To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
Languages
Recent
Show all languages
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

Russian cultural heritage register

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cultural Heritage
Register of Russia
Type of site
Government agency site
Available inRussian
OwnerMinistry of Culture
RevenueNon-commercial
URLhttps://opendata.mkrf.ru/opendata
RegistrationNo (read-only access)

The national cultural heritage register of Russia (Russian: Единый государственный реестр объектов культурного наследия) is a registry of historically or culturally significant man-made immovable properties – landmark buildings, industrial facilities, memorial homes of notable people of the past, monuments, cemeteries and tombs, archaeological sites and cultural landscapes – man-made environments and natural habitats significantly altered by humans. The register continues a tradition established in 1947 and is governed by a 2002 law "On the objects of cultural heritage (monuments of culture and history)" (Law 73-FZ). The register is maintained by the Federal Service for Monitoring Compliance with Cultural Heritage Legislation (a branch of the federal Ministry of Culture); the publicly available online database is hosted by the Ministry of Culture. Its primary purpose is to aggregate the regional heritage registers maintained by the federal subjects of Russia, monitor the state of heritage objects and compliance with relevant laws.

The legal framework of the register, as of May 2009, remains incomplete and the register itself is not yet matched to lists of protected buildings maintained by regional and municipal authorities. It includes around 100,000 items while the local lists total in excess of 140,000. Of these 42,000 are rated as national landmarks, while the rest are of regional or local significance. The Ministry of Culture admits that many items on the registers have been destroyed.[1]

Natural landmarks and reserves (apart from cultural landscapes), movable art, archives, museum and library collections are not part of the register and are governed by different laws and agencies.[2] A different listing, State Code of Particularly Valuable Objects of Cultural Heritage of the Peoples of the Russian Federation,[3] created in 1992, includes the most conspicuous man-made landmarks as well as operating institutions: museums, archives, theatres, universities and academies.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/5
    Views:
    134 529
    23 768
    2 533
    8 422
    27 362
  • At Home In Russia, At Home On The Prairie
  • AF-272: Jewish Surname and Their Meanings | Ancestral Findings Podcast
  • POLAND - WikiVidi Documentary
  • Admission Process for MBBS Abroad 2020 | MBBS in Russia | Russiafeels
  • THE HINDU Analysis, 24 July 2020 (Daily News Analysis for UPSC) – DNS

