House at the old mill. France.

Ancient architecture is an accent of any area that attracts attention. History itself is preserved in buildings that have survived hundreds of years, and this attracts, fascinates, leaving no one indifferent. The ancient architecture of cities often differs from the traditional buildings characteristic of a particular area, built over a certain time. Traditional architecture is classified as folk art, developing on the basis of the characteristics of the area: climate, the presence of one or another natural building material, national art. Let's consider this statement using examples of traditional architecture different countries. For example, for middle zone Russia is considered traditional wooden architecture based on a log house or frame - a cage with a pitched roof (double or hipped). A log house is obtained by folding logs horizontally to form crowns. With a frame system, a frame is created from horizontal rods and vertical posts, as well as braces. The frame is filled with boards, clay, and stone. The frame system is more typical for the southern regions, where adobe houses can still be found. In the decor of Russian houses of old architecture, openwork wood carvings are most often found, which in today's construction can be replaced with products made from wood composite.

Traditional architecture with carved decoration imitating wood.

The traditional architecture of Japan leaves no one indifferent. It is based on wood. The gracefully curved cornices of ancient houses and pagodas are recognizable all over the world. For Japan 17-19 centuries. Two- and three-story houses with plastered and whitewashed bamboo facades became traditional. The roof canopy was created depending on the weather conditions of a particular place: high and steep roofs were made where there was a lot of rainfall, and flat and wide roofs with a large offset in places where it was necessary to provide shade from the sun. In old houses, the roofs were covered with thatch (now such buildings can be found in Nagano), and in the 17-18 centuries. began to use tiles (they were mainly used in cities).

Traditional architecture of Japan 19th century.

There are other trends in traditional architecture in Japan. An example would be old architecture Shirakawa village in Gifu Prefecture, famous for its traditional gaso-zukuri buildings that date back hundreds of years.

Traditional "gaso-zukuri" architecture.

When people talk about traditional English architecture, many people think of Tudor-style houses or Georgian austere brick buildings, which are rich in Britain. Such buildings perfectly convey the national character of English architecture, and are often successful with new developers seeking to embody English style in a modern house.

(from the French moderne - modern, French art nouveau - translated means new art) - an artistic movement in art, most widespread in the last decade of the 19th - early 20th centuries (before the start of the First World War). Modern architecture is distinguished by its rejection of straight lines and angles in favor of more natural, “natural” lines, and the use of new technologies (metal, glass).

This was the first direction in the history of architecture that moved away from the order system and from the continuation of the traditions of classical architecture. The facades of buildings in the Art Nouveau style are asymmetrical - without straight lines and angles, they resemble forms borrowed from nature. The buildings are beautiful and do not have bad angles; on each side the façade and decor look special, while all elements obey the architect’s single plan. Another feature of the art of this style was the use of a variety of building and finishing materials; glass, steel, concrete are used along with more traditional wood, brick, and stone. The buildings were distinguished by huge display windows and stained glass windows - colorful paintings made of colored glass. Sculptures of fairy-tale creatures were located above the entrances and windows, organically combining with the overall architectural image.

Art Nouveau masters used new technical and constructive means, free planning to create unusual, distinctly individual buildings, all elements of which were subordinated to a single figurative and symbolic plan; The facades of Art Nouveau buildings are dynamic and have a fluidity of form, sometimes approaching sculpture.

Natural style

The natural architecture of a country house is represented by the chalet style, Scandinavian and organic styles. This also includes ethnic architecture (architecture inherent to a certain people, a country based on traditions and customs).

Born in Savoy, an ancient province in southeastern France, bordering Italy and Switzerland. Initially, chalets (French:shalet) are houses located on mountain slopes. They were used seasonally as farms for dairy cattle, which were grazed on the lowland pastures by shepherds (hence the shepherd's chalet). These houses served as shelter in bad weather and as a home for shepherds during the summer months of grazing livestock. With the onset of cold weather, they were closed and not used during the Alpine winter.

The chalets were built of stone (foundation and high ground floor) and strong timber (ground floor and attic), the walls were plastered and whitewashed with lime. The stone floor protected the house from any weather and allowed it to stand firmly on any difficult mountainous terrain. The usable building area was increased by terraces extending far beyond the perimeter of the house, as if hanging over the valley. Sloping roofs, with a slope strongly protruding beyond the walls, created additional protection from precipitation. The climatic conditions in the Alpine mountains are quite harsh, so the buildings were erected without any special frills, but very well. Wind, snow and rain only improved appearance chalet: the stone acquired a picturesque chipped appearance, and the resinous coniferous wood (pine, larch), traditionally used to build houses, became a noble dark color over time. The facades facing the weather were additionally sheathed with wood chips or shingles, and looked gloomy due to the monotony of the natural dark color of the wood and the lack of additional decorations. The most beautiful aspect of the house was east façade. The roof gable with the ridge was always oriented towards the sunrise. The walls facing the sunny side were plastered, painted with white lime, decorated with bright paintings, decorated with ledges, balconies, and carvings. The decor was simple and devoid of any pretentiousness.

