Architect Tseitlin
‘If Sheikh of Dubai finished the University of Harvard, and he has a PhD, then the policy in terms of architecture corresponds to his world-views and taste…’
One of the finest architects in Minsk, Anatoliy Tseitlin is designing some of the most significant buildings in this city for more than 40 years – from elite residential areas to business centers – but for all this time, he never met a single investor with good taste. Tseitlin likes skyscrapers of cloudy Manhattan, fantastic buildings in Dubai and Minsk’s GUM. He`s skeptical: predicts traffic collapse, complains about local misdoing and recalls ‘paper generations’ of architects. A little authoritarian, knows, that money rules everything and that only personal image is not for sale.
DO BELARUSSIAN TOWNS HAVE ITS OWN FACE?
I can`t give an answer for the entire Republic, because for the last 20 years I work in the capital city. The architecture of other towns, honestly, is of no interest to me. I won`t hide – architects` level of professionalism in district centers is not more than medium. Of course, we are trying to underline presence of the remaining historical architecture, but in our modern architecture, there is nothing worth mentioning. And it will stay so until investors appear with significant amounts of money. They did not appear even in Minsk yet, not to mention the other towns of Belarus. Good architecture is made with big money. Architect can be a genius, but he won`t build anything long-lasting, original, if he`s forced to work only with primitive materials. That is why our architecture has no face.IS IT POSSIBLE TO SAY, THAT WE HAVE OUR OWN ORIGINAL SCHOOLS?
No. There are no such schools, and we don`t shine with originality. We got behind for several generations. Our architects travel abroad, study journals, and some of them are capable to interpret what they saw in accordance with their own level of understanding. Western architecture is very technocratic, and it is absolutely another level. We simply can`t reach this level financially. There are, let`s say, ‘relatively unique’ buildings financed by government, that look good from distance. On the other hand, resellers who are taking bank credits to finance commercial objects, they build some rubbish, sell it, and then get their earnings. That is all - they have no other worries.WHAT SHOULD IDEAL CITY LOOK LIKE?
It is impossible to build one. Even with great efforts. Nobody is interested in urban planning problems – it is very complex, full-scale subject! Urban planning tasks are impossible to fulfill even in Minsk, a relatively small city. We can only adapt to new conditions, even if to look only at city automobile traffic. It seems, tendency of growth is obvious. It is possible to predict the traffic collapse, which can be seen today in Moscow. But no - chaos is approaching, and those, who are in control of everything, do nothing. Is there any way out – it is hard to see.MINSK – IS IT EASTERN OR WESTERN CITY?
I would like to see it as a western city, but since many investors came here from East, corresponding motives will dominate in the city architecture. It is already clear if you look at the investors’ demands. But for that it looks ‘rich’…IT IS OFTEN SAID, THAT MINSK IS CHANGING ITS SHAPE RADICALLY IN ONE GENERATION, 40 YEARS – AND NEW CITY APPEARS. IS THIS TRUE?
It is an overstatement. Without doubt, Minsk is changing. But not sharply, not fundamentally, not revolutionary, here everyone is ‘pamyarkouna’. Nowadays at least something is happening, and there were years when nothing was being built, building sites were in standstill. As a result, whole generation of architects was left out of process. All that`s left are dinosaurs like me, ‘children’ appeared, but unfortunately there is nobody in the middle. That is why the saying ‘no-one is prophet in his own village’ is probably true. They are inviting foreign architects who will show us what and how should be done. Possibly, it`s historical tendency, I don`t know, but I have never heard that English or the French invited someone from abroad. We pray for them to come, and they can`t even study our features, norms. They draw their own ideas without looking into local mentality, philosophy of the city – not everything is so simple.BUILDINGS ERRECTED IN 18TH, 19TH CENTURY ARE BEING DESTROYED HERE LATELY AND INSTEAD OF THEM THEY BUILD LOW QUALITY STRUCTURES, HISTORICAL BUILDINGS IN MOSCOW ARE LEVELLED TOO, BUILDINGS FROM SOVIET ERA CAUSE ALLERGIC REACTION IN POLAND AND LITHUANIA. WHY IS THAT SO?
For those, who take care of its history, it is a painful subject. However, to abstract – roughly speaking, forget my roots and compare all our historical ‘spadchina’ with the heritage of other countries, it gets a little gloomy. Architectural monuments in Riga, Vilnius, Prague, Budapest, not to mention France or Germany – those are real monuments! No matter how big Minsk local patriot I am, but if the Soviet monstrous buildings are disturbing, probably, the best thing to do is to get rid of them.IS IT POSSIBLE TO THINK OF THE TERM, LITERALLY ONE OR TWO WORDS THAT WOULD DEFINE NEW MINSK STYLE?