Transcription

[piano plays softly] (male narrator) What causes a region, a place, to imprint itself upon the people who are born and live there? What is the connection between landscape and memory; what is forgotten, what is remembered? How may a territory endure in the minds of the descendants of those inhabitants after years, even after generations have passed? (woman) "Fern im Sued am schoenen Kutschurgan, Dort wo die Taeler grun und Blumen reichlich..." "Far to the South on the lovely Kutschurgan Where the vales are green and flowers throng, Where the song of birds in the woods resounds, There is my home, the land for which I long." ¦ (woman) Funding is provided by... ...NDSU Libraries... ¦ (male narrator) It is not a mighty river that flows gently into its broad lagoon only to disappear, seeping almost imperceptibly into the nearby Black Sea. The Kutschurgan Valley lifts from the eastern bank of the river a distance of some 40 to 50 miles northwest of Odessa, punctuated by 6 once German villages, dazzling fields of grain, abundant vineyards, fruit trees and gardens. The land is fertile. The Germans who settled the area are largely gone now, scattered in a Diaspora of forced migration through difficult decades of political unrest and change. And though the region no longer exists as when the Germans lived there, it endures in the minds of the people, lingering fragilely, "Da haam in Russland," "Back home in Russia." (woman) "Dort wo der Vogelsang erschallet durch die Waelder," "Where the song of birds in the woods resounds, There is my home, the land for which I long." (Joseph Senger) I remembered from my childhood, my parents always said we had such beautiful crops at home in the Ukraine, although they always said at home in Russia. But I was very, very surprised and very pleased to see the beautiful vegetation. As soon as we got to Odessa-- the trees! Every street was lined with trees, and many of the streets had arches; the trees meeting on top-- so beautiful, beautiful; and the vegetation, I was impressed so much with that. When we saw the fields and the crops, I finally realized why our parents said we had such beautiful crops. Things grew so well in the Ukraine. They missed home a lot. I used to ask my dad, "Why didn't a lot of people go back?" He said nobody had enough money to go back. (narrator) Without the memories of familial discourse, there would be no shared collective history, partial and fallible as it may be. The memory of the Kutschurgan brings back days before the Russian revolution, before collectivization, before the starvation years of the 1920s and '30s. Viewed from a distant time and a distant place, it conjures Arcadian, romantic visions. Yet people construct their personal sense of identity relating in some complex way to a faraway homeland. We had a nice home, there was what you call a Vorderstube, (a front room) and a side room. Ma used to sleep in the front room and we girls. In the middle was the kitchen and the entrance. We had two rooms at the back, one for Joseph and one the younger girls was sleeping in. Behind that was the barn, there was the chicken coop and the two cows we had and the little pigs we had. I would say it was about 75 feet this way and it had a sandstone entrance. Der Giebel (the gable) used to be with stone. On the way down we had a garden, an Obstgarten (orchard), all kinds of apples, Pflaumen (plums), peaches, and what they used to call Helmehitsche, where we had the straw and oats in for the cows and for the horses we had. But then later on when Communists took over we couldn't have it-- just one cow, that's about it. Oh yah, summer Kueche and the Keller (the cellar) where you went down. Ours was about 10 feet down, 10 steps down where we had all our watermelon, apples, sauerkraut and cucumbers and everything for the winter. That we had all down there. The smoked meat we hung up in the attic, you know. We made our own [dried] fruit by cutting apples and pears and grapes and laid them on the roof and let it dry. Then we put it in sacks and hung it, and we made compote where they cooked it like fruit. We had flowers around, and like in Germany they have the geraniums in the window. That we had too. A lot of flower gardens, raised our own flowers and stuff. (Joseph Senger) I couldn't understand how they could grow grapes, because the country was basically the same as ours in terms of latitude and weather. However, practically every house has a trellis with grapes growing up the trellis. That to me that was very moving to see grapes grow so beautifully. Of course, there they have crops like we do here: corn, potatoes, and wheat. My dad and his brothers and sisters, when they visited, they spoke a lot about growing up in, as they say, in Russia, in the Ukraine. They had lots of stories about their childhood and they always talked about the great crops they had in the Ukraine. So they often talked about the beautiful crops they had at home. As they said, "At home in Russia;" "Da Haam in Russland." (woman) "In der Heimat meiner Jugend Glueck Hab ich mein Leben wie im Traum verbracht." "In the homeland of my happy youth I spent my life as in a dreamy state; From the Creator's hand it was bestowed, I left it only by the power of fate." (narrator) "The power of fate." In 1884, the first settlers from the Kutschurgan left for America. As the Russian government took back privileges granted the German Colonists long ago by Czar Alexander, the Germans were forced to give up their native language and learn Russian. Worse yet, they were now liable for military service, and at risk of being drafted into the dreaded Russian army. My grandfather, when they left Russia, had 5 sons. My father was the eldest of those; he was 16 years old. So one of the factors that made them come to America was that he was going to be supplying the Russian Army with recruits for the next 20 years! With all those sons, and they objected to that. He didn't want that. And you'll find that there were a lot of immigrants who came about the same time as he did-- he came around 1900-- there were some who came a little earlier than that and some later. But in all cases the military service law was one of the factors. It wasn't the only one, because some of them came because they heard about the free land over here and so on. (Barbara Schneider Risling) Father talked about how nice it was. The fruit they had was so nice until they said, "There's a war coming up, and it's going to be real bad." So they thought, they heard it was such a nice country in America and not settled at all. They brought a lot of people, and they started migrating over, and they all came over to America. They landed in the States. (narrator) The image of America played well with a dissatisfied people. As many left, others soon followed. Boatloads arrived in America between 1885 and 1920. (Adam Giesinger) There was advertising in Odessa. Oh yes. That brought a lot of them over here. The first ones came that way. After that, there was a long correspondence. The shipping companies advertised in Odessa all the time; they found customers. When things started getting a little rougher, they began to see what was happening in terms of their rights being taken away. So starting from the late 19th century on through, you had the people coming over here and exploring what was available. And because everything south from Texas on north was gradually taken over, what was left was North and South Dakota, and then on up into Canada. So you had Strasburg, was one of the first areas, they had scouts, if you will, came over. They went back and said, "There's land available, whoever's willing to, come on over." So in my family, Lawrence Welk's father, Ludwig came over first in, I believe 1891. And then my grandfather came later, and they lived together actually, west of Strasburg, because they both were blacksmiths. They were in competition for business. So my grandfather moved east of Strasburg about 10 miles and set up shop there. But my dad and my oldest uncles, they did the farming. (narrator) A new landscape in the Americas offered new opportunities. Old skills of farming and tilling the soil adapted to a new environment. They had farmed in Russia, they would farm in America. For some, it presented a sensual, pleasant experience. Oh, I love farming very much and I observe nature. I watch the crops grow when I drive over from Velva to Karlsruhe. Every day I would try to check how much the crops grew, when they were sprouting, when they were starting to turn, getting kernels and so forth. I observe nature very closely. For instance, when I smell, cutting hay or when I smell the threshing, it's a very beautiful sensation. Especially when they're cutting sweet clover because it has such a strong aroma. I love that when it comes into the car when you drive by a place where they had cut sweet clover. We'd follow, walk along behind the plow and smell the fresh earth. Oh, that's so vivid in my mind! In the springtime when they are cultivating, I loved the smell of the earth. (Thomas Welk) You were pretty well self-sufficient on the farm. So we would be having in terms of crops, diversified farming, you'd have your chickens, you'd have geese, you had the livestock, the hogs, cattle, you had some horses, not so much anymore. But there wasn't too much you needed from town. Certain times we even took the wheat in to get milled for flour. But things like salt, sugar, those obviously you had to buy in town, those kinds of staples. Cream would be what was taken along to town. Mom and Dad would go once a week, Saturday they'd go to Hague to go grocery shopping, they'd take the cream along. Get the cash from the cream, and then they'd use that to buy those things that they couldn't supply for themselves on the farm. But then, to buy the machinery and so on, your grain, wheat primarily and flax was raised there a lot. Oats and corn were mostly kept for the livestock for feeding; it was not taken to town for cash. (Theresa Bachmeier) I grew up on a farm, all my life till I moved to town after my husband passed away. I like farming. Better life than town. (narrator) While it may be that the culture of these Germans on the Kutschurgan created their landscape, a somewhat different landscape in the Americas required a shift in culture. As one scholar points out, "The past is not static. It changes as the present throws its shadow backwards." The abrupt change from village life to the isolation of the American plains brought a profound anguish: not only had the settlers lost their beloved Kutschurgan valley forever, in losing a place, they had lost a sense of self, their emotional identity. The concept of living in the village was much more important. They were allowed to do that in the Ukraine, they would spiral out the land and also they had carried that over from Europe, spiraling on out. Well, the Homestead Act forced them to live on a particular parcel of land. So now they became more isolated, in many ways, it was probably a good deal of a lonely existence for these people who were so used to living more closely together in a village. (narrator) Farm life frequently offered hardship and failure. I know one time my brothers were out threshing and it was going to freeze, and the corn wasn't cut. Dad said, "I'm going to cut the corn and you girls are going to have to shuck it." Well, you know, it's kind of hard work. My little sister, she was only 2 years younger then I, she helped put up about 2 or 3 shocks and she says, "Huh. I'm not a hired man." And she walked home, and that was it. So I shocked and shocked, and when Dad was through cutting he helped me finish it. And a week or two later he said, "I'm going to Harvey, I'd like for you to go along." [little sister] "Can I go?" He said, "No, I don't know you. You weren't here when I needed help so bad." So I got to go to Harvey, and I got to pick out the dress I liked. You know, it was the start of the Depression. You saw so many old men sit there, one maybe had a shoe on one foot and an overshoe on the other foot and one was barefoot, people were just so poor that you wanted to cry. On the farm you always had something to eat. Spent every cent we had on a down payment on the farm. The first crop was beautiful. 15 minutes after he started with the binder, we got completely wiped out-- hail. The fields were like plowed. The garden was gone, everything, but we had 5 cows, and about 50 chickens and they pulled us through. (Barbara Schneider Risling) We had a flood. We were just about drowned out. It was a low place, and it was so cold that nothing melted. All at once it got warm in April, and everything started melting at once, and the water just came running through our yard, and we were surrounded-- no telephone, nothing. It ran through the barn where the cattle stood-- right through the barn, out the other end. And here we sat with no telephone, and we were waiting. the basement was already filled to the brim of this little house. And then we said well, we have to get on tables, on chairs, whatever, when it gets worse, but it just filled the basement, then when it got, broke through, it worked itself again and started going out. But we were, 3 days we were living in-- surrounded by this water. And with the little children, and no telephone. (narrator) Ordinary, everyday life presents a storehouse of private and collective memories. In recalling landscape, we share a system of ideologies and beliefs. In a sense, landscape is memory and we share this memory with family and community. It tells the story of the people and the rhythm of life over time, imparting a sense of continuity and a shared heritage, a cultural richness that promotes a sense of distinctiveness. My name is Colleen Zeiler and I am the great granddaughter of Margaret Vetter who was the daughter of Valentine and Franciska Vetter who actually is the couple on this afghan. And, of course, they came to North Dakota from Strassburg, Russia in about 1888. And this year we had our second annual Vetter reunion in which we celebrated honoring their existence and the legacy they have given us. Plus we've honored the 100-year anniversary of this house up on the corner here, this wooden frame house. As well at this reunion we also found out that there were 2 sod plots and the sod was actually blessed by some of the priests at our Mass and everybody was given a little sample of this dirt, this "sacred ground" we call it. One of the things, the tradition when grandma came, we always walked over to the cemetery which was 1/4 mile away and we'd always tend the graves, my grandfather's grave, my brother's grave were always tended to. Then grandma would always