Yuri Avvakumov on Architecture and Art

Architecture in Venice is like the Olympic Games. So, there is not a question to take part or not to take part. We should take part in the Venice Biennale because it’s a possibility not only to show your work and to get some critical attention, but it is also a possibility to meet people and to feel what is new in architecture and what are the doubts, what are the problems and to get it not only through the magazines and journalists, but to get it kind of straight.

You have introduced and re-introduced the term “Paper Architecture” to describe the genre of conceptual design in the USSR OF THE 1980s. What exactly is “Paper Architecture”?

“Paper Architecture” is projects that were not intended to be realized. So, this sort of projects are different from projects that were not realized because of some economical or some technical or some other reasons. It’s different. Because, if you work on the project having in mind that this project will never be realized, you create your own rules of composing a piece of paper where you work. But, since we already work with computers, “Paper Architecture” is already in the past.

You have also created the “Utopian Foundation”, where a large installation is exhibited since 2000. How would you describe the “Utopian Foundation” and which are its actions?

It was totally utopian. It was just established and got all the needed documents from the Ministry of Justice, and it didn’t do anything at all. In such mood, it continued for ten years and then after I got the paper from the Financial Ministry that “since you are in inactivity, you have to close”, the foundation was closed. That’s it.

In 2002-3, you have curated 36 architectural photography exhibitions, titled “Photophogram 24”. How would you describe the relationship between the art of photography and architecture? It is said that many buildings nowadays are designed in a way to look good in photographs, so that they can be promoted. Is that true in a way?

To tell the truth, every exhibition had a kind of tough problem. Every exhibition consisted of 24 photographs and the opening was on every fourth Tuesday of the month, because of some certain reasons. Tuesday is the next day after Monday, which for the museum is a day off so there was time to change the exposition, and also because in Russia the fourth Tuesday somehow is never a holiday, so none of the openings was moved to another day. I would also say that all of these exhibitions were somehow dedicated to the city. Not to architecture, but to the city. It’s what Rem Koolhaas said, that there is no city without architecture, and there is no architecture without a city. Also, I didn’t think about the so cold “architectural photography”. I didn’t think about this type of photography that you could see in architectural magazines, mostly for promoting architects and their work. They were my 36 exhibitions. They were from artists, from architects, from photographers. Mostly, they were about architectural space. Sometimes, about details in architectural construction, but mostly about some other, not so representative parts of architecture. The model, I think, is deep and sensitive architecture. I was trying to make some thoughtful exhibitions. I would say that they were small exhibitions, but the press reacted pretty positive. We had a great number of replies. It was an interesting work. For me, it was interesting because with every new exhibition I didn’t know the result. It was a really interesting experience for me.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.