A distinctive feature of a house built in the style of an Alpine chalet is the special strength and reliability of the structure, laconic forms dictated by the harsh climate and ergonomic interior space. Among the features of architectural solutions: a sloping roof dominating the entire volume of the building; the top floor is always attic; and a wide, made of wood, balcony extending along the entire façade and resting on the structure of the first floor.

The concept consists of late XIX century from the diversity of Scandinavian cultures, languages, traditions and views. The philosophy of this style played an important role in world architecture.

Scandinavia harsh northern region with beautiful cold nature, clear lakes, huge forests, an indented coastline with many fjords. Scandinavians are leisurely and thorough. They are characterized by restraint and some severity, coldness and silence, as well as love and respect for nature. The character of a Scandinavian home was formed under the influence of two powerful elements. One of them is natural. Long cold winters, the proximity of the sea and the piercing wind forced the northerners to focus on protecting their homes from external influences. The other is religious. Protestantism and extreme negative attitude to demonstrative luxury. That's why Scandinavian houses look modest.

The traditional house in the Nordic countries was built from wood. The bare frame, covered with boards, wood siding or clapboard, is painted in a contrasting, discreet color with white window sashes. Scandinavian builders try to preserve the natural texture of wood, which is only emphasized by a colorless coating or tinting. But individual parts are allowed to be brightly colored, for example, ridges and roof supports or gables. The house itself is distinguished by simple forms, minimal decor and the highest quality workmanship of all construction details. This simplicity is particularly attractive. The Scandinavian style clearly shows the Nordic peoples’ craving for nature and love for its creations.

This is a direction in architecture that appeared thanks to the American architect Louis Sullivan, who first formulated it on the basis of the principles of evolutionary biology in the 1890s, as “correspondence between form and function.” Louis Sullivan and his student and colleague Frank Lloyd Wright (in whose works this trend of architectural thought found its most complete embodiment) at the beginning of the 20th century created American architecture, which before them was a mixture of historical European forms.

"Every building intended for human use must be integral part landscape, its features, related to the area and integral to it. We hope it stays where it is for a long time. After all, a house is not a van!”

F.L. Wright

Sullivan's ideas formed the basis of Wright's concept. The building must be integrated into nature. The appearance should follow from the content. Flexible building layout, internal spaces flowing into each other, connected to the outside world by strip glazing. Application of natural materials in architecture.

Organic architecture sees its task in creating buildings and structures that reveal the properties of natural materials and are organically integrated into the surrounding landscape. A supporter of the idea of ​​continuity of architectural space, Wright proposed to draw a line under the tradition of deliberately highlighting the building and its components from the surrounding world. In his opinion, the shape of a building should each time follow from its specific purpose and the unique environmental conditions in which it is erected. Houses built in an organic style served as a natural continuation of their surroundings. natural environment, similar to the evolutionary form of natural organisms.

Modern styles

New technologies and materials, new trends and currents of modern thought, functionality, laconic forms, rational thinking and the desire for naturalness - all this shapes A New Look on architecture, creating the so-called modern style. Simple forms, open structures that become architectural decoration; connection between the interior and the outside world, environmentally friendly materials, free space, plenty of air and light - these are important components of modern style.

The formation of modern architecture was strongly influenced by a number of trends in architectural thought, united by the term Modernism (from the French modernism, moderne - newest, modern) - this is a movement in the architecture of the 20th century, a turning point in content, associated with a decisive renewal of forms and designs, a rejection of styles of the past, it is based on the achievements of the scientific and technological revolution and covers almost the entire 20th century - from the beginning of the century to the 70-80s.

Architectural modernism includes such architectural directions such as functionalism, constructivism, rationalism, architectural art deco style, brutalism, organic architecture (discussed in the section “Natural style”). All these areas have their own characteristics, their own philosophy and stages of development, but in private suburban construction they are used in pure form weakly, therefore we will dwell in more detail only on constructivism and art deco.

Direction in architecture of the 1920s. XX century, which developed after the First World War due to the growth of industrial technology and the introduction of new types of buildings and structures.

