaiškinti, kodėl moderniosios architektūros pastatai ir kompleksai yra (turi būti) saugomi, kam jie atstovauja ir ką „pasakoja“, tyrime pateikiamas teorinis svarstymas apie Lietuvos moderniosios architektūros vertes, analizuojama paveldo atrankos ir apskaitos situacija. Straipsnyje chronologiniu, estetiniu ir tipologiniu požiūriu apžvelgiamas Lietuvos moderniosios architektūros paveldas, diskutuojama terminologijos klausimu.
This paper discusses the social, political and especially the technological aspect of the post-war Soviet industrialisation of housing, focusing on the relation to Western planning and technology. The chronological scope of the paper covers the thaw in Soviet architecture and construction that began in 1954 after the well-known meeting of Soviet architects and builders initiated by Nikita Khrushchev. This study presents Soviet architects’ study trips to the West, which became crucial in changing the entire urban planning and mass housing production system in the USSR. The text examines how pan-Union mass housing industrialisation policy and practice were carried out in the 1960s in the Western periphery of the USSR, namely Soviet Lithuania, which became the leader in mass housing urban design because of the Western-oriented ambitions of Baltic architects. Thus, in the paper the modern Soviet mass housing programme is researched from the perspective of (mutations in) modernist urban planning.
This chapter discusses Baltic (mostly Lithuanian) mass housing estates as winners of Soviet urban planning and housing competitions; the role of the architect in the field of standardised design; and Western architectural influences in Soviet Baltic housing estate design. In the field of industrialised and standardised housing construction, the role of architects and one-off design is of special interest, because industrialisation and standardisation in Soviet mass housing brought tension between planners of standardised large housing estates and master architects who drew up unique designs for public buildings. Despite the Communist Party declaring in 1955 the importance of mass housing, the Soviet Union's most prestigious state award-the Lenin Prize-was only ever conferred upon one model site: the Lazdynai large housing estate in Vilnius, Lithuania, in 1974. This chapter thus focuses on the involvement and experimentation of Baltic architects in the planning of standardised housing estates; on professional acknowledgment and on the fulfilment of ideological requirements. Keywords Microrayon Á Lazdynai Á Mass housing Á Baltic modernism 4.1 Introduction Reflecting the current interest in regional differences in large processes and phenomena, peripheral histories open up the possibility of seeing other dimensions, local variations and regional adaptations, and are able to change the established narrative frames. Comparative research in postwar mass housing has shed new light on uniformity and standardisation processes by adopting a more focused approach towards regional differences in the former Socialist countries, especially in the areas of East-West technological relations, the appropriation and rejection of Soviet directives, and the importance of local expertise (Kalm and Ruudi 2005;
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.