Chapter outlines

The­chapters­proceed­in­a­non-linear­chronology.­They­trace­the­entan-gled­development­of­the­two­professional­spheres­concerned­with­objects:­

industrial­ design­ and­ decorative­ art.­Chapter­ 1­expands­ on­ the­ histori-cal­ background­ of­ socialist­ objects­ sketched­ briefly­ in­ this­ introduction.­

It­ introduces­ the­ concept­ of­ the­aesthetic turn­ to­ describe­ the­ gradual­

­broadening­of­the­meaning­of­aesthetics­after­Stalin’s­death­in­1953,­which­

culminated­in­the­early­1960s.­The­aesthetic­turn­resulted­in­the­formation­

in­the­USSR­of­what­the­philosopher­Jacques­Rancière­calls­an­‘aesthetic­

regime­ of­ arts’­ –­ a­ mode­of­ identifying­ different­ arts­ as­ equal­ and­ valu-able­in­their­specificity.­I­will­analyse­the­new­aesthetic­regime­of­arts­by­

highlighting­its­key­categories:­realism,­contemporaneity­and­taste.­These­

categories­ acquired­ new­ meanings­ during­ the­ 1950s­ and­ early­ 1960s.­

Realism­ was­ then­ seen­ as­ a­ specific­ quality­ of­ things,­ not­ as­ a­ way­ of­

depicting­them.­Contemporaneity­appeared­as­a­measure­of­the­social­rel-evance­of­an­object.­Finally,­taste­turned­into­a­tool­for­probing­the­limits­

between­authenticity­and­appearance.­The­chapter­draws­on­professional­

discussions­and­designs­from­the­1950s–1960s­to­illustrate­the­new­roles­

of­these­three­categories.

The­ promise­ of­ the­ Soviet­ Communist­ Party­ and­ the­ government­ to­

‘fully­satisfy­the­constantly­growing­material­and­cultural­demands­of­the­

Soviet­people’­was­central­to­the­socio-political­reformism­of­Stalin’s­suc-cessor,­Nikita­Khrushchev.­It­meant­the­mobilisation­of­various­specialists­

in­ the­ campaign­ to­ increase­ the­ quality­ and­ quantity­ of­ available­ con-sumer­goods­and­create­a­strong­alternative­to­Western­consumer­culture.­

While­ historians­ have­ thoroughly­ explored­ the­ role­ of­ consumer­ goods’­

design­during­the­Cold­War,­I­will­focus,­in­Chapter­2,­on­the­designers’­

approach­to­the­existing­pool­of­Soviet­goods­as­unruly­things­that­needed­

to­be­ordered­into­rational­and­well-functioning­objects.­The­chapter­will­

demonstrate­how­the­professional­debate­regarding­the­borders­between­

art,­ technics­ and­ everyday­ life­ paved­ the­ way­ for­ theorising­ industrial­

design­under­state­socialism­while­some­of­its­complexities­became­rap-idly­outdated­with­the­institutionalisation­of­the­design­profession­by­the­

government.­The­chapter­further­analyses­the­methodology­of­VNIITE­at­

the­initial­stage­of­its­operation­and­thereby­addresses­the­contradictions­

of­the­Khrushchev-era­vision­of­the­perfect­order­of­things.

From­the­early­1950s­Soviet­decorative­artists­used­their­connection­

to­ everyday­ life­ as­ the­ main­ argument­ for­ their­ highly­ important­ status­

in­ the­ Soviet­ artistic­ community.­ The­ establishment­ of­ VNIITE­ in­ 1962­

seemed­like­the­beginning­of­a­system­of­clear­principles­and­guidelines­

for­all­types­of­objects­and­for­the­many­different­professionals­who­helped­

produce­ them.­ Decorative­ artists­ and­ designers­ all­ assumed­ the­ role­ of­

experts­in­improving­material­culture­and­particularly­the­modern­home.­

This­ was­ the­ apogee­ of­ the­ Khrushchev-era­ aesthetic­ turn.­ However,­ as­

recent­ studies­ have­ shown,­ beginning­ in­ around­ 1965­ with­ the­ removal­

of­ Khrushchev­ from­ power,­ the­ state­ and­ the­ experts­ that­ it­ employed­

changed­their­rhetoric­from­the­praise­of­standard­interiors­and­rational­

objects­towards­the­permitting­of­a­diversity­of­tastes­and­spirituality­as­

an­ essential­ component­ of­ daily­ life.­Chapter­ 3­ analyses­ the­ mid-1960s’­