This architectural style reveals the design of architectural structures, requires functionality and rationality of forms, geometric clarity of volumes. Constructivism is characterized by the exposure of the building structure, extreme simplification of the form, the contrast of blank wall surfaces with large glazing surfaces, and the monolithic appearance of the building.

Art Deco, Also Art Deco(fr. art deco, verb. "decorative arts", from the name of the Paris exhibition of 1925) is an influential movement in the first half of the 20th century, which first appeared in France in the 1920s and developed until the end of World War II. This is an eclectic style, a synthesis of modernism and neoclassicism. The Art Deco style also has a significant influence such artistic directions like cubism, constructivism and futurism.

Distinctive features are strict patterns, bold geometric shapes, ethnic geometric patterns, richness of colors, generous ornaments, luxury, chic, expensive, modern materials.

Art Deco structure is based on the mathematical geometry of shapes. It is generally accepted that Art Deco is one of many forms of Art Nouveau with eclectic influences in addition to powerful modern designs high technology.

The influence of Art Deco design was expressed in the crystalline and faceted forms of decorative cubism and futurism. Others popular topics Art Deco style had trapezoidal, zigzag, geometric and mixed shapes that can be traced in many early works architects and designers.

Now let's move directly to the main directions of modern architecture, such as High-tech, Minimalism and Bio-tech.

High tech(English hi-tech, from high technology - high technology) - a style in architecture and design that appeared in England in the 60s of the 20th century.

Main features of the style:
The use of high technologies in the design, construction and engineering of buildings and structures. High-tech is characterized by straight lines and shapes, an appeal to elements of constructivism and cubism, and the most practical planning of internal space; widespread use of silver-metallic color, glass, plastic, metal; lighting that creates the effect of a spacious room. The use of functional elements: elevators, stairs, ventilation systems placed on the façade of the building. High-tech style does not hide structural details, but rather plays with them, making them decorative elements. Buildings in this style are very functional, comfortable, they have their own beauty, complex simplicity and sculptural form.

Bio-tech(Bionics) is newest direction in architecture (late 20th - early 21st centuries, still at the stage of formation), where, in contrast to high-tech, the expressiveness of structures is achieved not by turning to elements of constructivism and cubism, but by borrowing natural forms. The bio-tech style developed from bionics (from the Greek bios - life), an applied science whose proponents seek inspiration in nature to solve complex technical problems. The concept of bionics appeared at the beginning of the twentieth century. This is the area scientific knowledge, based on the discovery and use of patterns of construction of natural forms to solve technical, technological and artistic problems based on the analysis of the structure, morphology and vital activity of biological organisms.

The name was proposed by the American researcher J. Steele at a 1960 symposium in Daytona - “Living prototypes of artificial systems - the key to new technology” - during which the emergence of a new, unexplored field of knowledge was consolidated. From this moment on, architects, designers, constructors and engineers are faced with a number of tasks aimed at finding new means of shaping.

Buildings in the Bio-tech style repeat natural forms and structures, striving for organicity with nature. Bio-tech embodies a philosophical concept, the meaning of which is to create a new space for human life as a creation of nature, combining the principles of biology, engineering and architecture. Unlike organic architecture, which does not seek to copy nature, its manifestations, but wants to be in an organic relationship with it, bionics seeks to copy nature not only externally, but also constructively.

The age of globalization has brought to humanity the development of technology, industry, urban growth, a wide range of opportunities for construction, architecture, etc. However, despite the advantages, we cannot remain silent about the negative factors of this process. In particular, this affected architectural practice as a means of cultural, national and ethnic expression. Globalization in architecture aims to erase international boundaries. The beginning of this process is associated with the appearance on the architectural horizon of the “International Style”, as uniting nations into a single global system. At the same time, I note that we should not speak categorically and negatively regarding this movement in the architecture of the twentieth century. Firstly, its creation is inextricably linked with the post-war years of World War II, when European states laid the foundation for the modern world economy and global political philosophy, which set itself the goal of uniting nations. And naturally, architecture, as a mirror of society, expressed the coming changes in the “international style”. Secondly, representatives of this direction are leading architects and real masters, who still inspire both professionals and young students of the relevant specialty: Walter Gropius, Le Corbusier, Mies van der Rohe, Peter Behrens, etc.