stop, and we'd say lots of prayers. But grandma loved to tell stories, the story of her coming to America. She came to America when she was 15 years old. She came actually by herself, but she came with another family. The family she came with, there was some disease in the family, there were some sick and so they ended up being hospitalized. And so Grandma ended up staying at Ellis Island for a while. Uncle Dan who was her brother had to send money out to Ellis Island for Grandma to get passage to South Dakota. She came to South Dakota by herself at age 15 with a kind of tag around her neck that said I'm Ottilie Lacher and I'm supposed to come to Daniel Lacher at Ipswich South Dakota. She spent those 3 years at Ipswich South Dakota with Uncle Dan and milked cows at age 15--you gotta remember that grandma was 4 foot 8-- that was it; she weighed 112 pounds. And yet she would milk 8, 10 cows without a blink of an eye. And grandma was a hard, hard worker. As a matter of fact, grandma stacked hay at our farm. She would always come out in the summertime to stack hay and be with us in the summer and stacked hay at our farm until she was 75 years old. And my dad had a Farmall tractor with a farmhand on it and one time, he had put a great big bucket of hay up on the stack and ended up pushing grandma off the stack. And when grandma came off the stack, she threw the fork down and said, "That's it, I'm not making hay any more. If you can't leave me on the haystack and pushing me off, I'm not staying here. But she still stayed on the farm and milked cows until she was 83 years old. (narrator) History, like memory, includes what is forgotten. Something in the past cannot be retrieved. The memory of a landscape does not always bring pleasure. It contains social fracture and pain as well. (Theresa Bachmeier) That family on that picture-- they were left behind. And there was another sister that she was left behind, from my dad's. And from my mother? I think there was some relatives, but I don't remember them. (woman) "O Kutschurgan, du stilles Tal!" Sei mir gegruesst viel tausendmal!" "Oh Kutschurgan, oh quiet valley! I call to you a thousand times! (narrator) Once again, "the power of fate." War, revolution, famine, war again, destruction and dispossession, exile. The landscape of the Kutschurgan as it had been... disappeared. Each trauma drove a few more people away, to America, to Germany, to an unknown destiny. The families that remained in Russia suffered the immeasurable consequences of the October Russian Revolution, collectivization, years of deliberate starvation, Stalin's purges, then the tragedy of World War II. In the end, their villages were emptied of German inhabitants and what was left of the Kutschurgan was no longer what it was, except as it was stored in memory. When the revolution started, they rounded all up some rich people and took them all to Selz. They took them out a little ways in the prairie, it was a valley, and it was 120 people. One lady was with 2 from Strassburg and the others were from Franzfeld and Khutor, Fischer-Franzen. They took them all and a priest was in-between those people and they shot them all. The priest got up and gave the blessing yet. I bet to this day there is not one grass growed in that spot. It was just like a bloodbath in that valley. That was in Selz; that happened in Selz. That's the way they got the people. (narrator) Hardships under the Communist government continued through the decades. in the '30s when there was starvation. There was wheat and there was vegetables and there was everything growing, but we couldn't have it. They came and took everything away. So if you didn't want to starve, you had to go to kolkhoz Kollektiv (collective farm). In the '30s when the Communists took over that's when they took all the people away. First, they took the teachers away, then they took the people who was a little smart and helped other people. Then they took the priests away. My father died in May the 5th, and he was the last person who got buried in Strassburg. Then they took Father Kopp away. He was from Krasna. And from that time on they start demolish the church. They threw the bells down, then the steeple down, everything-- the statue, the big organ-- everything was hauled out and burned, and they made a show hall out of the church. In our church, I think 600 people it holded, with the pews, but when the Germans came in so they helped us again, but it didn't took long. It only took 2 years, the Germans had to leave again. They said, "You are out on your own, there's nobody can help you." (narrator) The events of the Diaspora were not lost on the Kutschurganers living in North America. But the memory of these events became too painful to hold. Gradually, "Da Haam in Russland," "Back home in Russia," was suppressed by the mind and the memory grew numb. (Adam Giesinger) Our people did not talk very much about Russia. They seemed to gradually forget it altogether. When I was small, they used to speak about the "Da Haam in Russland." They still called it home, "Da Haam in Russland." Whereas, say 10, 15 years later, they never used that expression anymore. (narrator) So what did remain-- foods, language, religion? When people come together, it's always a time of eating and storytelling, of reminiscing and being reminded of times gone by. Recollection is a mirror of cultural identity, distinctively revealed in patterns of daily life and speech, in food and in story. (Adam Giesinger) We and all our neighbors all spoke German. We lived in an area where there were a lot of Germans from Russia. I heard no English in my home when I was a child. Well, it was very evident when we started school because actually we could probably speak some words of English, but we normally and automatically spoke German. Of course, in school we had to speak English. If we spoke German we were punished, had to write or stay after school. When we were out playing ball we would shout in German, but when we went into the school we'd have to speak English, of course. Thank God that the teachers had patience with us and taught us English. First of all, it was the German-Russian family that had its own customs-- food and the cooking and the language-- all of that. Going to a one-room school, I didn't know English, and teacher was pretty rough. Anytime you spoke German, you had the garden hose, you got slapped your hand with it. So I was a pretty quiet little boy the first year. Really, truth be known, I didn't really learn much English. When I went off to High School Seminary in Ohio, I was really at a deficit. That's basically where I learned my English, was going off to the prep seminary. It was a good school. We learned real good; we had good teacher, good teachers. And we wasn't supposed to talk German, but we went outside and still talked German. But then the teacher didn't hear that. But we managed, well, we had to learn that way, learn English, what we could, and talked German with it... that's the way we grew up. Oh a lot of them at the 8th grade finished the 8th grade. Oh yeah. And then they went further, the ones that wanted to take more school, they could take more. But there were very few German ones that went, at that time. My mother had a very severe surgery and she ruptured, and so she needed the help. So I pretend that I didn't want to go to school and I stayed home to-- the doctor said, "Your mother will live if she has complete peace of mind. So what could I do? I quit school. (Adam Giesinger) Many of the pioneers were illiterate, or nearly so. So when you had somebody like my father, he had had a year of high school in Russia. So when they set up a school, they had to elect a school board. Well, they needed somebody who could read and write to be secretary. Well, my dad was picked for that. So he was secretary of the school board for quite a few years, until the younger generation came along, then it passed to other families. I was the first one in our neighborhood that went on to high school-- the first one. When I was high school age, you had to go away, and many people couldn't afford that. I can observe in my hometown, if I go to the bar and if I sit down to talk with somebody, I really have to speak more directly. I have to speak in more declarative sentences. This is really tricky actually because I think people back home think very complexly and that could have something to do with Germanness. You think about the German language and the way they build these words that are just conglomerations of words within words within words and that reflects a way of looking at the world. And what the people back home manage to accomplish is, they think that way about the world but they communicate in very elegant, pared-down sentences structures. When I come back to the writing table and think about my creative writing that I do, I always try to get my voice back to the voice that speaks to the people from back home. (narrator) Speaking to the people back home included not only the spoken language, but the language of music, the rhythm of the dance echoing the rhythm of seasons and work. The fun part was, this building is still standing here in Balta. And the dance hall was upstairs. And when enough of us danced, the hall went like this. Every time we went, my dad would say, "Well, when I hear it collapse, I'll come and look for you." [laughs] But it was fun. We had a lot of house parties. We'd have a party at our house. Then the next week maybe the neighbors would have a party, and then the other neighbors. Whoever would have the dance there would serve a nice lunch. Sometimes we got to have it at the schoolhouse. Somebody would play the violin or somebody the accordion or sometimes it was just the record player. Weddings were a tradition in the German families. If you turned 14, you got to start going to wedding dances, from when I was 14 until I was 20 years old there was a wedding dance every Friday night. So you got to go to the wedding dance. My dad would give us 50 cents and say "Don't spend it all in one place." [laughs] And we would go to the wedding dances and my mother said, "Well, if you're going to go to wedding dances, you have to learn how to dance. There's no sense going to a wedding dance if you don't know how to dance." So my mother taught us how to dance at a young age, at 14, 15 years of age, so when we'd go to the dance, we could actually dance with the girls. It was always free, and they passed the hat around 11:00 and you would throw in a quarter, 20 cents, whatever, and they always seemed to collect for the band, and it was always a lot of fun. Wedding dances always traditionally had the waltzes, the 2-steps and polkas and occasionally there was a schottische. In those days people knew how to dance and they always danced in a circle. We'd make all the wedding dances and we'd always say, "If you're going to go to meet girls, you have to go to Balta or go to Berwick, they always had lots of girls; if you wanted to get into a fight, you could always go to Karlsruhe to the dance because there was always a fight at every Karlsruhe dance, I don't know why but there always was. And Orrin was just always a fun party always. (narrator) In days before television, families needed to invent diversion. I remember when my brother bought the first radio, little radio about so high. We all sat up all night listening to the songs. We were so happy! I played the organ and I taught my children on my knee to sing. In the evenings there was no radio, no nothing. In the evenings after supper they were on my knee in a big rocking chair, one had the lap, the other two were sitting on the side, and I sang to them; I sang to them. ¦ I was born and raised in Saskatchewan ¦ ¦ Where the golden fields of grain are grown. ¦ ¦ Where a herd of white-faced cattle ¦ ¦ Roam the pasture of my parents' farm. ¦ ¦ I'll always be a farmer's son ¦ ¦ Although I'm many miles from home. ¦ ¦ I'll never forget that, happy days. ¦ ¦ I lived with my parents on our farm. ¦ When I was 6 years old, my father had all those records from Germany. The German records that we had, that gramophone with that big horn on there, and he had all those German songs with the yodeling. When I was 7 years old, I sang those songs on that gramophone, and I yodeled like they did. When we got people to come to visit, they asked little Barb to come in, and I had to sing for them. And they gave me money-- 10 cents, 25 cents. You just desperately looked for visitors, you know, you'd be out on the prairie, you'd see the dust from a car. You know, no matter how many gophers I still had to hunt, or how many fish I wanted to catch, you ran on home, hoping those visitors would come to the house. Because not only would they come at mealtime when they'd sit down have a meal with you, but they also enriched your life. You just not only gave to them, they gave to you. Everybody's friendly; you know each other and you help each other. The neighbor kids figured we were making ice cream, they manage to come at noontime. I know one time one of the boys came up, they lived about a mile, and my mother said, "Oh, you hit a pretty good day-- we got spring chicken today and ice cream!" She said, "Yeah, well, we always have ice cream. I'll stay for dinner." Well, then his brother came to tell him to go home. Well, he stayed-- then the father came! Then my mother just winked to Dad, and she said, "Oh, let the boys have a little time off. They enjoyed this meal. Come sit down and eat with them." So he did! [laughs] (narrator) The aroma of bread just pulled from the oven, the smell of soil freshly tilled in the field, the sound of a language spoken by grandparents, aunts and uncles through centuries, echoing in German folk songs now all but forgotten, the taste of foods with strange sounding names enjoyed around countless kitchen tables--these sensory pleasures recall a home in Russian river valleys and on the American prairie. The foods in particular evoke memories of home and family. (Mary Ebach) It brings back visual memories because I can see her making them. She didn't use a recipe. She used her hand, the palm of her hand, or a green water glass or a blue soup bowl. That's how she measured. (narrator) For Mary and Clara Ebach of Rugby, North Dakota, memory resides in the kitchen, baking Blotchenda, as their mother did-- a Black Sea specialty. (Mary Ebach) I think it was 6 or 7 years old when her Dad died, and her mother remarried. I asked her one time, why she left Russia, were they mean to her? She said no, they heard that there was free land available in America and they wanted to come. So they got on a ship, and she told us all about her voyage over and how they