conceptual­change­in­decorative­art­and­argues­that­it­stemmed­not­only­

from­the­official­backlash­against­Khrushchev’s­reformist­policies,­but­also­

from­the­Soviet­designers’­responsiveness­to­the­global­crisis­of­modern-ist­aesthetics­in­the­mid-1960s­and­the­rise­of­the­postmodernist­critique­

of­design.­Comparing­works­of­decorative­art­from­the­early­and­the­late­

1960s,­the­chapter­reveals­the­techniques­that­the­artists­used­in­order­to­

criticise­ the­ state-sponsored­ campaign­ for­ improving­ consumer­ culture.­

Far­from­an­instrument­of­state­propaganda­regarding­material­well-being­

under­socialism,­Soviet­decorative­art­in­the­late­1960s­became­a­forum­for­

commentary­on­the­fundamental­challenges­of­Soviet­modernity.­It­raised­

such­questions­as­the­place­of­individuality­in­the­world­of­uniform­mass­

production­and­consumption,­the­fate­of­traditional­crafts­in­the­industrial­

age,­the­role­of­diverse­folk­motifs­in­Soviet­cultural­internationalism­and­

the­meaning­of­sincerity­and­emotional­connection­in­a­socialist­society.

Meanwhile,­the­vision­of­a­socialist­object,­promoted­by­VNIITE,­was­

also­ far­ from­ uniform.­Chapter­ 4­identifies­ the­ elements­ of­ critique­ in­

state-sponsored­industrial­design­of­the­1970s.­It­shows­that­just­as­VNIITE­

designers­ had­ built­ a­ theoretical­ basis­ for­ action­ by­ the­ late­ 1960s­ and­

started­developing­new­prototypes­for­modern­domestic­objects,­such­as­

vacuum­cleaners­and­refrigerators,­they­also­started­to­recognise­the­inad-equacy­of­the­object­as­a­basic­unit­of­socialist­material­culture.­Following­

the­theorists­of­the­Ulm­School­of­Design­(1953–68)­who­were­critical­of­

American­styling­and­promoted­an­interdisciplinary­approach­to­design,­

VNIITE­designers­tended­to­see­environments,­and­not­objects,­as­ideal­

end­products­of­their­work.­Without­abandoning­the­avant-gardist­idea­of­

a­comradely­object,­Soviet­designers­and­theorists­dwelled­upon­another­

notion­of­the­avant-garde­from­the­late­1960s:­the­artist­as­an­organiser­of­

all­aspects­of­society’s­life,­including­the­material­environments­of­work­

and­ leisure.­ After­ discussing­ several­ projects­ for­ home­ appliances­ from­

the­early­1970s,­the­chapter­explains­the­notion­of­a­design­programme­

that­answered­to­the­interests­of­both­the­state­and­designers­regarding­

the­optimisation­of­life­in­late­Soviet­society.­Through­a­case­study­of­an­

early­1980s­design­programme,­I­will­demonstrate­that­this­type­of­design-ing­was­at­once­totalistic­and­flexible:­it­tended­to­regulate­broad­areas­of­

human­activity­but­also­left­space­for­consumer­activity­and­variation.

Finally,­the­fifth­chapter­considers­the­identity­crisis­of­the­1970s–early­

1980s,­ experienced­ by­ decorative­ artists­ in­ the­ system­ of­ traditional­ art­

industries,­state-sponsored­workshops­and­exhibitions.­It­shows­the­joint­

attempt­of­artists­and­critics­to­renegotiate­the­position­of­decorative­art­

vis-à-vis­ industrial­ design,­ industrial­ production­ and­ easel­ art.­ The­ pro-posed­ solution­ –­ the­ creation­ of­ a­ vigorous­ interdisciplinary­ production­

culture­based­on­mutual­respect­between­artists,­engineers,­technicians­

and­administrators­–­proved­insufficient­to­satisfy­the­decorative­artists’­

creative­ and­ critical­ urges.­ Even­ factory-employed­ artists­ tended­ to­ dis-sociate­ themselves­ from­ the­ state-run­ campaign­ to­ improve­ consumer­