However, I will not take the reader far from the main topic of the article and its problem, no matter how interesting the history of world architecture and the international style, in particular, is. Today, globalization is erasing traditional architecture from the face of the earth. This means that the concept of identifying an architectural object by its history, culture and the uniqueness of the people that this object represents disappears.
But architecture, as a form of art, can be an excellent mediator in intercultural and interethnic dialogue. Through architectural creations and the idea that fills them, a representative of one culture has the opportunity to better understand the traditions of another people. And in turn, the history and uniqueness of the various nationalities of our planet will not remain forgotten by the representatives of one or another nationality. One of the trends in modern architecture - regionalism or regional architecture - can accomplish this task.
The very idea of ​​using national elements in architecture is not new. Among the predecessors of regionalism among Russian architects, I will name the name of Fyodor Shekhtel, who successfully used elements of traditional Russian architecture in the direction of modernism.

Yaroslavsky Station, Moscow

It is also impossible not to mention the Russian-Byzantine style in which Konstantin Ton designed. We can say that objects of this direction are the pride of both domestic and world architecture. The first echoes of regionalism.


Cathedral of Christ the Savior, Moscow

The heyday of this trend dates back to the second half of the twentieth century, as a response to the policy of globalization. This architectural movement implies:

• The architect's appeal to local national traditions, history, epic


• Inspiration from images of local nature, reference to the landscape


• Silhouette perception of an object


• Presence of an ethnocultural component


• Design in a historical environment


• Use of national decor


• Transformation of national architecture into a modern object

Regionalism has been successful both abroad and in our homeland. Japan, the country where a stunning synthesis of modernism and regionalism arose, gave the world masterpieces of regional architecture in the works of K. Tange. One of his famous buildings is the Yoyogi Olympic Sports Complex. The complex, curvilinear shapes emulate the ancient Japanese art of origami.

In the USSR, the direction of regional architecture was reflected in the works of V. Jorbenadze, V. Orbeladze (Palace of Ceremonial Rituals, Tbilisi. The silhouette of the building follows the shape of a mountain serpentine).

Palace of Ceremonies, Tbilisi

G. Movchan, V. Krasilnikov, S. Galadzheva (Avar Theater, Makhachkala).


Avar Theater, Makhachkala

In Tyrnauz (Kabardino-Balkaria) there are also still multi-storey residential buildings with national ornaments on their facades.

And on one of my trips to Vladikavkaz, I accidentally found one of the houses, also made in the same direction (but already reflecting the spirit of the Ossetian people).

Regional architecture did not disappear even after the collapse of the USSR. This direction is still making itself known. Today, new architectural objects are appearing in the territories of the Caucasian republics, reflecting national identity. A striking example can be called Grozny City (architect Jalal Kadiev), where the panorama of buildings depicts Vainakh towers and titanic warriors to the viewer.

National traditions in architecture are still relevant today. Every nation must preserve the memory of its history, traditions, and culture. And architecture, as the face of time, can become an excellent tool for this, a mediator in intercultural and interethnic dialogue.

The origins of the concept of “tradition” and its interpretation

What is tradition in architecture? Classical, in particular? Do we mean by it the order tradition? Modernism today also has its own almost century-old tradition. Is this part of a single progressive process, or is it about the antagonism of two “superstyles,” as S.O. Khan-Magomedova?

Everyone understands that any art (like other types human activity) do not arise out of nowhere, but are based on all previous development experience. This is especially true for such a fundamental and long-term phenomenon by its very nature as architecture, which solves not only aesthetic, cultural, spiritual, but, first of all, practical problems.

At the same time, in accordance with the law of dialectics, each subsequent round of architectural development in some way denies the previous one. The stimulus for the new formation is, on the one hand, the new social ideas that have captured the minds, and on the other, the development of the engineering and construction industries. In its dialectical negation of the previous stage, architecture can either declare a search for new paths, or turn to the styles of the past, perceived as the embodiment of a certain historical ideal, worthy of emulation. In other words, architecture looks either back or forward, rushing towards a certain imagery. The present, as an intermediate stage, is too elusive and not fully formed an image for such an inevitably inert and conservative activity as the art of building. At least this has been the case for the last 500 years.

However, ideal figurative projections of architecture can be located not only on a horizontal time scale, but also on a vertical, absolute, eternal scale. This is the ideal of a religious worldview, which found its vivid embodiment in pre-Renaissance architecture.

It can be stated with certainty that the roots architectural tradition sacred, just as the roots of culture as a whole are sacred. Ancient cities and temples were built as earthly projections of the cosmic universe. Strictly defined proportional relationships of religious buildings, their construction based on a symmetrical combination of regular geometric figures, their meaningful location in space oriented towards the heavenly bodies - all this indicates clear and unshakable rules and laws that guided the architects. Without having precise calculations in the modern understanding, they unerringly achieved harmony, relying on tradition as a divine institution passed on from generation to generation. Differing in appearance and size, religious buildings of different nations had a number of common patterns, based on certain numerical and rhythmic relationships and expressing divine properties in the language of architecture: greatness, harmony, eternity, beauty and the ideal hierarchy of the universe. Other buildings, neighborhoods and cities were erected according to similar principles, excluding arbitrary interpretation.

