The USSR through the eyes of the British. Excerpt from the book "I Came, I Vied, I Conquered!"

Contents:

The Garage Museum of Contemporary Art has presented Ksenia Malich's book "I Came, I Seeed, I Conquered!" The publication is dedicated to the collaboration between Soviet and British architects from the 1930s to the 1960s. As part of this project, we are publishing the chapter "Frank Yerbury," which describes the British architects' trip to the Soviet Union. The book offers a unique perspective on the interaction of the two countries' architectural traditions and illuminates significant moments in the history of architecture.

In 1931, the Society for Cultural Relations between the British Commonwealth and the USSR (SCR) began holding annual dinners called "We-have-been-to-Russia," at which tourists shared their impressions of their trips to the Soviet Union. British urban planning and housing specialists expressed interest in the unique professional experience these stories could provide. Meanwhile, in June 1931, the British Embassy in Moscow notified the Foreign Office of the Soviet Union's growing interest in urban planning. This led to a series of fact-finding trips between the two countries.

In 1931, a Moscow engineer inspected the London Underground, and the following year, a team of London Underground engineers advised the designers of the Moscow Metro. In 1932, Lord Marley, a member of the SCR and head of the Garden Towns and Suburbs Committee, established in 1931 under the British Ministry of Health, visited the USSR. He was particularly interested in the Birobidzhan project. That same year, engineer Kenneth Dodd, an employee of the Ministry of Planning, studied the construction of new health facilities in Russia and in 1933 published a report on his trip, in which he described "the greatest system of state planning the world has ever seen." He noted the centralization of administrative resources as one of the main advantages of this system for urban regeneration, while in the West, private property and a multitude of stakeholders made it difficult to implement large-scale urban reforms.

In 1932, Sidney and Beatrice Webb, prominent representatives of Fabian socialism, advocates of the gradual overcoming of capitalism, who collaborated with the Labour Party, visited Moscow. Their trip culminated in the publication of a two-volume work entitled Soviet Communism: A New Civilization?, which was widely circulated among British scholars of the humanities.

At a meeting of the Board of Trustees of the London Architectural Association, Frank Yerbury presented an interesting report after returning from a trip to the USSR in 1932. As already mentioned, Yerbury traveled to the Soviet Union with his colleagues. In July 1932, their tour was announced in newspapers: "A group of English architects from London will arrive in Leningrad on July 14. The purpose of their visit is to study new construction projects for government and industrial purposes, including club, theater, and school buildings. After Leningrad, the architects will visit Moscow, Nizhny Novgorod, and Stalingrad. A second group of English architects is expected at the beginning of August."

The July 19 article paid special attention to Yerbury: "A meeting of the Leningrad architectural community with English architects was held at the Molotov House of Engineering and Technical Workers. During the meeting, the guests shared their impressions of what they had seen in Leningrad over the past four days. The representative of the group, Mr. Yerbury, secretary of the English Architectural Society, expressed his feelings with the words: 'I came, I saw, and I was conquered.'" Architect Herbert Williams added: "I am amazed by everything I saw. My only wish is to remain in the USSR to work."

The visit became an important moment in the cultural exchange between Great Britain and the Soviet Union, highlighting the architects' interest in the new building styles and methods actively developing in the USSR at that time.

Based on newspaper chronicles and the Yerbury archives, it can be concluded that a varied excursion program was developed for the British architects. Although not all participants in this program were supporters of modernism, VOKS (All-Union Society for Cultural Relations with Foreign Countries) in the first half of the 1930s placed an emphasis on showcasing progressive architecture, in which Soviet architects had less competition.

The excursion began in Leningrad, where guests arrived from London. In this city, which Yerbury describes in detail, the architects visited such iconic sites as the Hermitage, Anichkov Palace, and Kazan Cathedral, including the Museum of Atheism exhibit, and also explored key historical ensembles. Important sites for inspection included recently constructed buildings, including the Vasileostrovskaya and Moskovsko-Narva factory kitchens, the Gorky House of Culture, and the First Five-Year Plan House of Culture.

Having moved to Moscow, the architects explored the Kremlin, Red Square, the Izvestia newspaper building, the First House of Soviets, and the Narkomfin Building. In Nizhny Novgorod, they explored ancient estates and the new House of Soviets. The journey then continued along a picturesque route along the Volga, where the architects visited Kazan, Saratov, Samara, Stalingrad, and other cities, where Yerbury was interested not only in the architecture but also in the ethnographic and historical aspects of the region.

This excursion program allowed British architects to gain a comprehensive understanding of Soviet architectural practice, as well as the unique cultural context in which it developed.

Whether "Mr. Yerbury" was truly defeated remains an open question. By his own account, he deliberately avoided reading both before and after the trip in order to maintain a fresh and unbiased perception. Nevertheless, he describes the country as full of contradictions and oddities, which may indicate a deep internal conflict and that his experience was more complex than it first appears.