got seasick. I asked her one time if she would ever go back to Russia and she said, no, she'd never go back. She liked it here, she became an American, she learned how to read English, how to speak English and she was very good at it. This is a recipe book that we compiled, using the recipes, the information that she provided. Like I said here in the front, that she used like a green glass full of that or a blue cup that she used or a green soup bowl. And if she said a soup bowl, she meant that green soup bowl she wanted a glass, then you used a green glass. And I said you know, if you don't have that blue soup bowl or the green glass, you're in trouble because she had the right ingredients, the right touch! Sometimes there are words in German that you don't know how to translate into English. Like we say Kaesknaepf, ok, we know what it is. Explain it to somebody else, you got to translate it into English, cheese buttons--it's not quite the same. It loses something in translation. So when we say we're going to make Blotchenda, that's what we say. I don't know how you would say that in English. So all these recipes are in here, like Gruene Borscht, I suppose you could just say it's a meatless vegetable soup. But it's more than that. It's more than just a vegetable soup because it has all these special ingredients in there that only a German would have in there. What we do when we make the Blotchenda is to take a small-size pumpkin, for the amount of Blotchenda we make. We cut it in half, after they are cut in half, I will take out the seeds, scrape them out... This is the way we learned how to make it, and rather than try something new and maybe not turn out as good as the way our mother made it, we just continue with the actual way that she made it. I don't know, sometimes if you modernize too much. And it is a little more work. Some people use canned pumpkin to make these, but like I said, we're a firm believer in continuing with the way that was good enough for our mother. We scrape until we get about 8 cups in there. To this I'm adding the pepper and the salt and onion, and now 2/3rds cup of sugar. Now some people when they make this, they don't use the salt or the onion on it, they add cinnamon. And that's just another way that people learned how to make it, I guess. This is the way we learned how to make it in our house, so this is the way we're going to make it. While Clara is making the dough, these ingredients will blend. I'm going to make the dough for the Blotchenda. I have 4 cups of flour, 1/2 teaspoon of baking powder, and 1 teaspoon of salt. And then about 1/2 cup of lard. This I do by guess and by gosh. I think I have to get in there with my hands to do that. I put water in there, I'm gonna add a little bit of milk and a little bit of cream. Because with the milk and cream it makes the dough a little more moist. It is a lot of work. We don't do it that often. It seems like all those German dishes are a lot of work. Whew! Now I gotta let this rest for a while. I hope to get a dozen Blotchendas out of that. (Mary Ebach) I feel with these recipes that it is a continuation of our heritage. (Clara Ebach) I'm rolling out the dough for the Blotchenda, little ones. We used to make big ones, but Mary decided the little ones are better. Now we're going to start the second process of making the Blotchenda, and that is to fill them. And stir it up a little bit because it has blended pretty good; they are nice and soft. Pinch 'em together. They're going to turn out a little small, but they'll be good enough. Have them set at 375 and leave 'em in for 20 to 30 minutes depending on how fat I made 'em. Oh, boy that's a juicy one! Then, of course, with the Blotchenda we... we ate 'em--you can eat 'em just by themselves, but our mother always had a soup to go with it. A potato soup, bean soup, She had a solution for all of our hunger. It's surprising how long that dough will stay, hold your appetite; you don't get hungry fast after you've eaten something made with dough. (Joseph Senger) They were able to create things out of nothing with just flour and water and we thought it was really, really delicious. Of course, we baked bread, had the kitchen table full of loaves of bread. We baked bread once or twice a week. I smell that, and immediately I think of home and the kitchen and the bread. Oh yes, yes. (narrator) Preparing food requires hours of repeated tasks: kneading dough, shelling peas, grinding sausage. Fieldwork requires repeated labor as well. Through the agricultural repetition of plowing back and forth, repeatedly seeding and threshing, and through the flow of seasons and rivers, people of the Kutschurgan felt their connection to a chain of being that stretched back beyond known ancestors (Barbara Schneider Risling) Well, I didn't like to go out in the field, because it was hot, and I had to harness my horses, but I had to do it because the boys were not old enough to do it. Joel was my brother next to me, but he was not old enough. We hauled sheaves to the threshing machine till we got enough help, then we were released. We picked all the weeds by hand. There was no such a thing as spray. From the beginning there were no weeds, all at once the weeds started coming, see, the land was so new, there was no weeds there. Up and down, the 5 of us. We took up one strip up, put them all in the piles, down the other one, up and down the field we picked them all by hand. I worked hard all my life. And my sister's 91, and she was with me, we all worked together. It wasn't that I worked hard alone, they all worked hard. The whole family worked hard. (narrator) The church towered over the Kutschurgan valley of remembrance, its architecture dominating both ideology and landscape. Parishioners were Catholic, devout, and willing to support the construction of huge edifices whose monumental ruins mark the villages yet today and register a piety that transcends national boundaries. In America, the construct was just as powerful, but the buildings more modest. (Joseph Senger) I always compare it to the churches in Russia where they had these great big, beautiful churches and they were all turned into granaries, and garages and machine shops because they were the strongest buildings in every town. So the buildings are still there; they are 100 years old. I shock people when I tell them that the churches at Orrin, Karlsruhe, Balta, will one day be empty, because people are just moving away from the farm. And I dread to think of 25 years from now I think this church here where we are won't be in operation in 25 years. So I'm very sad. I'm too pessimistic about the fact that we're losing so much population in the rural areas. When I think of the activity and how our life centered around the church when we grew up--it simply is not that way anymore. We don't have the people; we don't have the young people, so there simply isn't that much activity. I remember when I was very little we went to the country church. Then I remember when this church was built. My dad and the boys were down working, and it wasn't enough help, so my dad hired a hired man to help also. And my mother took all the kettles down. Sometimes we didn't know if we could cook a good meal at home or not because everything was down here! No matter what oppressive circumstances they had to encounter, whether it would be in Alsace, or Napoleon, whether it was in Russia or the adverse conditions they had to confront just living in North Dakota, church was important. That was the rallying point. Church became the point of socializing. Well in the villages, you know, a lot of that socializing was built around the religious festivals. So you had particular customs surrounding Christmas celebrations. You had customs surrounding Easter that weren't just connected with the church service, you know, were much more broadly expanded. And going on down the line, weddings would be celebrated, not just one day, but three days. You went on and on Names Days, Namestag, oh gosh, that was important. The church festival, the Karichweihfest. I do remember the one for New Year's because I remember what they used to call Neujahrschiesse, which means they were New Year's celebrators and they would come at like 3:00 in the morning. The first thing they would do, they would take a loaded shotgun and they would pull 'er off right next to the master bedroom window to wake up the owners of the home. Then they'd come in, and they'd want to have a little drink or something. The first thing they did when they come in, they'd have to give the greeting to come in the house-- And it was always, it went, "Glueckliches Neujahr G'sundheit, langes Leben Alles was is' is' 'n Haus voll Kinder e' Stall voll Rinder e' Keller voll Wein un' da kumet Leut' rein," which is really "Happy New Year to you." All there is, is a house full of children, a barn full of cattle, a cellar full of wine, and a great time to come in and have company" is what it was all about-- wishing everyone the best for the new year, and that you've got all these, and you're willing to share with everybody. It was more of a chant than a song, The New Year's greeting was more of a chant than a song, it was not really--it depends how much they had to drink, I suppose! [laughs] And how many houses they had been to before they got to ours. One year they blew the chimney off our house! [laughs] (narrator) Although the people of the Kutschurgan didn't have much leisure time, their talent for combining belief, skill, art, and landscape found expression in their production of funerary iron crosses. Wherever Kutschurganers lived and died, there one finds these landscape sentinels peering eternally into the soul of the people both dead and alive. Their black outlines relieve the endless prairie; their negative space embraces inner horizons. The iron crosses are very, very, special to me and I feel they have a much more religious significance than the granite monuments. It seems like it's closer to the heart of religion; that the people who made them had a much more personal influence. When people became more prosperous, they felt it was a sign of prosperity if they could buy either an iron cross that was molded or a granite cross. So in later years it was considered to be only the very poor people would have an iron cross because they couldn't afford a better one, and that, of course, was very unfortunate. It would have really been good if they had continued with the iron crosses because they were made by people of the area, the blacksmith of the area. I would like to have an iron cross made for myself. (narrator) What are the strengths of a German-Russian heritage? (Thomas Welk) I think resiliency. They've had to go through so much adversity that I think there's very little that some of these people would not be willing to tackle and take on. I think the strong convictions that come out of a long, big tradition, would be probably another one that served these people well. Sometimes they may not even realize it, but I think those convictions will carry them through a lot. Well, they have a reputation for being stubborn. [laughs] I think it probably isn't stubborn so much as determined and I would say hard working. They work very, very hard. I think even the ones who go to college, they tend to work very hard. It is something that they grew up with. And like for me, all of the German-Russians were farmers, and so I associate hard work with the Germans from Russia. I think the Germans from Russia are very religious people and very pious people. Possibly some of it was because they had so many hardships. We had two generations of real suffering and one generation of things going really well. I think somehow or other that affected them. I would say that in Russia they were isolated in the sense that they had their own villages and so there too, their lives centered around their church. I think they have a deep affinity to the church and to God. I mentioned earlier because of hardship, but I don't want to say simply because times were hard that they were religious. I think they were religious when times were good too. I feel very strongly that we are losing a very special part of our heritage by being, sort of melting into the general American scene. I wish that we could keep alive more of our German-Russian heritage. (narrator) The Kutschurgan exists today at the confluence of place and memory. How long it will persist depends on the power of memory, for the place of the past has disappeared. It is saved in the hearts and minds of descendants whose ancestors once dwelled there. It also lives on in traditions found in the plains states and provinces of North and South Dakota, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan. One of the things I'm trying to do is to resist two things that I think are dangerous for preservation of culture: one is nostalgia, and one is romanticism. I think actually our people were not a nostalgic people. I think they were people who knew that in order to survive, you had to keep looking forward. And that the generations who came afterwards, we've been maybe a little bit too nostalgic because we were trying to correct that forward-looking impulse in our ancestors. Nostalgia brings with it rosy glasses. I think we're at beginning of this huge, new, rich wave of German-Russian culture, history, literature, that is going to put German-Russian culture in its proper place in American culture because we'll have the tools in place, and I think slowly we'll be less hampered by this romantic instinct. What future historians and future writers will have to do is, have to unpack all of those neatenings that have occurred and all those conflations for simplification. The worst thing that could happen is if the story were completely forgotten and completely erased. (narrator) The people of the Kutschurgan were united by their faith and by their agricultural foundation. It has been said that people who settle virgin land, as did the people of the Kutschurgan at least twice in their common history, feel themselves to be performing an act of creation. Though scattered now as the seeds and hulls of wheat they tended for centuries, people of the Kutschurgan return almost as ritual to their prairie roots, hungry for the resonance of their sacrifices and successes, a renewal of a memory not yet lost, and that landscape not yet urban. (woman) "O Kutschurgan, du stilles Tal! Sei mir gegruesst viel tausendmal!" "Oh Kutschurgan, oh quiet valley! I call to you a thousand times!" ¦ (woman) Funding is provided by... ...NDSU Libraries... (man) To order a DVD copy of "At Home in Russia At Home on the Prairie," call or visit our online store...