Aesthetics as a symptom

Let's try to take a look at the changing world of architecture in the light of those fundamental qualities of architecture that Vitruvius formulated at the dawn of our era. In the twentieth century, all three of them experienced a number of crisis rethinkings. Benefit began to be understood as purely utilitarian functionality; durability is becoming an increasingly relative category, in line with the new understanding of architectural structures as objects of design, temporary street “furniture”, designed to last 50 years. But the most radical revision occurred in relation to the third component - beauty.

The basis for the interpretation of beauty in philosophy and aesthetics of the classical type is its fundamental attribution to the transcendental, divine principle. The foundations of this approach to beauty were laid by the philosophy of Plato, in which a thing was perceived as beautiful, perfect due to its correspondence to its ideal image, the divine idea, the embodiment of which is the purpose of the existence of this object. Thus, beauty was thought of as an absolute substance. Plato's concept of beauty, adopted and developed in Christianity, became the basis of European aesthetics for many centuries. Beauty was perceived as one of the definitions of God, along with love and truth. The phenomenon of beauty as a reflection of divine, absolute beauty acquired the characteristics of normativity and was enshrined in the canons, ensuring continuity in the development of architecture and other arts.

Thus, the grandiose change in the figurative-constructive paradigm, which took place as a result of the victory of Christianity over paganism, took place through gradual evolution, without cutting off the stem line of development. It took more than a thousand years to transform the Roman basilica into a Gothic cathedral, embodying the victory of spirit over matter with unattainable perfection. Gothic, like ancient architecture, demonstrates the complete unity of constructive and figurative components, becoming one of the perfect expressions of “truthful” and at the same time beautiful architecture.

Looking ahead, I will note one extremely important, from my point of view, general pattern: in the future, when styles changed, buildings from different eras coexisted harmoniously, often forming outstanding ensembles. This testifies, in my opinion, not only to the urban planning talent of the old masters, but also to the related continuity of pre-modernist styles that have a common sacred root. In modern times, the coexistence of old and new, as a rule, has the character of opposition and antagonism (which confirms Khan-Magomedov’s thesis about two superstyles). At the same time, it can be stated that the growing number of protective laws and organizations do not save the situation in any way, since they act in fragments, within the framework of a completely different paradigm.

Renaissance like new point countdown

Starting from the New Age, gradually, gradually, the complete dominance of the religious idea as the semantic engine of human consciousness begins to dry up. It is symptomatic that it was at this time that advanced Italians first turned to the ancient - pagan - architectural heritage, which a thousand years before had been quietly destroyed before their eyes. Since then, it seems, that very “tradition” in the modern understanding has arisen - i.e. orientation towards order classics as a kind of universal tuning fork, an absolute reference point. The ideal moved from heaven to earth, into the past covered in romantic myth. At the same time, the Christian idea, of course, still continued to nourish and fertilize the new aesthetic standard. But the process of secularization was already irreversible; it received a rapid surge in the era of Voltaire and ended with a series of atheistic revolutions in the twentieth century.

At the new stage, referring to the order had a completely different meaning than what its ancient creators put into it. Spatial and plastic patterns based on constructive logic and religious consciousness, turned into an abstract aesthetic system, which over time became increasingly torn away from its roots, fragmented and lost even its formal integrity. The once indissoluble unity of the figurative and constructive components has given way to the universalism of order forms, interpreted purely as representative decoration. The gradual decline of urban planning art in the 19th century and its deep permanent crisis in modern times also testifies to the loss of the integrity of the public worldview and the impoverishment of religiosity as a fundamental binding idea.

The classical canon was able to adapt itself equally successfully in both civil and temple architecture, expressing the general idea of ​​greatness and harmony, beauty and hierarchical order. Over time, it has become a universal emblem of culture and tradition, indispensable for the representation of any public institution or private home until the present day.

The ancient classics perceived by the Renaissance served as such a powerful impetus in the process of style formation that its energy lasted until the middle of the 19th century, when general fatigue with columns and porticos began to grow. For some time, the order became one of many decorations in a series of equal options for “smart choice” in order to once again occupy a meaningful, dominant position in the neoclassical period.

The vitality and, by and large, lack of alternative to the order tradition speaks not only of its powerful artistic potential, but also of the fact that only by the beginning of the 20th century (neither earlier nor later) the fundamental ideas of a new worldview matured and were finally formed in society. It was by this time that a revolutionary transition took place from the traditionally religious (with all the diversity of confessions) model of the universe to a completely new one - materialistic.

