The Agency of Architectural Appearances in Moscow’s Ambiguous Urban Culture: The Practice of Ginzburg Architects

This study is an attempt to define the nature of work of a contemporary architect in a highly contextual city through the example of Ginzburg Architects in Moscow. In carrying out the study, it was necessary to analyse the trajectory of Moscow's development over the past 150 years, to define the specific features of the urban fabric that exists today, and to explain both the complex transformation that the city went through in the twentieth century and the architectural discourse of the post-Soviet period. The first part of this text deals with the factors that influenced the author's set of views: his family’s history and the emergence of a private architectural practice at the moment when the Soviet system suddenly collapsed. A brief description of the practice’s body of work identifies its operational principles and explains the reasons for choosing the present research topic. This part also contains an analysis of three early projects executed by the firm. The selection of projects located in distinctive locations necessitated additional analysis of Moscow’s urban structure. A comparison was made between the various approaches to working on buildings as elements that ‘complete’ the existing context of the city in a particular way. This is followed by a description of the process by which research was conducted; it should be said that work on the research project took longer than expected due to interruptions caused by major changes in the work of Ginzburg Architects and in the author’s life. The second part of the research analyses a project in progress that was worked on during the PRS process. The practice’s architectural tactics are described and illustrated with examples of this project. Parts of conversations with different actors in the urban process show thinking regarding the Moscow context from different perspectives. In the third part the author shows the interaction between context as spacetime continuum and architecture. The firm’s methods of working in the specific circumstances of Moscow’s ambiguous public realm (ambiguous in the sense of lacking an overall contemporary style within a planned urban increment) are described. The author’s positioning of himself in the community of practice helps throw light on the specific character of how modern-day discourse regarding interaction with the urban fabric is evolving towards the architect paying more and more attention to the urban morphology of the historical city. Here the author summarises the main assertion made in this project (i.e. its contribution to knowledge), outlining the results of this study as well as its impact in modifying the firm’s working methods and approach. This is a transition from an empirical situational relationship with the context of the city to a reflective dialogue with the multidimensional structure of the city’s urban fabric and its public spaces. This section concludes with an epilogue – the author’s attempt to engage in dialogue with Moisey Ginzburg, his grandfather, in order to close the loop of reflections about the family’s architectural tradition. Here the author answers for himself the question of what was the aim of his research.