There is no style. I would like the city to have good, concentrated business center, and not center that is spread on all city area, then to have normal living districts, not multi colored buildings surrounding ring road. There are sites, which shouldn`t be given to investors without money, with administration on their side! They shouldn`t disfigure the city. But that is happening now. That`s why we have dispersed definition of capital – here everything is scattered. Many associate Minsk with its main avenue. Some are even proud of it. When guests from mega poleis arrive, who are already tired of glass, metal and sterility, they see here Stalin empire style, which provokes some curiosity. But nothing more than that. In fact, this style can`t wake exceptional feelings: it is nothing more than a tribute of an era, when everything was made pompous, when façade was decorated with classical orders, and the courts were left with bare silicate brick without plaster. In fact, avenue was built according to principle of Potemkin`s villages. This is not Frankfurt, where you walk with open mouth while looking at all the glass structures. And of course, not Dubai, where miracles come true. Billions were invested there. Those are not buildings like we are used to - they are mechanisms. It`s simply miraculous architecture.IN YOUR OPINION, WHAT COMES FIRST – ESTHETHICS OR FUNCTION?
Truly, it is an ever going struggle. I was lucky – I spent all my life in practice, working, and didn`t become member of ‘paper architecture’ generation: people who didn`t work in practice, who were forced to do something else, so as not to lose themselves. They were making drawings, looking for ideals without stop. At this stage, they were not interested in function - form was in first place. They had only one goal – to astonish themselves. But I was forced to connect those two elements, so that the expression would correspond with functional demands. Today we have this situation: they`re building a house, in order to complete it, they add a small turret, without any function. This is a primitive approach to formation of building. In order to make a silhouette, it is necessary to build 50 stories effectively and expressive, instead of 10 stories with unnecessary turrets and so have the possibility to avoid senseless details. Sadly, it is not always easy to achieve harmony of esthetics and function.CAN SKYSCRAPERS STAND NEXT TO HISTORICAL SITES? IS IT NECESSARY FOR THE CITY TO RISE HIGH?
Absolutely yes. There is nothing to discuss about. Skyscraper – it is not some kind of whim. In first place, it is necessary to preserve city`s land. In second place there`s a political aspect: it is the expression of country`s economical power through architectural form. There is no need to waste money on 10 unneeded tanks; skyscrapers are the best evidence of economic rise. They, of course, should not be a dominant that is standing on the axis of street, surrounded with small buildings. And by the way, it is absolutely not bad to have historical sites next to skyscrapers. In Manhattan, New York, you can see such combinations very often. They cause no negative emotions. On the contrary, it is amazing how careful it is done. There we have architectural monument, old building with pilasters, cannelures, etc. and literally next to it – 60 stories. How is that possible? When we build a building, we need to clear all the surrounding, degrading the environment… There, they are attentive with land and environment. That`s why the New York ensemble looks astonishing, despite the apparent chaos. So, you see, the concentration camp order is not always good… When I strolled in Manhattan it was cloudy enough, so that all the skyscrapers were hidden in clouds. But in perception of old buildings alongside skyscrapers there was no strain. Even when it`s a clear sunny day one doesn`t walk looking up and thinking: ’How it looks altogether?’ Usually pedestrian`s sight can capture a building up until 4th floor.
IF WE FORGET FOR A MOMENT ABOUT FINANCIAL PROBLEMS, WHY AREN`T HERE ANY EXTRAVAGANT ULTRAMODERN BUILDINGS? ARE BELARUSSIANS IN GENERAL WILLING TO EXPERIMENT?
There`s only one reason: money. When normal investors come – striking objects will appear. The problem is not in mentality of designers or people in general – everyone would like to see something unusual. This is the main thing: If Sheikh of Dubai finished the University of Harvard, and he has a PhD, then the policy in terms of architecture corresponds to his world-views and taste; but when investors-traders appear with corresponding mentality, it is clear what happens. To design a project for them, which they will certainly not accept, is senseless.IS IT POSSIBLE TO SAY THAT IN THE EX-SOVIET COUTRIES WE HAVE SOME KIND OF DISTANCE FROM TRADITION, ARCHITECTURAL UNCONSCIOUSNESS?
It`s a provocative question… what was built earlier by previous generations, is not transformed. The evolution is not taking place. New meanings, new world looks emerge, but all that was before is cut-off. We are hopping after those who are already very far away. That`s why there is no continuity. But who knows, is it necessary to look back at all? What for? Even in Baltic states, Poland, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Hungary everything was fulfilled and finished by the previous generations. All that is left is historical value. By the way, if to speak of historical values in Minsk, I instantly think of GUM. No matter how often I look at this façade, I always find myself with one thought: ‘I would never make something like that!’ All those details, complexity, and stone macramé – it is truly a monument, a monument of people`s craftsmanship, who lived in that era. Today`s designers, investors and builders will never make something like that, they won`t even try. But Union Palace, for example, we can`t call a monument. It is a fake classicism, overdone copy. It would be better to pull it down. It is no more than a tribute of an era. So it comes out we have nothing left in the past. Do we need it at all? There was no skillfulness at that time. But it will come up, forgive me for triviality, when money appears.WHAT MATERIALS, COLOURS, AND FORMS WILL APPEAR IN THE FUTURE?