­products­ and­ life­ standards,­ instead­ focusing­ on­ consumers’­ ‘spiritual­

needs’.­While­this­tendency­was­connected­to­the­rise­of­neo-traditionalist­

ideas­and­anti-Western­attitudes­among­Soviet­intellectuals,­it­was­ideo-logically­heterogeneous­and­was­comprised­of­very­different­positions­and­

motives.­Ceramics­came­to­be­the­leading­arena­for­the­seeking­of­a­non-­

commodity-based­material­culture.­I­follow­this­role­of­ceramics­through­

the­decade-long­activities­of­a­group­of­Leningrad­ceramic­artists­called­

One­Composition­(OK).­Founded­thanks­to­favourable­institutional­circum- stances,­the­group­reconsidered­what­constituted­a­useful­object­and­ques-tioned­the­role­of­decorative­artists­in­a­socialist­society.­Uncomfortable­

with­their­position­as­producers­only­of­utilitarian­objects,­they­advanced­

the­concept­of­‘image-ceramics’.­Limited­by­modest­technical­capabilities,­

the­ Leningraders­ tried­ to­ achieve­ the­ kind­ of­ expressive­ power­ usually­

associated­with­easel­art.­Though­they­focused­on­the­symbolic­meanings­

of­objects,­materiality­instantly­fascinated­and­informed­them.­The­internal­

dynamics­of­the­OK­group­reflected­the­tensions­between­Soviet­intellectu-als­and­the­state­in­the­early­days­of­political­and­economic­change­under­

the­leadership­of­Mikhail­Gorbachev,­known­as­perestroika,­which­would­

ultimately­lead­to­the­disintegration­of­the­Soviet­art­and­design­system.

Notes

­1­ N.­Iaglova,­‘Boris­Smirnov­–­khudozhnik­promyshlennosti’,­Dekorativnoe Iskusstvo SSSR 6­(1961),­11–15.

­2­ Dan­Hicks,­‘The­Material-Cultural­Turn’,­in­Mary­C.­Beaudry­and­Dan­Hicks­(eds),­

The Oxford Handbook of Material Culture Studies­(Oxford:­Oxford­University­Press,­

2010),­pp.­25–98.

­3­ Ewa­ Domanska,­ ‘Ecological­ Humanities’,­ presentation­ for­ the­ keynote­ talk­ at­ the­

conference­ ‘All­ Things­ Living­ and­ Not:­ An­ Interdisciplinary­ Conference­ on­ Post-Anthropocentric­Perspectives­in­Slavic­Studies’,­The­Harriman­Institute­at­Columbia­

University,­New­York,­23–25­February­2017.

­4­ The­most­notable­works­are­Daniel­Miller,­Material Culture and Mass Consumption­

(Oxford:­Blackwell,­1993);­Steven­D.­Lubar­and­W.­D.­Kingery­(eds),­History from Things: Essays on Material Culture­(Washington,­DC:­Smithsonian­Institution­Press,­

1993);­David­Kingery,­Learning from Things: Method and Theory of Material Culture Studies­ (Washington,­ DC:­ Smithsonian­ Institution­ Press,­ 1998);­ Bill­ Brown­ (ed.),­

Things­(Chicago:­University­of­Chicago­Press,­2004);­Lorraine­J.­Daston­(ed.),­Things That Talk: Object Lessons from Art and Science­ (New­ York:­ Zone­ Books,­ 2007);­

Daniel­Miller,­Stuff­(Cambridge:­Polity,­2009);­Bjørnar­Olsen,­In Defense of Things:

Archaeology and the Ontology of Objects­(Plymouth:­Rowman­Altamira,­2010);­Jane­

Bennett,­Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things­(Durham,­NC:­Duke­University­

Press,­2010).

­5­ Miller,­Material Culture and Mass Consumption,­p.­142.

­6­ Hazel­ Conway,­Design History: A Student’s Handbook­ (London:­ Routledge,­ 1987),­

p.­9.

­7­ Judy­ Attfield,­Wild Things: The Material Culture of Everyday Life­ (Oxford:­ Berg,­

2000),­p.­5.

