Conclusion
Well, it looks like we are just about at the end of our time together! Before I bid you all adieu, I would love to sum up the sites we’ve visited today.
We began the day with the notion that each of these sites had been converted following a fairly similar model. We saw that they had all become sites of modern life in Moscow, where the young and affluent come and play. There were art galleries, fashion studios, and fine dining in each of the old factories. They were aesthetically characterized by tall ceilings, rugged textures on the walls, and incredibly open spaces. They were dynamic, colourful, naturally lit, and a surprisingly coordinated juxtaposition of old shell and structure with new contents.
Of course, it goes without saying that these sites do not necessarily symbolize the best approach to managing post-industrial spaces. There have been many concerns voiced over the destruction that such projects cause to traditional architecture. While some of the projects, such as the Garage, aim to incorporate elements of the past, such as Soviet mosaics, these efforts often feel forced and superficial. By integrating the original pillars in a factory or keeping the original wall décor of a Soviet restaurant, are we truly honouring the past and history of the space? Are we just manipulating it to work for our aesthetic pleasure today? Does seeing these emblems really encourage us to think about the past?
Ultimately, what stands out the most is that through their transformations, all of these sites – except Trekhgornaya – actually reject their respective histories. While there is this superficial notion of building upon the layers of the past, each of the other four sites strips down the past to a shell and fills it with something completely different. However, the rejection of the past is not done in a uniform way.
The first site we visited, Trekhgornaya, is the most embracing of its past. It draws on the values that underlay its industry, maintaining its administrative offices and retail store on site. On the contrary, the case with Winzavod is a bit more complex – the space was created with the intent of rejecting the Soviet era and the ensuing state control over art, though the state of affairs today is arguably uncertain with respect to supporting public expression. The next two sites that we saw, ZiL Auto Factory and the Garage, were sites that had very clear ties to the Soviet era of Moscow. The cars produced at ZiL are an index of the Soviet era to Muscovites and the Garage itself was a Soviet restaurant. Both remind visitors of the Soviet era and daily life at the time. It is perhaps then not surprising that these two sites turn more strongly on their past than the others. ZiL is undergoing a complete reconstruction into a city-in-a-city of its own – with no indication of its automobile history whatsoever – and the Garage has literally been covered, hiding its past. The only potential reference to the Soviet era is a cheeky one, with the red staircase that leads up to freedom or liberation, symbolized by the roof terrace. Our last site, Flacon, is a bit similar to Winzavod in its goal of cultivating public expression though it has arguably done a better job of fulfilling this intent. Although in appearance and function it seems fairly similar to Trekhgornaya and Winzavod, it is particularly poignant in its rejection of the Soviet era in how it embraces the idea of freedom. Flacon brands itself as a space “to do what you want.” Perhaps the biggest signal against its past is that Flacon also offers tenants the opportunity to actually own a portion of the factory.
I hope you have all enjoyed our tour today! I welcome your feedback and any tokens of appreciation you may have. If anyone is looking for other sites to visit, I would strongly recommend checking out Artplay, an old pressure gauge factory, and Red October, a chocolate factory. The two are not too far apart and on our original map in indigo and violet, respectively.