Based on this, in the future we have to talk about tradition, as a rule, in its completely castrated, purely applied manifestation, at best at the level of aesthetics of urban planning thinking, and more often at the level of external decoration, although there are exceptions.

Order tradition in modern times

The existence of the classical tradition at the beginning of the twentieth century. began with its overcoming - first evolutionary, in line with the search for art nouveau and industrial architecture, and then revolutionary, under the onslaught of avant-garde modernism. The language of modernism is fundamentally different: firstly, it declaratively rejects such “excesses” as ornament and any decoration in general. In addition, in continuation of the development of industrial architecture, modernism proclaims the principle of design “from within - out” and the reign of “honest architecture”, following function. In this case, the function is understood exclusively in a physical, utilitarian sense. As a result, such previously unshakable laws as symmetry and generally hierarchical, harmonious order, closely associated with the traditional subordination of the internal structure to the external volumetric-spatial composition, which to one degree or another reflected the model of the universe characteristic of the religious era, were naturally rejected. It is impossible not to notice the accentuated “horizontalism” of all the iconic buildings of the new era, as if crossing out the traditional upward aspiration of all Christian architecture. The vertical vector aimed at overcoming inert stone matter was replaced by an affirmation of the uniqueness of the physical dimension. New figurative expressiveness replaced traditional ideas about the beauty of a building as proportional harmony and elegance 1.

So, using the term S.O. Khan-Magomedov, the new superstyle deliberately opposed itself to the very tradition discussed above. Thus, modernism is a culture based on negation, i.e. alternative culture. At the same time, the further emasculation of the concept of “tradition” and the weakening of religiosity as a determining factor of consciousness means for modernism the loss of the tuning fork, its starting point and “source of adrenaline.” As a result, it has long lost its original pathos and revolutionary sharpness of form, fragmenting into many independent “anti-traditional” movements.

Neoclassicism, which had prevailed in Russia, was stopped by the revolution and was forced to adapt to new realities. Today it is difficult to say how sincere the search for I.A. was. Fomin adapting the order language to the new social order. Obviously, at least in a purely formal aspect, the task could not help but captivate the architect. In parallel, in Europe, P. Behrens, O. Perret and others were engaged in experiments of such adaptation (with a predominance of engineering and technical and formal rather than ideological motivation). Art Deco's quest also took place at the intersection of tradition and innovation.

One way or another, pushed aside by the experiences of “modern architecture” or forced to adapt, classical reserves were again in demand with the strengthening of Stalin’s dictatorship in the USSR, as well as with the establishment of the regimes of Mussolini in Italy and Hitler in Germany. At the same time, the order wave swept across France and Great Britain, the USA and Japan, essentially becoming the last universal consistent appeal to tradition.

2nd floor XX century was marked by a new balance of power in world architecture. The discredited “neoclassicism,” associated primarily with totalitarian regimes, gave way to a new onslaught of functionalism, which found fertile ground in the post-war housing crisis. After overcoming the consequences of the war and with increasing prosperity, the unified international style provoked an alternative in the form of postmodernism. This was no longer a consistent appeal to tradition, even at the formal-aesthetic level. Individual words and quotations from the classical dictionary were involved in more or less fascinating, but more often cold intellectual game. While externally borrowing classical elements, this new “system” (rejecting the very principle of systematicity) rather states the agony of the classical tradition than its continuation.

At the same time, the modernist mainstream was not going to give up its position, producing mass products in the form of multi-storey functionalist housing and elite examples in various neo-modernist styles in a wide range from high-tech and minimalism to non-linear architecture and deconstructivism, united, however, by a common sign of negation historical tradition. Against this background, individual regional schools, such as Finnish, Japanese, Brazilian and others, entered the scene. Based on modernist principles, they developed the ideas of organic architecture and national traditions, forming different versions of “humanized” modernism.

Today, traditional value guidelines are more confidently opposed than ever by the aesthetics of the absurd. If the old masters made every effort to comprehend harmony, today it seems that many inquisitive minds and bright talents selflessly strive for the scientific and artistic comprehension of chaos. This is clearly reflected in the new, irrational modifications of modernism: deconstructivism and non-linear architecture, associated with the development of philosophical thought (Derrida, Deleuze).

Bio-tech, genetically related to organic architecture, has become a kind of ghostly alternative to the many-sided modernist style and a variant of the “third way.” In general, “green (sustainable) architecture” today seems to be a gigantic laboratory of new form-building, which has not yet produced independent sustainable stylistic results.

