Ars: časopis Ústavu Dejín Umenia Slovenskej Akadémie Vied — 1989

Page: 34
DOI issue: DOI article: DOI Page: Citation link: 
https://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/ars1989/0038
License: Free access  - all rights reserved Use / Order
0.5
1 cm
facsimile
34

pnoflOB (<Ěpainjy3CKaa 6yp>Kya3Haa pesojnopMíi m BejiMKaa
OKTíiSptcKaa copMajiMCTMHeCKaa peBOJnoqna). Ona Haxo-
flMT 3HauMTCJibHbie anajioruM b npoójieiviax, pemeHMsx m
cyfltGax apxMTCKTypbi stmx ;jByx rtepnoflOB, oflHOBpeMen-
Ho, oflnaKO, yK33MBaeT TaioKe Ha xapaKTepnbie c;<BMrn
M OTJIMHMX.
XtaHHasi MHTepnpeTapiííi 3annMaeTca ripc>i</(c Bcero ana-
JIOHMMM BO BpeMeHHOM CBH3M apxMTCKTypHOTO pa3BMTMÍt
C nepMOflOM peBOJIlOpMOHHblX BOJIHCHMM, aHajIOTMÍIMM
M OTJIHUMMM B CBÍI3M COflCpJKaHMB apXMTCKTypbl C MflCM-
HMM M oSmeCTBeHHMM ßpoaCCHMCM (c TOHKM 3pCHMB (J>M-
jiococjjcKoro coflepjKaHMx ona yßejiaer BHMMaHne rjiaB-
HBiM o6pa30M MOTUBy Tpyfla b ero pa3JimiHbix no3npM-
ax), a Taioxe aHajiornaMM b nporpaMMHoň opneHTaijMM
apxMTeKTypw na cJiyJKÖe pcbojuoijmm. Hannasi MHTepnpera-
pna cpaBHUBaeT TaioKe xapaKTepncTMKM ejjopivibi n nofl-
XO/( K BblSopy M paÖOTC C Bbipa3MTeflbHbIMM Cpe^CTBaMM
apxMTCKTypbi (reoMeTpwaauMíi, CTaTMHHOCTb m ^MHaMMKa,
paiJMOHajIbHbIM M 3M0pH0HaJIbHbIM acneKTbi).
Bropaa MHTepnpeTapM« npe/jCTaBjíaeT cbpanuyscKyio
peBOJiioinMOHHyK) apxMTCKTypy i<ai< nanajio hobom Tpa«n-
HMM B apXHTCKTypHOM MbímjieHMM. npMTOM OHa OrpaHM-

HMBaeTCH TpCMÍI (B3aMMH0 oSyCBOBMeHHblMM m tccho cbm-
3aHHbIMH) OCHOBHMMM HCpTaMM, OXBaTblBarOIIJMMM CC Cy-
IIjeCTBCHHbie CBOMCTBa:
1. ApxMTeKTypa bo Bce Sojibineň Mepe BOcnpMHMMacT-
ca Kai< coixnajibHoe MCKyccTBO — pacniMpacTca Kpyr ee
oßmecTBeHHbix 3a/(av, pacTCT copwajibHoe cosHanne apxw-
TCKTypbi no OTHOineHMK) k TeopeTMuecKMM m npaKTMnec-
kmm BonpocaM (npoójieMa KOJinnecTBa m Kanecrsa, n^eaji
rywaHM3Ma m ero BHyTpeHHee npoTMBopenne).
2. PacreT anavcHMC cjjyHKijnoHaJibHoro acneicra apxn-
TeKTypnoro TBOpnecTBa. B to Bpeivia KaK npoeKTbi peso-
JIlOpMOHHblX apXMTeKTOpOB CflBMraiOT <Í>yHKmlOHaJIbHOCTb
b TeopeTunecKMx n cmmbojimhcckux ypoBHax, nponsBe-
ÆChmm nx yneHMKOB paapaSaTbisaiOT npaKTMuecKMe bo-
npocbl M nOHMMaiOT cj)yHKI(MOHaiIbHOCTb B CMbICJie BeCbMa
0JIM3KOM coBpeMennoMy noflxofly.
3. B oöjiacTM Bbipa3MTejibHbix cpe;i,CTB naöjuo.naeTcsi
TiiroTCHMe k BJieMeHTapHbiM cjjopMaM n naxo/pn npMMe-
HeHMe HOBbie npMHijMnbi mx crpyKTypsr. PeisojrionuoHnasi
apxMTeKTypa npeflBOCxniqaeT cbop.MM m KOMno3MpnoHHbie
npHHUMiibi coBpeiweHHOM apxMTeKTypw m 'reH/iennnn ee
pa3BMTMa.

Social Motivation in the Architectural Concept
(Outline of an Interpretation of French Revolutionary Architecture)

The first part of the study Sketches French revolu-
tionary architecture as an architectural utopia which.
has changed its character during the course of histori-
cal development. The intellectual effervescence of the
pre-revolutionary period (culminating in the eighties)
gave rise to a dream of a new architecture for a new
society — for a free man in the society of the equals.
The programme of this period is the revival of architec-
ture as an expression and the means of the régénéra-
tion of the society. Under conditions of the revolutiona-
ry process, the dream cornes into confrontation with the
reality with the ensuing contradiction between theory
and practice, perspectives and limitations. Architec-
ture is apprehended as means of éducation, uplif-
ting of the people, as means of célébration of novel
revolutionary ideas. The period of stabilization (from
the mid-nineties) ushers in an awakening from the
dream, the official programme becomes diverted from
the intentions of the revolutionary architecture, but its
message persists.
This message of revolutionary architecture is the
subject matter of the second part of the study which
outlines, in concise theses, two interprétations of
French revolutionary architecture in terms of its ac-
tualization. The link between both the interpretative
planes is given by the basic premise — social motiva-

tion of architecture, understood as an internal justifi-
cation of the choice of architectural means.
The first interprétation is focused on a comparison
of the development of architecture during two revolu-
tionary periods (viz. the French bourgeois révolution
and the Soviet October révolution). It sets off signifi-
cant analogies in the Problems, their solutions, and also
in the destinies of architecture of these two periods,
but simultaneously points out characteristic shifts and
différences.
It is primarily concerned with analogies in a tempo-
ral bond of architectural development with the period
of revolutionary disturbances, with analogies and di-
vergences concerning the content of architecture in its
relation with the ideological and social effervescence
(from the aspect of the philosophical content it devo-
tes attention particularly to the motive of work in its
various aspects) and also with analogies in architec-
ture’s programmed orientation to the service of révo-
lution. It likewise compares the form patterns and
approach to a choice and application of various means
of its expression (geometrization, statics and dynamics,
the rational and emotional aspects).
The second Interpretation introduces the French re-
volutionary architecture as the beginning of a new
tradition in architectural thinking. Here it limits itself
loading ...