Yerbury was struck by the sharp contrast in lifestyle and social hierarchy between the various strata of society. Expecting to see a manifestation of class equality, he was surprised to realize that in fact there were many categories of train and ship tickets. The crowd at the Moscow tennis tournament differed significantly in dress and manners from the workers who leisurely spent time in the parks. In the lower compartments of Volga steamships, one could encounter poor peasants, whom he thought were unheard of in modern society, while on the upper decks, gentlemen in white suits enjoyed the picturesque scenery. This contrast highlights not only social differences but also the standard of living, which remains segregated despite societal changes. Workers live in conditions that force them to seek solace in alcohol. Despite this, it is worth noting that factories operate free crèches, and the state has developed a progressive healthcare system, including a network of public children's clinics, women's clinics, and sanatoriums. Yerbury was particularly impressed by the rowing clubs on the Moskva River and the parks. However, by the end of his visit, he felt tired of the parklands, which were perhaps too often on display for English guests. Frank and his companions quickly grew tired of the propaganda posters with anti-religious, anti-capitalist, and anti-militarist themes, as well as the drawn-out speeches. Architect Yerbury called the mausoleum on Red Square and its lighting system one of the best modern projects in the USSR. At the same time, he felt that the new buildings lacked interest in terms of form, composition, and texture. British architects were disappointed by the poor quality of materials and the lack of skilled labor, which made the buildings appear dated within the first months after completion. Monotonous color schemes, large areas of glazing in a cold and damp climate, and sloppy finishing attracted the attention of Yerbury and his colleagues. However, they found the typologies proposed by Soviet architects for the new way of life truly remarkable: workers' clubs with theaters and children's rooms, factory kitchens, and residential complexes. But even here, there was ground for criticism. After inspecting the Narkomfin Building, Yerbury concluded that the idea of ​​grouping people by departmental affiliation was impractical, as it limited a person's right to choose their neighbors. The architect attributed all these shortcomings to the fact that the new Soviet architecture was the result of a drastic break with tradition, not a natural development. The desire to break with the past overshadowed logic and common sense.

It can be assumed that even loyal representatives of the British architectural community considered examples of new construction in Russia too radical. For example, Le Corbusier's Tsentrosoyuz building in Moscow remains unmentioned in his works. The author is clearly more interested in discussing Quarenghi and the young woman from the Moscow registry office, whose photograph he displays during his presentation to architects at the London Architectural Association. This contrast between traditional architecture and contemporary trends highlights the complex relationships between different architectural styles and cultural contexts.

When Yerbury visited Boris Iofan's construction site and saw the newly completed Government House, he changed his mind. For him, Iofan became a promising and talented architect, and the House of Soviets symbolized Russian architecture's emergence from crisis. This project highlights new trends and possibilities in architectural design, demonstrating that Russian architecture is capable of innovation and progress.

The English travelers likely also visited Soviet architectural studios, confirming Yerbury's admiration for the skill of Soviet architects. He noted that Russian architects possessed a unique drawing technique and created inimitable designs. In his opinion, "there is nothing an English architect could teach a Russian colleague." However, the English visitors noted that there was a shortage of skilled workers to realize these ambitious plans. Difficulties also arose due to the need to develop standard projects adapted to various regions of a vast country.

During During their visits to studios, the travelers took an active interest in the work organization of Soviet architects. They inquired about salaries, opportunities for independent participation in competitions, the number of women on design teams, and the specifics of student internships. Discussions of employment prospects in the USSR were common in professional circles at the time. Yerbury urged his colleagues to abandon such illusions, noting that salaries, when converted into pounds, would be extremely low. Furthermore, any English specialist would face intense competition, including students, making it difficult to find work in this field. Yerbury and his companions deeply respect the respect for the historical heritage and the meticulous restoration, the results of which are visible everywhere. Despite the fact that some mansions and churches have been reimagined and given new functions, the overall state of the architectural heritage is impressive. The author expresses surprise that, instead of ruined beauty, he discovered "a more beautiful landscape than Leningrad." This demonstrates the importance of preserving and restoring the cultural monuments that shape the city's unique appearance and its historical identity.

In March 1934, Mary Jacqueline Tyrwhitt, a colleague of Yerbury's and a graduate of the Royal Horticultural Society's courses, as well as a former student of the London Architectural Association, arrived in the USSR. In the 1940s, Tyrwhitt would become an active member of the British modern architecture research group MARS. Like many of her like-minded colleagues, she developed ideas of modernist urban planning, not in Corbusier's interpretation, but in an adapted concept of the garden city and the ideas of Patrick Geddes. In the 1940s, Tyrwhitt also contributed to The Architect's Yearbook, a magazine founded by Jane Drew. The authors of this publication analyzed how the utopian social and aesthetic projects of 1930s modernism could be applied to post-war construction in Britain. Mary Jacqueline Tyrwhitt's article opened the journal's first issue in 1945.

