语境化评价与苏联设计院档案的销毁

Ksenia Litvinenko
{"title":"语境化评价与苏联设计院档案的销毁","authors":"Ksenia Litvinenko","doi":"10.2218/ear.2022.7258","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recently, historians and theorists of architecture have started questioning the neutrality of traditional archival research methods by uncovering the operations of power and authority inherent to the creation, appraisal, accessioning, or erasure of historical documents and the institutionalisation of official and unofficial archives. Most of this research is based on analyses of archiving in Euro-American and (post-) colonial contexts; consequently, there is limited understanding of the politics and practices of archiving architecture in both former and current state-socialist countries. The paper addresses this lacuna by exploring different ways of archiving a single design practice, the Giproteatr Institute, one of the central organisations behind the construction of buildings for culture and the performing arts in the Soviet Union and beyond. By reconstructing the changing material and economic conditions of architectural labour in the late Soviet and immediate post-Soviet periods, precedents of authorised and unauthorised destruction of architectural documents, archival regulations, and appraisal procedures, the paper demonstrates that Giproteatr Institute’s archives are in themselves historical and carry different definitions of archival value and of the architectural profession. Therefore, the paper further problematises the notion of ‘evidence’ in architectural history and advocates for strengthening the focus on analysis of material processes of archiving. ","PeriodicalId":349624,"journal":{"name":"Edinburgh Architecture Research","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Contextualising Appraisal and the Destruction of the Soviet Design Institute’s Archives\",\"authors\":\"Ksenia Litvinenko\",\"doi\":\"10.2218/ear.2022.7258\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Recently, historians and theorists of architecture have started questioning the neutrality of traditional archival research methods by uncovering the operations of power and authority inherent to the creation, appraisal, accessioning, or erasure of historical documents and the institutionalisation of official and unofficial archives. Most of this research is based on analyses of archiving in Euro-American and (post-) colonial contexts; consequently, there is limited understanding of the politics and practices of archiving architecture in both former and current state-socialist countries. The paper addresses this lacuna by exploring different ways of archiving a single design practice, the Giproteatr Institute, one of the central organisations behind the construction of buildings for culture and the performing arts in the Soviet Union and beyond. By reconstructing the changing material and economic conditions of architectural labour in the late Soviet and immediate post-Soviet periods, precedents of authorised and unauthorised destruction of architectural documents, archival regulations, and appraisal procedures, the paper demonstrates that Giproteatr Institute’s archives are in themselves historical and carry different definitions of archival value and of the architectural profession. Therefore, the paper further problematises the notion of ‘evidence’ in architectural history and advocates for strengthening the focus on analysis of material processes of archiving. \",\"PeriodicalId\":349624,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Edinburgh Architecture Research\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Edinburgh Architecture Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2218/ear.2022.7258\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Edinburgh Architecture Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2218/ear.2022.7258","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

最近,历史学家和建筑理论家开始质疑传统档案研究方法的中立性,他们揭示了历史文件的创造、评估、添加或删除以及官方和非官方档案的制度化所固有的权力和权威的运作。大多数研究都是基于对欧美和(后)殖民背景下的档案的分析;因此,在过去和现在的社会主义国家,人们对建筑存档的政治和实践的理解是有限的。本文通过探索单一设计实践的不同归档方式来解决这一空白,Giproteatr研究所是苏联及其他地区文化和表演艺术建筑建设背后的中心组织之一。通过重构苏联后期和苏联刚解体时期不断变化的建筑劳动物质和经济条件、授权和未经授权销毁建筑文件的先例、档案规定和评估程序,本文证明了Giproteatr研究所的档案本身具有历史意义,并承载着对档案价值和建筑专业的不同定义。因此,本文进一步质疑了建筑史中“证据”的概念,并主张加强对材料存档过程分析的关注。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Contextualising Appraisal and the Destruction of the Soviet Design Institute’s Archives
Recently, historians and theorists of architecture have started questioning the neutrality of traditional archival research methods by uncovering the operations of power and authority inherent to the creation, appraisal, accessioning, or erasure of historical documents and the institutionalisation of official and unofficial archives. Most of this research is based on analyses of archiving in Euro-American and (post-) colonial contexts; consequently, there is limited understanding of the politics and practices of archiving architecture in both former and current state-socialist countries. The paper addresses this lacuna by exploring different ways of archiving a single design practice, the Giproteatr Institute, one of the central organisations behind the construction of buildings for culture and the performing arts in the Soviet Union and beyond. By reconstructing the changing material and economic conditions of architectural labour in the late Soviet and immediate post-Soviet periods, precedents of authorised and unauthorised destruction of architectural documents, archival regulations, and appraisal procedures, the paper demonstrates that Giproteatr Institute’s archives are in themselves historical and carry different definitions of archival value and of the architectural profession. Therefore, the paper further problematises the notion of ‘evidence’ in architectural history and advocates for strengthening the focus on analysis of material processes of archiving. 
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信