Background

Early records (1805–1861)

Preservation efforts of the 1830s were limited to undisputed relics like the 11th century Saint Sophia Cathedral in Novgorod. This architectural drawing was made in 1830, prior to restoration.

Local heritage registers in the Russian Empire extend to 1805, when Alexander I demanded state protection of archaeological sites on the recently conquered Black Sea coast.[4][5] These Greek, Genoan and Tatar relics in sparsely populated steppes were regularly looted by treasure hunters. In 1821 minister Alexander Golitsyn limited the scope of protection to Greek and Genoan heritage and denied protection to Tatar and Ottoman buildings.[6] Requirements for a scientific heritage register were formulated in 1823 by Ivan Stempkovsky and enforced by governor Vorontsov.[4]

In 1826, emperor Nicholas I decreed compilation of Russia's first nationwide register of architectural "antiquities". The decree prohibited demolition of historical "castles, fortresses and other ancient buildings", imposed local governors' responsibility for their preservation and required them to compile lists of notable local properties, backed by archive research and where qualified architects were available, by proper architectural drawings of their facades and floorplans.[7] Churches were omitted from the decree, – Nicholas at that time did not want to interfere with clergy; a similar but less strict decree on religious heritage was issued in 1828.[8]

Nicholas did not explain what, specifically, constituted protected buildings, so initial responses from the provinces listed both pre-petrine buildings and contemporary neoclassical landmarks. Within the 1830s official and public understanding of "antiquities" was narrowed to Russia's "indigenous" art of pre-petrine periods; baroque and neoclassicism of the 18th century, regarded as recent foreign influence, were exempt.[8] Recognition of these styles as national heritage did not occur until the Russian neoclassical revival of the early 1900s.[9]

The first regional register (album) of listed buildings was published in 1830 in Novgorod (including relics of Belozersk).[10] In 1839 Andrey Glagolev published "Russian Fortresses", in 1844–1846 Ivan Pushkarev published four volumes on Northern Russian heritage.[11] Professional studies of ancient architecture did not gain momentum until the 1840s, when the country accumulated a critical mass of architects trained in restoration projects in Italy and France at the expense of the Imperial Academy of Arts.[12] Materials on Kievan Rus relics collected in the 1820s–1834, compiled by Konstantin Thon,[13] contributed to the formulation of the official Russo-Byzantine style of the 1830s–1850s.[14] Eventually the compilation duties were delegated to the Russian Archaeological[15] Society, established in 1846–1849.[16]

The building code of 1857[17] separated responsibility for preservation of historical buildings (17th century and earlier) depending on property type.[18] State properties were now governed by the Ministry of Internal Affairs, with restoration financed by local taxes. Restoration of urban churches had to be approved by the Holy Synod, restoration of rural churches by local bishop, with prior consent of a civilian city architect. Private properties remained largely unregulated.[19][20] An Imperial Archeological Commission, established in 1859, was tasked with maintenance of the register; however, it was never adequately financed.[19]

Societies and Commissions (1861–1917)

Baroque heritage was not deemed notable until the very end of the 19th century. This photo of St. Catherine church (Karl Blank, 1760s) was included in Nikolay Naidenov's catalogue in 1883, before official recognition of baroque art.[21]

During the reign of Alexander II (1856–1881) the dominant policy shifted from preservation of buildings to recreation of their perceived, frequently fictional, "original" looks.[22] The change was influenced by Western European experience, particularly works by Jonathan Smith and Viollet-le-Duc,[23] as well as domestic political unrest. After the 1863 uprising in Poland Alexander launched a campaign of reintroducing Orthodoxy into Western provinces, including restoration of ruined Orthodox churches. To help formulate the new canon, Grigory Gagarin (vice-president of the Archaeological Society) instituted a special commission for "the studies of Russian and Orthodox in general, monuments of the Western Territory".[24] In less than ten years the commission catalogued the Orthodox heritage of western Ukraine, Lithuania and Congress Poland, paying special attention to churches initially built as Orthodox and later converted to Catholicism; these were repossessed and eventually rebuilt to Orthodox canon.[25]

In the second half of the 1860s Gagarin and count Alexey Uvarov solved the problem of managing the national register; in particular, Uvarov is credited with establishment of the non-governmental Moscow Archaeological Society [fr; ru; uk] (1869), a professional institution that literally "kept the nation's records" and was the public watchdog for preservation until the October Revolution.[26] It tried to secure an exclusive right to approve or veto any changes to listed buildings, but failed; in 1874 these rights were granted to an Imperial Commission composed of members of Archaeological Societies, the Holy Synod, Russian Academy of Sciences and the Academy of Arts. In the same year the state finally formulated the legal meaning of architectural landmark and ensured equal protection for church and civil properties.[27]

The register compiled by Archaeological Societies was augmented by regional catalogues published by amateurs such as Nikolay Naidenov, author of the four-volume "Moscow Cathedrals, Monasteries and Churches" (1883–1888).[28] Amateurs were not bound by the official borderline between "antiquities" and modernity and thus preserved all-inclusive snapshots of their period. In the 1890s protection was gradually extended to selected buildings of the 18th century, however, their classification as heritage remained debatable until the 1900s.[18] Late 18th and 19th century Empire style buildings were placed on the register shortly before World War I through the efforts of Ivan Mashkov, Ilya Bondarenko of Moscow Architectural Society and the Saint Petersburg school of Russian neoclassical revival.

Denial of heritage (1917–1941)

In the years immediately after the October Revolution, the Bolshevik administration had not yet forged its policy on culture; it was outwardly hostile to religion and "upper" classes, at the same time allowing preservationists to have a say in daily life of Soviet cities. The same person, Vladimir Lenin, decreed destruction of tsarist monuments and removal of church properties and at the same time authorized maintenance of cultural heritage registers. In the early 1920s the government supported conversion of significant historical buildings into public museums. Notable preservationists like Petr Baranovsky, Ilya Bondarenko and Petr Sytin[29] took over nationalized landmarks for museums of local "people's heritage" and managed to delay their destruction and keep the record of surviving local heritage.

However, in the second half of the 1920s, the policy reversed to outward denial of this heritage and shutting down "redundant" local museums. With the change in values imposed by communist ideology, the tradition of preservation was broken. Independent preservation societies, even those that defended only secular landmarks such as Moscow-based OIRU were disbanded by the end of the 1920s.[30] A new anti-religious campaign, launched in 1929, coincided with collectivization of peasants; destruction of churches in the cities peaked around 1932.

The rise of Stalinist architecture had dual consequences. On one hand, gigantic reconstruction plans demanded demolition of anything caught in the way. In Moscow, the new plans resulted in reducing the heritage register from 474 items in 1925 to just 74 in 1935; national RSFSR register shrunk from over 3,000 to 1,200.[31] The establishment of the Academy of Architecture marginally improved attitudes towards the national heritage; the academy provided a new forum for preservationists. In 1940 the academy compiled its own list of top-priority landmarks and assessed the damages, but comprehensive national or even regional heritage registers did not reappear until after World War II. The few landmarks set aside by the planners of the 1930s remained protected and restored[32] until the German invasion.

Post-war recovery (1945–1959)

Troitse-Sergiyeva Lavra was listed by Joseph Stalin and delisted by Nikita Khrushchev.