However, the orthodox traditionalist line did not disappear. Along with direct classicistic stylizations (Quinlan Terry, Robert Adam), the search for a dialogue between classics and modern technologies, materials, style. Today a number of masters belong to this conventional trend, such as R. Bofill, P. Portoghesi, Leon Krie, M. Budzinsky, in Russia these are M. Filippov, M. Atayants, M. Mamoshin, etc. However, it should be noted that only very few of the architects conducting their searches in this direction have a consistent creative platform; the majority solve purely formal problems with varying degrees of success, essentially representing the modern echelon of eclectics.

Tradition in urban planning

The twentieth century was marked by a number of urban experiments related to the search for practical solutions to acute problems. social problems and problems big cities generally. The garden city of Ebenezer Howard, the linear city of Soria i Mata and Milutina, the radiant city of Le Corbusier and the Charter of Athens are the main milestones that determined the development of urbanism in the recent past and present. As a result of these experiments, the structure of cities radically changed, and a system of strict functional zoning became one of the fundamental principles.

Meanwhile, the denial of the evolutionary experience of European urbanism, neglect of the communicative component of urban space (pedestrian zone), and the predominance of a planned, rational approach to organizing a living and diverse urban environment have posed new problems for cities. As the famous Danish urbanist Jan Gehl writes, since the Middle Ages there have actually been only two radical changes in the ideology of urban planning: the first is associated with the Renaissance, the second with functionalism. The Renaissance marked the transition from the naturally formed city to the city as a work of art. The second turn occurred around 1930, when the physical-functional aspects of cities and buildings took precedence over aesthetics and became the main dimension of design. At the same time, it sometimes happened that some exemplary blocks from the point of view of new urbanism often became hotbeds of crime, which sometimes even led to the demolition of houses that had not had time to age. The dull monotony of residential areas aesthetically, culturally, and socially devalued the vast urban spaces. The isolation of mono-zones has created huge transport problems, as a result of which megacities are turning into cities for cars, not for people. On top of the flaws of the pseudoscientific, purely rational approach are the costs of the market system. The total sale of urban land plots into private hands, including those that are fundamentally important in the urban planning sense, turns modern urban development into a patchwork quilt, a motley crowd of buildings, the only illusory regulator of which is land, construction and other countless standards. As a result, we see that in the twentieth century, any outstanding ensemble achievements in architecture are associated, as a rule, with periods of strong centralized political power. The time of democracy, pluralism and freedom of conscience, in a paradoxical, at first glance, way, is marked by the atrophy of ensemble thinking and a deep permanent crisis.

Against this background, the movement of New Urbanism, which turned to the classical urban planning tradition, was born and developed. It combines elements of architecture, planning and town planning, united around several key ideas. These ideas are used at all levels - from planning a region of a number of cities to planning a small neighborhood. The main idea of ​​this development strategy is that people should live, work and relax in the same place, as it was in the pre-industrial era, but at a new level. Enriched with the best urban planning finds of the 20th century. New urbanism gives our cities a chance to turn towards people, although not much depends on architects in this complex sphere.

Urban planning theory, including many important aspects human life, reveals more deeply the confrontation between new and traditional architecture. However, today she also turns to tradition, without affecting the original foundations, studying the effect, not the cause.

Conclusion

So, speaking today about tradition in architecture, I mean a tradition that has sacred, religious roots and provides a consistent, evolutionary path for the development of architecture until the beginning of the twentieth century. Being different in style and technology, the architecture of traditional religious societies maintained continuity and had fundamental similarities based on the ideas of ontological world order and divine hierarchy.

At the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, the evolutionary development of architecture gave way to a revolutionary one. New era– the era of materialism – created a fundamentally different art, which consciously opposed itself to centuries-old tradition. From my point of view, it was the atheistic impulse, with its priority of material function over all others, that became the main source of modernist shaping and planning at all levels.

Today, atheistic pathos, closely intertwined with social pathos, has outwardly weakened, giving way to the prosaic ideology of a consumer society. The general form-creative crisis, associated with a mental and ideological crisis, associated with the lack of large-scale unifying ideas, is obvious; it has once again found confirmation in a new round of eclecticism.