­8­ For­example,­Kevin­Davies,­‘Markets,­Marketing­and­Design’,­Scandinavian Journal of Design History­9­(1999),­56–73;­Judy­Attfield,­Bringing Modernity Home: Writings

on Popular Design and Material Culture­(Manchester:­Manchester­University­Press,­

2007);­ Paul­ Betts,­The Authority of Everyday Objects: A Cultural History of West German Industrial Design­(Berkeley,­CA:­University­of­California­Press,­2007);­Kjetil­

Fallan,­Scandinavian Design: Alternative Histories­(Oxford:­Berg,­2013);­Kjetil­Fallan­

and­Grace­Lees-Maffei­(eds),­Designing Worlds: National Design Histories in an Age of Globalization­ (New­ York:­ Berghahn­ Books,­ 2016);­ the­ detailed­ historiography­

up­to­2010­is­presented­in­Kjetil­Fallan,­Design History: Understanding Theory and Method­(New­York:­Bloomsbury,­2010),­pp.­1–54.

­9­ Jeffrey­L.­Meikle,­American Plastic: A Cultural History­(New­Brunswick,­NJ:­Rutgers­

University­Press,­1997);­Peter-Paul­Verbeek­and­Petran­Kockelkoren,­‘The­Things­

That­ Matter’,­Design Issues­ 14.3­ (1998),­ 28–42,­ doi:10.2307/1511892;­ Alison­ J.­

Clarke,­Tupperware: The Promise of Plastic in 1950s America­ (Washington,­ DC:­

Smithsonian­Institution­Press,­2001);­Kjetil­Fallan,­‘Goldfish­Memories:­Recounting­

Oslo’s­Streamlined­Aluminium­Trams’,­in­Fallan,­Scandinavian Design,­pp.­117–35;­

Marta­ Filipová,­ ‘Czech­ Glass­ or­ Bohemian­ Crystal?­ The­ Nationality­ of­ Design­ in­

the­Czech­Context’,­in­Fallan­and­Lees-Maffei­(eds),­Designing Worlds,­pp.­141–55;­

Jesse­Adams­Stein,­Hot Metal: Material Culture and Tangible Labour­(Oxford:­Oxford­

University­Press,­2017).

10­ For­ example,­ Marta­ Ajmar-Wollheim­ and­ Luca­ Molà,­ ‘The­ Global­ Renaissance:­

Cross-Cultural­Material­Culture­and­the­Creation­of­a­Community­of­Taste’,­in­Glenn­

Adamson,­Giorgio­Riello­and­Sarah­Teasley­(eds),­Global Design History­(London:­

Routledge,­2011),­pp.­11–20;­Anne­Gerritsen,­‘Domesticating­Goods­from­Overseas:­

Global­Material­Culture­in­the­Early­Modern­Netherlands’,­Journal of Design History­

29.3­(2016),­228–44,­doi:10.1093/jdh/epw021.

11­ Finn­ Arne­ Jørgensen,­ ‘Green­ Citizenship­ at­ the­ Recycling­ Junction:­ Consumers­

and­ Infrastructures­ for­ the­ Recycling­ of­ Packaging­ in­ Twentieth-Century­

Norway’,­Contemporary European History­ 22.3­ (2013),­ 499–516,­ doi:10.1017/

S0960777313000258;­ Livia­ Rezende,­ ‘Manufacturing­ the­ Raw­ in­ Design­

Pageantries:­The­Commodification­and­Gendering­of­Brazilian­Tropical­Nature­at­

the­ 1867­ Exposition­ Universelle’,­Journal of Design History­ 30.2­ (2017),­ 122–38,­

doi:10.1093/jdh/epx007;­Kjetil­Fallan­(ed.),­The Culture of Nature in the History of Design­(London:­Routledge,­2019).

12­ Kjetil­ Fallan,­ ‘Our­ Common­ Future.­ Joining­ Forces­ for­ Histories­ of­ Sustainable­

Design’,­Technoscienza­5.2­(2015),­15–32.

13­ Boris­ Kushner,­ ‘Organizatory­ proizvodstva’,­LEF­ 3­ (1923),­ 97–103.­ The­ avant-­

gardist­vision­of­the­artist’s­organisational­role­is­examined­in­Maria­Gough,­The Artist as Producer: Russian Constructivism in Revolution­(Berkeley,­CA:­University­of­

California­Press,­2005).

14­ Aleksei­Gan,­Konstruktivizm­(Tver:­2-ia­Gostipografiia,­1922),­p.­21.