Losses of World War II, conservatively estimated at 3,000 landmarks,[33][34] and a wartime shift in favor of nationalist ideology raised the politicians' attention to the problems of surviving national heritage. In 1947 Council of Ministers of the RSFSR approved the new comprehensive list of more than 600 top priority buildings and ensembles.[35] Detailed legal instruction on recordkeeping and protection followed in 1948.[36]

The 1947 decree limited the scope of protected buildings to "ancient Russian" art, although the register included singular objects of Muslim culture (Khan's Mosque of the Bakhchisaray Palace and the fortress of Derbent) and many 19th-century buildings.[35] More than half of listed buildings were located in the historical northern lands of the former Novgorod Republic and Vladimir Rus, with a substantial share of vernacular wooden architecture.[35] Novgorod and Pskov, largely destroyed during the war, were restored.[37]

Registers for the other republics of the Union and the cities of Leningrad and Moscow were developed independently (Moscow, in particular, benefited from its 800-year anniversary celebrated in 1947). Religious buildings dominated the registers, a consequence of a "conciliatory" policy toward the Russian Orthodox Church that was practiced in the last decade of Joseph Stalin's tenure.[38][39]

Khrushchev's offensive (1959–1964)

Between 1951 and 1955, 37 buildings (mostly churches) were struck off the list. In 1960 the government approved a larger, purportedly all-inclusive register of more than 30 thousand buildings.[40] However, shortly before the list was finalized, Nikita Khrushchev launched his anti-religious campaign of 1959–1964.[33] By 1964 over 10 thousand churches out of 20 thousand[37] were shut down (mostly in rural areas) and many were demolished.[33][41] Of 58 monasteries and convents operating in 1959, only sixteen remained by 1964; of Moscow's fifty churches operating in 1959, thirty were closed and six demolished.[41] The 1960 register also suffered reductions, notably in 1963 when authorities struck Troitse-Sergiyeva Lavra and other landmarks.[1] Destruction reached into Moscow Kremlin when the Palace of Congresses replaced the "old" buildings of the Kremlin Armoury. In an unrelated move, in 1956, Khrushchev shut down the Academy of Architecture, an established venue for restorers and historians of architecture.

Khrushchev's campaign backfired, triggering a rise in public attention to national heritage[42] and to the dismal state of the ecosystem. In March, 1962 a group of intellectuals published a bitter article on the destruction of old Moscow in Moskva monthly; official Pravda responded with harsh criticism in May.[43] A public call to establish an independent watchdog society was just as harshly rejected.[41] Two years later and six months before Khrushchev's fall from power, the first truly independent preservation society, Rodina, was founded in Moscow by Petr Baranovsky;[44] barely tolerated by authorities, Rodina survived into the early 1970s.[45]

Formal protection (1965–1991)

The Church of Kazan Icon in Yakimanka District of Moscow, desecrated in the 1930s and gradually reduced into a storage barn, was demolished during a 1972 campaign to clean up the city for Richard Nixon's state visit.[46]

In 1965, Pavel Korin, Sergey Konenkov and Leonid Leonov published a call to stop destroying churches and, literally, "preserve our sacred places". Two months later, in an apparent reversal of Khrushchev's past, the state announced creation of VOOPIK – a national preservation society controlled by the state.[45] However, preparation for its founding congress demonstrated that the state actually intended to create a powerless front group. It subordinated VOOPIK to Party bureaucrats and denied it the right to publish a journal.[45][47] Disillusioned advocates (Vladimir Soloukhin, Ilya Glazunov) moved to a public forum of Molodaya Gvardiya magazine, shaping a new, nationalist, version of Russian history that sharply contradicted official doctrine.[48]

Nevertheless, VOOPIK provided a forum to preservationists; discussions inside VOOPIK eventually led to legitimising previously suppressed nationalist issues;[45] the dues paid by 15 million "mandatory volunteers" financed restoration projects. The society contributed to the heritage register but was never entrusted to manage it. In 1974 the government of the RSFSR produced a broader and stable version of the national register, reversing the 1960s reductions. In 1978 new practices for heritage monitoring were formulated in new national and republican laws "On protection and usage of monuments of history and culture".[1]

In reality, landmarks were informally split into two groups. The most conspicuous ones, the tourist showcases, were largely untouchable and barely maintained; the rest were left to rot without proper maintenance. Sometimes these dilapidated buildings fell prey to one-off "cleanup" campaigns like those that preceded the 1972 state visit by Richard Nixon or the 1980 Summer Olympics, sometimes to urban renewal programs inherited from Stalin's master plans.[46] Between 1965 and 1984, Moscow's preservation budget increased from 2 to 25 million roubles,[49] or still less than 0.5% of the city's capital construction budget. Meager financing forced the authorities to freeze the heritage register as of its 1974 version. In Moscow about 1,200 buildings made the list, while about 1,100 new applications were rejected. 2,200 Moscow landmarks (mostly unlisted) disappeared during Leonid Brezhnev’s tenure[50] (although only three of them were Orthodox churches).[49]

In June 1978 Party executive Mikhail Solomentsev attempted to appease public opposition, declaring heritage preservation a high priority for the Party and voiced full support for VOOPIK. The message did not appease residents who passed everyday examples of neglect and ruin;[51] Soloukhin wrote: "My book[52] could have contained not four essays but twenty four. I suspect, however, that the effect would have been the same".[53] The policy of empty declarations continued in 1982, when Dmitry Likhachev reported in Ogonyok that the RSFSR heritage register must be expanded three-fold, to at least 180 thousand items.[54] The Ministry of Culture immediately concurred with the new estimate and ordered restoration of the buildings pinpointed by Likhachev, yet no work was done.[54] The USSR's final years brought no improvement; in 1986 even hard-line communist Yegor Ligachev had to admit in public that "destruction of central Moscow has become a political issue"[55][56] and praised preservationists' efforts.[57]

The brief period of perestroika that preceded the fall of the Union did not change the situation radically, apart from allowing the Church to gradually repossess its former properties.[58] Takeover incited conflicts, especially where churches had been occupied by public institutions (as was the case of Yaroslavl Museum of Art, subject of a bitter public campaign of 1990–1993).[59] The first modernist buildings were listed in 1987; by 1990 protection was granted to all Moscow buildings designed by Konstantin Melnikov.[60]

Post-Soviet Russia (1991–present)

Moscow City Heritage register still lists this house near Arbat Street as an 18th-century wooden building[61] although it was taken apart and rebuilt in 1994, retaining less than 15% of original structure.[62] The federal heritage register admitted the fact and delisted the property.[63]

In 1995, Boris Yeltsin approved a new, expanded federal heritage register. The new version suffered from inconsistencies influenced by regional politics: for example, numerous residential buildings in Kirov Oblast were granted federal protection, while similar buildings elsewhere were considered local, or at best regional, points of interest.[1] It inherited most of the errors present in the 1974 register.

Public affection for surviving heritage remained strong: "Any American preservationist would be jealous of the importance assigned to historic preservation by contemporary residents of Yaroslavl",[64] but failed to check the construction boom that destroyed thousands of historical buildings. Moscow losses of 1900–2006 are estimated at over 640 notable buildings (including 150 to 200 listed buildings, out of a total inventory of 3,500)[65] – some disappeared completely, others were replaced with concrete replicas while still listed.[66] Only a few cases of destruction (not backed by local authorities) reached the courts; wherever possible, interested developers succeeded in delisting target buildings prior to demolition.[67] As "ethical reference points were swept aside by a torrent of money", former Minister of Culture Alexander Sokolov described the situation as "bacchanalia of uncoordinated construction".[68]

The city of Moscow reduced its restoration budget from 150 million pound sterling in 1989 to barely 8 million in 2004[69] and at the same time elevated replacement of old buildings with modern replicas to a policy level. In May 2004 mayor Yury Luzhkov defended the policy in Izvestia, saying that "In Moscow culture, the notion of a replica sometimes has no lesser meaning than the original had. Meaningful historical and cultural 'load' carried by the replica is frequently richer and wider than the original architect's solution."[note 1][70] Rebuilding is cheaper than restoration and increases rentable space.[69] The same attitude of decision-makers developed in other towns and was studied in Yaroslavl by Blair Ruble, who identified growing social separation between advocates of preservation and decision-makers: the latter are "among the least identified with the need to preserve", not in the least because the affluent ruling class chooses suburban lifestyle, out of touch with the city.[71]

Legislation

Geographical distribution
of listed properties[1]
Federal district Share in total
inventory
Rating of properties
Federal Regional and
municipal
North-Western 43% 39% 61%
Central 37% 17% 83%
Volga 8% 10% 90%
Southern 7% 4% 96%
Urals 2% 7% 93%
Siberian 2% 8% 92%
Far Eastern 1% no data no data
Total 100%

Federal law "On the objects of cultural heritage (monuments of culture and history)", enacted in June 2002, defines these objects as either standalone buildings or monuments with adjacent territories, or ensembles of buildings, or "notable places" (cultural landscapes, including historical urban districts and major archaeological sites).[72] A registered object (or a historical event that is key to an object's notability) must be at least forty years old;[73] the memorial home of a notable person may be registered immediately upon that person's death.[73]

Depending on their significance, objects of cultural heritage are assigned to either federal, regional or local (municipal) level (archaeological sites are automatically assigned to federal level). Top priority federal objects (including all World Heritage Sites) form a special subset of "most valuable" objects.[74] They are listed in a separate State Code of Particularly Valuable Objects of Cultural Heritage of the Peoples of the Russian Federation[3] which, in addition to immovable properties, includes active institutions (theaters, museums, universities, libraries and archives). "Particularly valuable" objects, by definition, are federal state properties,[75] however, in December 2008 Pavlovsk and Gatchina palaces, part of a World Heritage Site, became municipal property of the city of Saint Petersburg.[76] Privatization of lesser landmarks controlled by the federal government, put on hold in the early 1990s, was allowed in 2008.[77] However, privatization auctions did not catch investors' interest and only about 250 objects changed hands in 2008.[77] Regional listed properties were gradually privatized throughout the 1990s.

