Critical spatial practice in the research of soviet Lithuanian architecture

Straipsnyje tyrinėjami XX a. 6 deš. pabaigoje profesinę karjerą pradėjusių Lietuvos architektų kartos ryškiausių atstovų – Vytauto Brėdikio, Nijolės Bučiūtės, Vytauto Edmundo Čekanausko, Algimanto Mačiulio, Algimanto ir Vytauto Nasvyčių, Justino Šeiboko – kūrybos ir gyvenimo laukas. Pasitelkus šių architektų asmenines istorijas ir jų reprezentacijas, bandoma išplėsti modernios architektūros reikšmių totalitarinėje sistemoje interpretacijas. Architektų archyvuose rasti šaltiniai nagrinėjami taikant ikonologinę ir dekonstrukcinę prieigas, o istorinis-menotyrinis ir meninis tyrimas jungiami siekiant architektūros kritinei analizei suteikti erdvinę formą. Šiame vaizdų tyrime išryškinamas architektų santykio su sovietine politine sistema ambivalentiškumas, o Lietuvos sovietmečio architektūra atskleidžiama kaip daugialypis ir kintantis objektas, kuriam būdingi realumo ir fiktyvumo, vidaus ir išorės, atvaizdo ir erdvės, estetikos ir ideologijos sąsajų, inversijų, mutacijų paradoksai. Svarbia tyrimo dalimi laikytinas su sovietmečio architektūra susijusių medijuotų šaltinių kolekcijos paviešinimas parodoje, kaip architektūros vaizdų trūkumo kompensavimo Lietuvos muziejuose ir jų kritinės patirties aktyvavimo būdas.This article discusses the processes and conditions of the shaping of the oeuvre and social status of the most prominent Lithuanian architects of the 1960s generation: Vytautas Brėdikis, Nijolė Bučiūtė, Vytautas Edmundas Čekanauskas, Algimantas Mačiulis, Algimantas and Vytautas Nasvytis, and Justinas Šeibokas. The start of their professional careers coincided with the beginning of the Khrushchev ‘thaw period’ in the cultural politics, and a rather unique situation in the field of architecture. The natural course of pre-war Modernism in Lithuania at this time was forcibly discontinued, while the style of Stalinist Neo-Historicism in architecture was suddenly at odds with the shifting aims of the system. Architects were in great demand during the post-war period of rapid urbanisation, which was also due to the fact that many professionals had fled the country at the end of the war. These circumstances opened up opportunities for younger Lithuanian architects who were eager to innovate, to design public buildings that would stand out against the background of the typical mass built social housing. The named architects had a major impact not only on the development of Lithuanian architecture in the second half of the 20th century but also on mediating the aim of the Soviet system to construct a “new” society. This is shown in numerous state awards received by the architects as well as in the wide distribution of information about their projects through the space of Soviet political influence. The seven architects and their milieu are approached as a microhistorical case presenting clues for the interpretation of the meanings of larger creative processes and their representations of modern post-war Soviet architecture. The focus of the research is on the images and stories as mediated source material found in the personal archives of the architects or collected through interviews with the architects. The sources are interpreted by applying iconological and deconstructive methods of research. At the same time, the collecting of these sources is seen as a complex creative practice of gathering, studying, ordering, gazing, spacing and exhibiting of knowledge in its own right. This leads to research that merges art history and artistic research modes in search of architecture criticism as a form of critical spatial practice. The analysis of images, as related to media and body, highlights the ambivalent, complex relations of architects with the Soviet system. Lithuanian post-war modern architecture is revealed as a multifaceted contextual phenomenon, connecting, transforming and inverting the opposites of real and fictive, inside and outside, image and space, aesthetics and ideology. The research adds up to an exploration of the possibilities to animate historic material through its staging in an exhibition. The Contemporary Art Centre in Vilnius, which in itself is a listed building and one of the important examples of post-war modern architecture designed by V. E. Čekanauskas, is used as the site of exploration. The exhibition of the collection in this context becomes a critical means of bringing private source material related to Soviet Lithuanian architecture to the public space. It is intended to compensate for the lack of architectural images in Lithuanian museums and to explore the possibilities to activate their perception through contextual spatial experience