15­ Aleksandr­ Rodchenko,­Opyty dlia budushchego. Dnevniki. Stat’i. Pis’ma (Moscow:­

Grant,­1996),­quoted­in­Ekaterina­Degot’,­‘Ot­tovara­k­tovarishchu:­k­estetike­neryn-ochnogo­predmeta’,­Logos 26.5–6­(2000),­37,­www.ruthenia.ru/logos/number/50/14.

pdf­(accessed­11­June­2014).

16­ Boris­Arvatov,­Iskusstvo i proizvodstvo. Sbornik statei­(Moscow:­Proletkul’t,­1926),­

p.­128.

17­ Boris­Arvatov,­‘Byt­i­kul’tura­veshchi’,­in­Al’manakh proletkul’ta (Moscow:­Proletkul’t,­

1925),­p.­79.

18­ Christina­ Kiaer,­ Imagine No Possessions: The Socialist Objects of Russian Constructivism­(Cambridge,­MA:­MIT­Press,­2005),­pp.­17–28.

19­ For­analysis­of­the­role­of­design­in­the­Cold­War,­see­Greg­Castillo,­Cold War on the Home Front: The Soft Power of Midcentury Design­(Minneapolis,­MN:­University­of­

Minnesota­Press,­2010).

20­ Sergei­Oushakine,­‘Dinamiziruiushchaia­veshch’,­Novoe Literaturnoe Obozreniie­120­

(2013),­29–34.

21­ Sergei­ Tretiakov,­ ‘Biografiia­ veshchi’,­ in­ Nikolai­ Chuzhak­ (ed.),­Literatura fakta:

pervyi sbornik materialov rabotnikov LEFa [reprint­ of­ 1929­ edition]­ (Moscow:­

Zakharov,­2000),­pp.­68–72.

22­ Igor­Kopytoff,­‘The­Cultural­Biography­of­Things:­Commoditization­as­Process’,­in­

Arjun­Appadurai­(ed.),­The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective­

(Cambridge:­Cambridge­University­Press,­1988),­pp.­64–92.­­

23­ Julie­ Hessler,­A Social History of Soviet Trade: Trade Policy, Retail Practices, and Consumption, 1917–1953­ (Princeton,­ NJ:­ Princeton­ University­ Press,­ 2004);­

Amy­ E.­ Randall,­The Soviet Dream World of Retail Trade and Consumption in the 1930s­(Basingstoke:­Palgrave­Macmillan,­2008);­Steven­E.­Harris,­Communism on Tomorrow Street: Mass Housing and Everyday Life after Stalin­ (Washington,­ DC/

Baltimore,­ MD:­ Woodrow­ Wilson­ Center­ Press/Johns­ Hopkins­ University­ Press,­

2013);­ Christine­ Varga-Harris,­Stories of House and Home: Soviet Apartment Life during the Khrushchev Years­(Ithaca,­NY:­Cornell­University­Press,­2015);­Natalya­

Chernyshova, Soviet Consumer Culture in the Brezhnev Era­(New­York:­Routledge,­

2013).

24­ The­materiality­of­everyday­life­in­the­USSR­from­the­1920s­to­the­1970s­is­addressed­

in­Victor­Buchli,­An Archaeology of Socialism­(Oxford:­Berg,­2000).­The­most­thor-ough­examination­of­the­role­of­materiality­in­the­relationship­between­state­and­

citizens­is­Krisztina­Fehérváry,­Politics in Color and Concrete: Socialist Materialities and the Middle Class in Hungary­(Bloomington,­IN:­Indiana­University­Press,­2013).­

A­recent­volume­on­Russian­material­culture­has­made­a­progressive­step­in­this­

direction:­Graham­H.­Roberts­(ed.),­Material Culture in Russia and the USSR: Things, Values, Identities­(London:­Bloomsbury,­2017).

25­ Katharina­ Pfützner,­Designing for Socialist Need: Industrial Design Practice in the German Democratic Republic­(London:­Routledge,­2018).

26­ Susan­E.­Reid,­‘Destalinization­and­Taste,­1953–1963’,­Journal of Design History­10.2­

(1997),­ 177–201;­ Victor­ Buchli,­ ‘Khrushchev,­ Modernism,­ and­ the­ Fight­ against­

“Petit-bourgeois”­Consciousness­in­the­Soviet­Home’,­Journal of Design History­10.2­

(1997),­161–76;­Iurii­Gerchuk,­‘The­Aesthetics­of­Everyday­Life­in­the­Khrushchev­

Thaw­in­the­USSR­(1954–64)’,­in­Susan­Emily­Reid­and­David­Crowley­(eds),­Style and Socialism: Modernity and Material Culture in Post-War Eastern Europe­(Oxford:­

Berg,­2000),­pp.­81–100.