New properties are listed through a two-tier procedure. In case of regional and local properties, the regional branch of Rosokhrankultura collects all relevant information and issues a recommendation to the regional government; then, actual listing is promulgated by a decree of regional government.[78] Professional preservationist organizations usually have significant influence at the early stages of the process, but are barely mentioned in law. Regional legislators and municipal authorities are excluded from the process altogether.[78] The federal register was intended to track and incorporate any changes in regional registers, but as of 2009 it had not happened.

Lower-level authorities have limited rights. For example, municipalities cannot register their own objects; instead, they must apply to Rosokhrankultura representatives. Federal authorities can reclassify any object of regional or municipal significance as a federal landmark.[79]

Perhaps worse for the objects is that regional governments cannot legally finance restoration of federal-level buildings unless they are specifically mentioned in jointly-financed federal target programs. The law allows financing "preservation" which, in Russian legalese, excludes capital investment in restoration. Until January 1, 2008, even this "preservation" was not allowed; at best, regions were allowed to set up independent charities and seek donations.[80] This is particularly important for the city of Saint Petersburg and its suburbs, where an overwhelming majority of notable buildings are rated at federal level.[1] Municipal authorities are still not allowed to finance restoration of regional and federal properties,[80] but under the present Tax Code they have no funds for projects.

Unsolved problems

This 1890s building, listed in 2001, was demolished in September 2008. Property developer walked away with a $1,500 fine.[81]
Listing of surviving constructivist architecture is contested by authorities and has narrow public support base.

Definitions

Russia has no legal or otherwise generally accepted definition of cultural landscape.[1] Local zoning regulations, once imposed by municipal authorities, can be lifted in favor of "important" projects.

Saint Petersburg

In Saint Petersburg, the city heritage commissioner attempted to enforce demolition of an addition to a building on Moika Embankment that wrecked the skyline of this protected neighborhood. However, the building itself was not listed and no sanctions were imposed;[82] the city architect and other involved executives upheld the developer's interests.[83] The city governor approved construction of Gazprom's 400-meter Okhta Center while the outline of Palace Square was deformed by a highrise built behind the former General Staff building;[84] the latter incursion against a World Heritage Site was supported by the city architect.[83] In Moscow, the southward view from Red Square was similarly deformed in 2005 by a 162[85] meter tall Swissotel tower.

No independent watchdog

No Russian independent preservation group has sufficient influence to intervene into the plans of city authorities and property developers. Legislation leaves matters of preservation to federal and municipal heritage commissions, neither of which are sufficiently independent to check these plans. As a result, listed buildings are easily delisted, or their listing is delayed until the wrecking crews (Voyentorg building)[69] or fire (El Lissitzky's Ogonyok printshop)[86] reduce them to ruins.[69]

Property title

A significant share of state-owned landmarks have no legal owner due to disputes between federal and regional authorities and the legal ban on registering title for such properties (lifted in 2008). Saint Petersburg alone, as of April 2008, had 1,200 listed objects without registered titles.[87] Only in 2008 did the authorities agree to register 393 buildings (including Hermitage Museum and Smolny Palace) as federal property and 243 as city property; ownership of Peter and Paul Fortress was split.[87] The last batch of 90 buildings (the most potentially profitable, rentable properties) was split in May 2009. As a result, after 680 objects were assigned to the city and 424 to federal authorities, at the end of May 2009 Saint Petersburg had only 13 listed buildings, all former churches, including Saint Isaac's Cathedral and Church of the Savior on Blood.[76] in legal limbo.[76][87] The city has over 3,000 "newly found" historical buildings on the waiting list of local heritage commission; they will be either listed or demolished.[88]

Moscow, as of July 2009, has around 2,500 historical buildings waiting for inclusion into the heritage register, including five buildings by Fyodor Schechtel and St. Andrew's Anglican Church. Around 500 buildings on this list are expected to be denied protection of any kind.[89]

Recognition of modernist architecture

Addition of yet unlisted avantgarde buildings to the register remains controversial. Western authors noted that preservation of these buildings has a very narrow support base, limited to architects' heirs[90][91] and selected intelligentsia; the general public identifies the bulk of avant-garde architecture with the bland Soviet industrial past, and as devoid of Russian national character.[90] According to Anna Bronovitskaya, "Modernist aesthetics have never recovered from Stalin's denouncement... the public remains very conservative in its tastes."[92] Russian restorers have no experience in handling concrete structures,[92][93] making restoration itself a threat to their survival,[92] unless the investor hires German restorers.[93] Prejudice against real or perceived poor construction quality of the interwar period favors radical rebuilding initiatives.[94] As a result, far more avant-garde buildings perished in modern Russia than in socialist Soviet Union; the art of the 20th century "have proved to be the most vulnerable and poorly defended".[95]

Moscow Heritage Commission is split on the heritage value of mainstream constructivist and rationalist architecture. Moscow Mayor Yury Luzhkov denounced the "flat-faced architecture";[96] the city's chief architect has spoken against preservation of functional midrise housing built in the 1920s and 1930s,[60] saying, "they are doomed";[97] some of these blocks have been condemned for demolition.[98] Nevertheless, in 2008 Moscow listed 114 "newly identified" buildings of this period.[60]

Footnotes

  1. ^ Russian: В московской культуре понятие копии иногда имеет не меньший смысл, чем оригинала. Потому что смысловая, историческая и культурная «нагрузка», которую несет в себе такая «копия», часто может быть и богаче, и глубже первоначального архитектурного решения.