In the article "Soviet Communism and British Planning: Rational Learning or Utopian Imagination?" by S. Ward, key aspects of the Soviet model's influence on the British planning movement are examined. The author analyzes how Soviet communism's ideas influenced approaches to rational planning in Britain, highlighting both the positive and negative consequences of this influence. Ward also discusses the extent to which utopian notions of the Soviet project can be integrated into actual planning practices, an important question for contemporary analysis of planning strategies. The article serves as a valuable resource for researchers interested in the links between political ideologies and public planning practices.

The book "2 Moscow in the Making", written by E. Simon, S. Simon, W. A. ​​Robson and J. Jewkes in 1937, is an important study of the formation and development of Moscow. In 2014, this work was reissued by Routledge in Abingdon and New York. The edition includes a twelve-page preface that emphasizes the significance of the work and its relevance to the study of the history of the Russian capital. Offering an insightful analysis of the socio-economic and cultural changes that took place in Moscow, the book will be useful both to historians and to a wider audience interested in the history of the city.

Taylor, Nicole. "The Mystery of Lord Marley: Investigating an English Peer in Stalin’s Jewish Autonomous Region." The Jewish Quarterly, Summer 2005, No. 198.

Dodd K. Planning in the USSR. Journal of the Town Planning Institute, 1933, No. 20, p. 34. In this study, the author analyzes the characteristics of urban planning in the Soviet Union, emphasizing the influence of political and economic factors on the development of urban planning. [This article provides an insight into how the historical context shaped approaches to urban development in the USSR.]

Webb S. and Webb B. in their work "Soviet Communism: A New Civilization?" in two volumes (London: Longmans, Green, 1935) analyze the features of Soviet communism. In the second edition of 1937, the question mark from the title of the book was removed, which may indicate a change in emphasis in the perception of Soviet reality. This book is an important source for the study of Soviet society, its ideology and the cultural changes that took place during that period.

British architects arrived in the city. This was reported by the Red Newspaper in the evening edition of July 9, 1932. The arrival of specialists from Great Britain opens new prospects for the architectural development of the region. The architects plan to exchange experiences and offer innovative solutions for local construction projects. Their visit will undoubtedly have an impact on the architectural landscape and will help introduce modern trends in construction.

An article entitled "Meeting of Soviet and British Architects," published in the "Krasnaya Gazeta" on July 19, 1932, examines key moments in the interaction between architects from the Soviet Union and Great Britain. The meeting became a significant event, facilitating the exchange of experience and ideas in the field of architecture. Architects discussed the latest trends, approaches to urban planning and architectural design, which contributed to the development of both Soviet and British architectural practice. The exchange of opinions and collaboration between specialists helped strengthen international ties and inspired the creation of unique architectural projects that meet the demands of the time.

The Yerbury Photographic Archive is housed at the London Architectural Association. This unique collection reflects the rich architectural history and cultural heritage of the region. The archive contains valuable photographs, documents, and projects that are essential for studying architectural evolution and contemporary design trends. A visit to this archive provides a deeper understanding of architectural styles and their influence on London's urban environment.

In his work "Impressions of Russia," on page 124, F. Yerbury shares insightful observations about Russia. The author describes the cultural characteristics and social aspects of life in the country, emphasizing the uniqueness of the Russian people and their traditions. The book serves as an important source for studying Russia's cultural heritage, as well as for understanding its historical context. It is important to note that works such as 'Impressions of Russia' help to expand our understanding of the country and its diversity, which is particularly valuable for researchers and lovers of Russian culture.

Revised text:

Source link: p. 128.

This source, on page 117, contains important information that may be useful for further research on this topic. It is recommended that you pay attention to the key points and conclusions presented on this page, as they can significantly impact your understanding of the issue at hand. For a more in-depth analysis and application of the knowledge gained, it is worth comparing the data with other sources and research in this area.

12 RIBA. Jacqueline Tyrwhitt Archive. Box 63.

Shoshkes E. in the article "Jaqueline Tyrwhitt and Transnational Discourse on Modern Urban Planning and Design, 1941–1951", published in the journal Urban History in 2009, examines the influence of Jacqueline Tyrwhitt on modern urban planning and design in the context of transnational discourse. Between 1941 and 1951, Tyrwhitt made a significant contribution to the development of theories and practices that shaped modern approaches to urbanism. The author analyzes her works and ideas, emphasizing their significance in the context of historical and cultural changes that took place in the post-war period.

Tyrwhitt J. in her work "Urban Planning" covers key aspects of urban planning in the 'Architect's Yearbook', published in London by Elek Books Limited in 1945. In this publication, the author emphasizes the importance of an effective urban planning approach to creating a harmonious urban environment. The article contains valuable recommendations and analysis that remain relevant today.

Read also:

• What the Palace of Soviets in Moscow was supposed to be
• 5 famous projects by Le Corbusier
• Monumentality and elegance: 5 outstanding projects by Vera Mukhina