Nowadays tendencies show us that construction engineering and architecture are becoming less time-consuming. A building is assembled and fastened literally by details. The costs of building are always very important, so that there`s no time and money for long, dedicated work. Reinforced concrete, console constructions, no walls, no laying, no plaster, dirt – all this is of poor quality and expensive.HOW THE CHANGES IN POLITICS OR ECONOMY INFLUENCE CHANGES IN ARCHITECTURE (STYLES, TENDENCIES)?
The Stalin architecture is for example, ideology. After the war, it was necessary to show that we are not lying in dirt, that we can do something. That`s why they chose the tendency of neoclassicism, which gave the illusion of wealth. That was distinguishing style for political tendencies. In general, all the features of city architecture depend on the ambitions of the mayor. If he, for example, wants to demonstrate adequately his work, he will do it in a form of interesting new building. There`s nothing wrong, if those in charge know what they want. In that sense I`m for good authority. Since the element of looseness is still preserved here, hoping that everything will be formed by itself is senseless. For long years we were servants, and we can`t become chiefs for one day. In the States, control is as harsh, but there market is regulating everything. If you built something with faults, there won`t be any place for you in business in the future. Even without local patriotism they preserve the city face. For example, in Washington D.C. it is forbidden to build higher than the monument of George Washington. But New York is city without limitations and borders.DOES ARCHITECTURE HAVE ITS POP AND CONJUNCTURE?
Of course. Personally, I rejected several investors, despite the normal price of the projects, when I realized that they are trying to force their own thoughts and comprehension. Breaking up is never easy, but I can allow myself such thing, because I`m not jobless. But if one doesn`t do very well, he will swallow his pride and do all he`s asked to do.YOU OFTEN DESIGN BUSINESS CENTERS. IF WE ANALYZE WHAT MODERN BUSINESSMEN PREFER, WHAT KIND OF CONCLUSIONS CAN WE MAKE? WHAT IS THE GENERAL PORTRAIT?
In all the years I spent working, I never met a single investor, who amazed me with his good taste. Of course, not everyone can express on paper or even by words their own wishes. But there are magazines: they can buy and read them, or ask me to give some, and then show me what they want! That`s how I can make conclusions about investor`s inner world! Possibly, it`s a man with big inspiration, he just can`t explain what he wants. But something like that never happened. We simply forge the fortune of those fellows, because the particularity of our profession is such, that it doesn`t allow us to work badly. Comes a man with a proposal, and says: ‘I want it to be like this.’ Without false modesty I can say that if it wasn`t for professional conscience, it would be possible to visualize all their demands in 15 seconds – quickly and painlessly. And earn money fast. But this conscience gives me no rest. You sit and create for this aborigine something, and then you listen: ‘Anatoliy Zinovyevich, you want to build yourself a monument with our money.’DO YOU FEEL ISOLATED WHEN YOU WORK ON A PROJECT THAT HAS CONCEPTION IMPOSED BY INVESTOR, RATHER THAN YOURS?
I simply reject, if I feel that something like that is happening. I strain myself to the maximum in those projects I choose to work on. For me, reputation – is above everything else. I just can`t start hack working. I don`t pay attention on investors` taste and think only of one: not to disgrace myself. If I feel that investor wants a simple cube, I will refuse to work with him. I can`t do any other way.THE UTILITY BUILDINGS, BUILT MANY CENTURIES AGO, NOWADAYS ARE CONSIDERED TO BE MONUMENTS, THEY ARE INVALUABLE. CAN SOMETHING SIMILAR HAPPEN TO OUR BUSINESS CENTERS?
No. What we are building today – these are all copies. We are trying, but very little comes out of it. I`m not talking about designers, but about builders. Behind every modern material stands technological process, which is necessary to follow from beginning to the end. In our search for money saving, we ‘crush mountain-tops’ but it works out badly. If we look at structural glass facades for example – they are at the same time drainage system and thermal isolation. If to use them then then they need to be used completely. But here they buy just frames and windows. It is simply nonsense!DOES ARCHITECT EVER GET INSPIRATION, OR HIS PART IS TO THINK WITH COOL HEAD AND CALCULATE SOBERLY?
If I start working on a project, which is not very urgent to finish, I do other things, and in sub consciousness, something is slowly growing. It never happened that investor came, gave 100 rubles, we made contract and I right away started working. This is how craftsmen do, masters with golden hands. I can think for a few weeks, and then do all in one day. In general, architecture is a collective work, one man alone hasn`t enough power to do it. That`s why I`m more for authoritarian style of management. Collective opinions, discussions, are of course allowed. For example, color scheme always causes painful debates. In the end, one should make decisions, though it is never easy. I`m always afraid not to lose the good image of bureau, of possible mistakes – I honestly admit - and I won`t stand stains on reputation. That`s why I must do everything with my own hands.Magazine ‘Doberman’ 4(12) September 2008