The universal gave way to the subjective, the spiritual to the material, the harmonious to the disharmonious, the ordered to the chaotic. Beauty, truth, harmony - all these absolute categories, being definitions of God, were subject to doubt and revision. Appeal to tradition as a treasury (albeit not preserved intact) of objective sacred knowledge began to be replaced by external copying of antiquity, turning art into a dead mask. It is falsely contrasted with freedom of creativity, which, being a particular manifestation of freedom in general, has come to be understood as permissiveness. This deadlock confrontation prevents the search for a full-fledged new path. Ethical categories are leaving art; it increasingly exists on the other side of good and evil. Even such a seemingly unshakable stronghold as beauty, which has a powerful effect on the intuitive level of “recognition,” is subject to powerful revision and devaluation, the consequence of which is indifference to beauty and addiction to the aesthetics of the ugly.

In our time, a return to tradition in its pre-Renaissance understanding is more important than ever. Tradition as a lexical set or set of ready-made rules must give way to creative continuity, the search for form must give way to the acquisition of Meaning.

Armed with everyone the latest technologies and the experience of mistakes, it can give over time a modern humane architecture in line with a centuries-old successive culture.

Bibliography

1. Khan-Magomedov, S.O. Ivan Zholtovsky. – M.: S.E. Gordeev, 2010
2. Ikonnikov, A.V. A thousand years of Russian architecture. – M., 1990
3. Neapolitansky, S.M., Matveev, S.A. Sacred architecture. – St. Petersburg, 2009 4. Smolina, N.I. Traditions of symmetry in architecture. – M.: Stroyizdat, 1990
5. Vitruvius. Ten books about architecture. – M., 2003 Shuisky, V.K. Strict classicism. – St. Petersburg, 1997 Rappaport, A.G. “Style as transcendental, or how now dead architecture will rise again and save the world.” – Lecture at MARSH 10.25.2012. http://archi.ru/russia/news_current.html?nid=44965(access date 04/26/13). Stern, Robert. Modern classicism. – New York, 1988
6. Dobritsina, I.A. From postmodernism to nonlinear architecture. – M.,
2004
7. Glazychev, V.L. Urbanism. – M.: Publishing house “Europe”, 2008
8. Jacobs, D. Death and life of large American cities. – M, 2011.
9. Ikonnikov, A.V. Architecture of the 20th century. – M., 2001
10. Gehl, Jan. Zycie miedzy budynkami. – Krakow, 2009

1 Let us remember that beauty was characterized by Vitruvius by “the pleasant and elegant appearance of the structure and the fact that the ratios of its members correspond to the proper rules of proportionality.” - Vitruvius. "Ten books about architecture." Book I

Speaking about architectural and style features skyscrapers being built in different parts of the world, in our reviews we tried to emphasize distinctive features and the specific appearance of high-rise buildings inherent individual countries. Describing the stylistic diversity of modern buildings and projects, we focused on the commonality of techniques of one direction or another.

However, speaking about terms important for understanding the principles of development of this field of activity, we cannot ignore two more global approaches to the construction of skyscrapers, which are permanently present in the world practice of high-rise construction, either dominating or moving to the periphery of the architectural mainstream.

The concepts of “historicism” and “traditionalism” have a very wide range of interpretations in architecture and art, so let us designate more specifically what will fall into the scope of our attention in the first place. In a general philosophical sense, traditionalism is a worldview that transforms the entire heritage of a given culture into a positive tradition; prescription acts as main value(see: Architecture and urban planning: Encyclopedia / ed. A. V. Ikonnikov. M.: Stroyizdat, 2001. P. 591). Conscious traditionalism does not protect the familiar old, but certain general principles, which are considered fundamental and unchangeable.

In architecture, traditionalism involves the use of stylistic and compositional techniques, inherent in a certain time, direction, local tradition and supporting them in current practice. Traditionalism can be aimed at strengthening trends that persist from an earlier period in current culture. Thus, traditionalism can be oriented either towards conservation existing tradition, or to search for historical prototypes, that is, to restore a partially lost tradition (archaization). Conservative traditionalism is aimed at strengthening the existing principles in architecture, while archaizing, on the contrary, is aimed at its destruction, making way for revival.

Historicism, focused on the resuscitation and reuse of methods of constructing an architectural work that have already ceased to be relevant, appeals to an even greater temporary immersion. “Directions emanating from the restoration of already extinct traditions, based on historical memory, belong to the category of historicism.” In high-rise architecture, historicism is clearly used as “an appeal to the architecture of the past to solve the problems of the present” (Ibid. p. 254).

The formation of a new canon is often focused on historical borrowings. For example, the creation and development of the Art Deco style in the architecture of American skyscrapers was based on an unfading interest in neo-Gothic, rethought on a different scale and materials adapted for new tasks. That is, the most original and vibrant period in the development of skyscrapers in the twentieth century, which still inspires architects to compare their works with the best examples of that time, was based on a persistent interest in the architectural achievements of the past, especially the neo-Gothic style.