References

  1. ^ a b c d e f g Problemy ucheta...
  2. ^ A roundup of legislation on different preservation topics is provided in: "Russia: Sector specific legislation". Council of Europe, Compendium of Cultural Policies and Trends in Europe, 10th edition. 2009. Retrieved 2009-05-16.
  3. ^ a b English translation as in "Russia: Sector specific legislation". Council of Europe, Compendium of Cultural Policies and Trends in Europe, 10th edition. 2009. Retrieved 2009-05-16.
  4. ^ a b Shchenkov et al. 2002, pp. 48–49.
  5. ^ Schmidt 1989, p. 58, ironically remarks that the greatest neoclassical architects of the last quarter of 18th century, Vasily Bazhenov and Matvey Kazakov, did not suffer from a "consuming passion for preservation" and boldly cleared anything that stood in their way. Thus Alexander's 1805 decree actually predated the preservation movement among professionals.
  6. ^ Shchenkov et al. 2002, p. 77.
  7. ^ Shchenkov et al. 2002, pp. 44–45.
  8. ^ a b Shchenkov et al. 2002, p. 46.
  9. ^ Shchenkov et al. 2002, pp. 89–91.
  10. ^ Shchenkov et al. 2002, p. 45.
  11. ^ Shchenkov et al. 2002, p. 92.
  12. ^ Shchenkov et al. 2002, p. 93.
  13. ^ Thon already had a wide experience in restoration; he lived in Italy and France in 1819–1829 and was awarded membership in Accademia di Belle Arti Firenze and Accademia di San Luca for actual restoration work – Shchenkov et al. 2002, p. 83
  14. ^ Shchenkov et al. 2002, p. 97.
  15. ^ In the 19th-century Russian language archaeology included studies of any historical artifacts, including quite recent, extant, operational buildings.
  16. ^ Shchenkov et al. 2002, p. 177.
  17. ^ Shchenkov et al. 2002, p. 175.
  18. ^ a b Shchenkov et al. 2002, p. 324.
  19. ^ a b Shchenkov et al. 2002, pp. 176.
  20. ^ There weren't many private properties dating back to pre-Petrine times and those that were positively identified as "ancient" were rarely deemed valuable enough.
  21. ^ Naidenov, vol. III. The church partially survived: the right dome still exists; the left dome and belltower were demolished and haven't been rebuilt, as at 2009.
  22. ^ Shchenkov et al. 2002, pp. 157–158.
  23. ^ Shchenkov et al. 2002, pp. 290–296.
  24. ^ Shchenkov et al. 2002, pp. 157.
  25. ^ Shchenkov et al. 2002, pp. 150, 194–198.
  26. ^ Shchenkov et al. 2002, pp. 178–179.
  27. ^ Shchenkov et al. 2002, p. 180.
  28. ^ Naidenov, Nikolay (1883–1888). Moskva. Sobory, monastyri, tserkvi Москва. Соборы, монастыри, церкви (in Russian). Moscow:Kushnerev printhouse. 2008 reissue: ISBN 5-98339-005-8
  29. ^ Baranovsky supervised a museum based in Boldino Monastery (Smolensk Oblast); Bondarenko – a museum based in private manor in Ufa; Sytin – a museum in Moscow's Sukharev Tower, carefully restored in 1923–1925 – Scherbo.
  30. ^ OIRU ceased to exist in 1930, their last publication was issued in 1929 – "History of the OIRU (Society for the Studies of Russian Manors) (in Russian)". Retrieved 2009-05-11.
  31. ^ Fyodorov et al. 2006, p. 9.
  32. ^ Cracraft & Rowland 2003, p. 174.
  33. ^ a b c Cracraft 1988, p. 9.
  34. ^ The number, compiled by the Ministry of Culture, includes losses of Ukraine and Belarus – Schmidt 1990, p. 352
  35. ^ a b c "Decree of the Council of Ministers of RSFSR, No. 349, May 22, 1947 (in Russian)". Archived from the original on October 4, 2011. Retrieved May 12, 2009.
  36. ^ Anderson, Richard (2008). "The USSR's 1948 Instructions for the Identification, Registration, Maintenance and Restoration of Architectural Monuments under State Protection". Future Anterior. 5: 64–72. doi:10.1353/fta.0.0012. S2CID 111106379. Retrieved 2009-05-16.
  37. ^ a b Schmidt 1990, p. 352.
  38. ^ Brudny 2000, pp. 44.
  39. ^ Cohen 2008a, p. 63.
  40. ^ "Decree of the Council of Ministers of RSFSR, No. 1327, August 30, 1967 (in Russian)". Archived from the original on October 4, 2011. Retrieved May 12, 2009.
  41. ^ a b c Brudny 2000, p. 45.
  42. ^ Schmidt 1990, p. 353.
  43. ^ Brudny 2000, p. 67.
  44. ^ Hosking 2006, p. 357.
  45. ^ a b c d Brudny 2000, p. 68.
  46. ^ a b Fyodorov et al. 2006, p. 10.
  47. ^ In the 1970s VOOPIK was allowed to print only biannual research compilations; in 1979 it was granted permission to publish a semiannual almanac. – Brudny 2000, p. 141
  48. ^ Brudny 2000, pp. 71–72.
  49. ^ a b Brudny 2000, p. 138.
  50. ^ Brudny 2000, p. 140.
  51. ^ Brudny 2000, p. 139.
  52. ^ The book is known in English as A time to gather stones (translated by Valerie Nollan, published by Northwestern University Press, 1993, ISBN 0-8101-1127-6, ISBN 978-0-8101-1127-1). Soloukhin wrote in a 1993 preface (page x) that all 75,000 copies of the first 1980 edition were de facto confiscated.
  53. ^ Brudny 2000, p. 141.
  54. ^ a b Brudny 2000, p. 142.
  55. ^ Fyodorov et al. 2006, pp. 10–11.
  56. ^ Schmidt 1990, p. 351, attributes the quote to Boris Yeltsin. Who was it, anyway?
  57. ^ Schmidt 1990, p. 351.
  58. ^ Schmidt 1990, pp. 361–363.
  59. ^ Cracraft & Rowland 2003, pp. 208–209.
  60. ^ a b c Koryakovskaya, Natalya (2009). "Ob okhrane avangarda" Об охране авангарда (in Russian). archi.ru, April 30, 2009. Retrieved 2009-05-15.
  61. ^ "Moscow City Heritage Register" (in Russian). Retrieved 2009-05-19.[permanent dead link]
  62. ^ Fyodorov et al. 2006, p. 70.
  63. ^ "National Heritage Register, object No. 7720030000" (in Russian). Archived from the original on 2011-10-04. Retrieved 2009-05-19.
  64. ^ Cracraft & Rowland 2003, p. 4.
  65. ^ "Ninth bulletin of the Moscow Architecture Preservation Society". MAPS. 2005.
  66. ^ Fyodorov et al. 2006.
  67. ^ See, for example, the story of delisting the Institute of Red Professors buildings (still extant as at May, 2009) – "Ninth bulletin of the Moscow Architecture Preservation Society". MAPS. 2005.; "Building profile, delisting status (in Russian)" (in Russian). Archi. 2005.
  68. ^ Dushkina 2008, p. 3.
  69. ^ a b c d Clem, Cecil (2004-10-14). "Moscow's past under demolition". London: Times Online, October 14, 2004. Retrieved 2009-05-25.
  70. ^ Yury Luzhkov (2004). "Cho takoe stolichny arhiterturny stil?" Что такое столичный архитектурный стиль?. Izvestia, May 19, 2004. Retrieved 2005-05-16.
  71. ^ Cracraft & Rowland 2003, p. 207.
  72. ^ Law 73-FZ, article 3
  73. ^ a b Law 73-FZ, article 18.7
  74. ^ Law 73-FZ, articles 4,24,25
  75. ^ Note that the decree on "most valuable" objects was issued in 1992, when privatization of real estate was in its infancy.
  76. ^ a b c Goncharov, Mikhail (May 21, 2009). "Gorodskie pamyatniki zhdet privatizacia" Городские памятники ждет приватизация (in Russian). Fontanka. Archived from the original on June 6, 2011. Retrieved May 25, 2005.
  77. ^ a b "Russia: Heritage issues and policies". Council of Europe, Compendium of Cultural Policies and Trends in Europe, 10th edition. 2009. Archived from the original on 2009-02-14. Retrieved 2009-05-16.
  78. ^ a b Law 73-FZ, article 18.1–9
  79. ^ Law 73-FZ, articles 9.1–9.3
  80. ^ a b Law 73-FZ, article 13.4 – 2008 and 2007 versions
  81. ^ "Nezakonny remont pamyatnika ..." Незаконный ремонт памятника в Москве привел к его разрушению) (in Russian). Newmsk. April 4, 2009. Retrieved 2009-05-25.
  82. ^ Sibirtseva, Polina (2009). "Antihudozhestvennoye belmo" "Антихудожественное бельмо" – законно (in Russian). Izvestia, May 25, 2009. Retrieved 2009-05-25.
  83. ^ a b Goncharov, Mikhail (May 21, 2009). "K mansarde na Moike pridetsa privykat" К мансарде на Мойке придется привыкать (in Russian). Fontanka. Retrieved 2009-05-25.
  84. ^ Nazaretz, Yevgenia (2009). "Ischeznovenie gorodskih panoram" Исчезновение городских панорам Санк-Петербурга (in Russian). Radio Liberty, May 25, 2009. Retrieved 2009-05-25.
  85. ^ "Swissotel Krasnye Holmy (building card)". emporis.com. Archived from the original on February 8, 2007. Retrieved 2009-05-25.
  86. ^ Ilyicheva, Anna (2008). "Avangard na samoteke" Авангард "на самотеке" (in Russian). lenta.ru.
  87. ^ a b c Pushkarskaya, Anna (2008). "K Smolnomy pristroili ... (К Смольному пристроили исторические здания)". Kommersant, May 22, 2009. Retrieved 2009-05-22.
  88. ^ Lebedeva, Kira (2009). "Okhrannye gramoty dany ne kazhdomu" Охранные грамоты даны не каждому (in Russian). Izvestia, May 25, 2009. Retrieved 2009-05-25.
  89. ^ "Dom Bolkonskogo..." Дом Болконского из романа "Война и мир" не попал в список охраняемых памятников (in Russian). newsmsk.com, July 5, 2009. 2009. Retrieved 2009-09-12.
  90. ^ a b Cohen 2008b, p. xvi.
  91. ^ Natalya Dushkina, quoted in this paragraph, is herself a granddaughter of Alexey Dushkin.
  92. ^ a b c Dyckhoff, Tom (2009-01-24). "Oligarch leads fight to save Russia's neglected 'Utopia'". London: Times Online, January 24, 2009. Retrieved 2009-05-25.
  93. ^ a b Volodina, Marina (2009). "A vy, Mendelsom, posidite v ocheredi" А вы, Мендельсон, посидите в очереди (in Russian). Nevskoe Vremya, May 22, 2009. Archived from the original on June 6, 2011. Retrieved May 25, 2009.
  94. ^ Zalivako 2008, p. 39.
  95. ^ Dushkina 2008, p. 4–5.
  96. ^ "Sovremennaya Moskva i problemy sohraneniya" Современная Москва и проблемы сохранения aрхитектурного наследия. Proceedings of the December 2, 2005 conference held by the Moscow Architectural Union (in Russian). architector.ru. 2005. Archived from the original on August 2, 2008. Retrieved May 16, 2009.
  97. ^ Brinney, Marcus (2005-07-04). "Best by damp and Stalinism". London: Times Online, July 4, 2005. Retrieved 2009-05-25.
  98. ^ Davydova, Natalya (2009). "Konstruktivizm: sohranyat nevygodno" Конструктивизм: сохранять невыгодно, сносить стыдно (in Russian). Izvestia, February 12, 2009. Archived from the original on February 26, 2009. Retrieved May 15, 2009.

Bibliography

External links

This page was last edited on 17 September 2023, at 13:28
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.