27­ Susan­ E.­ Reid,­ ‘Khrushchev­ Modern:­ Agency­ and­ Modernization­ in­ the­ Soviet­

Home’,­Cahiers du Monde Russe­47.1/2­(2006),­268.

28­ Andres­Kurg,­‘Feedback­Environment:­Rethinking­Art­and­Design­Practices­in­Tallinn­

During­the­Early­1970s’,­Kunstiteaduslikke Uurimusi/Studies on Art and Architecture/

Studien für Kunstwissenschaft 20.1–2­(2011),­26–58;­Diana­K.­West,­‘CyberSovietica:­

Planning,­Design,­and­the­Cybernetics­of­Soviet­Space,­1954–1986’,­PhD­disserta-tion,­Princeton­University,­2013;­Tom­Cubbin,­‘The­Domestic­Information­Machine:­

Futurological­Experiments­in­the­Soviet­Domestic­Interior,­1968–76’,­Home Cultures­

11.1­(2014),­5–32,­doi:10.2752/175174214X13807024691142;­Tom­Cubbin,­Soviet Critical Design: Senezh Studio and the Communist Surround­(London:­Bloomsbury,­

2018).

29­ Alexandra­Sankova,­guided­tour­of­the­exhibition­‘Design­System­in­the­USSR’,­All-Russian­Decorative­Art­Museum,­Moscow,­4­December­2017.

30­ For­ example,­ S.­ O.­ Khan-Magomedov,­Pioneers of Soviet Architecture­ (New­ York:­

Rizzoli,­1987);­Larisa­Zhadova,­Malevich: Suprematism and Revolution in Russian Art 1910–1930­(New­York:­Thames­and­Hudson,­1982);­Susan­Buck-Morss,­review­of­

Vladimir­Paperny’s­Architecture in the Age of Stalin­(2011),­www.paperny.com/k2_­

morss.html­(accessed­1­February­2015).

31­ Paul­ Wood,­ ‘The­ Politics­ of­ the­ Russian­ Avant-Garde’,­ in­The Great Utopia: The Russian and Soviet Avant-Garde, 1915–1932­ (New­ York:­ Guggenheim­ Museum,­

1992).

32­ For­example,­Stephen­V.­Bittner,­The Many Lives of Khrushchev’s Thaw: Experience and Memory in Moscow’s Arbat­ (Ithaca,­ NY:­ Cornell­ University­ Press,­ 2008);­

Benjamin­Tromly,­Making the Soviet Intelligentsia: Universities and Intellectual Life under Stalin and Khrushchev (Cambridge:­Cambridge­University­Press,­2013).

33­ Cubbin,­Soviet Critical Design.

34­ David­Raizman,­History of Modern Design (Upper­Saddle­River,­NJ:­Pearson­Prentice­

Hall,­2010),­pp.­11–13.

35­ Aleksandr­Lavrentiev,­Istoriia dizaina. Uchebnoe posobie­(Moscow:­Gardariki,­2006),­

p.­14.

36­ Attfield,­Wild Things, p.­2.

37­ Wendy­R.­Salmond,­Arts and Crafts in Late Imperial Russia: Reviving the Kustar Art Industries, 1870–1917­ (Cambridge:­ Cambridge­ University­ Press,­ 1996);­ Selim­ O.­

Khan-Magomedov,­Pionery sovetskogo dizaina­(Moscow:­Galart,­1995).

38­ David­ Aranovich,­ ‘Khudozhestvennoe­ oformleniie­ dvortsa­ sovetov’,­Iskusstvo 4­

(1938),­181–2.

39­ Glenn­Adamson­et­al.,­‘Modern­Craft­Studies:­The­Decade­in­Review’,­The Journal of Modern Craft­10.1­(2017),­9.

40­ Djurdja­Bartlett,­FashionEast: The Spectre That Haunted Socialism­(Cambridge,­MA:­

MIT­Press,­2010),­p.­22;­Jukka­Gronow,­Caviar with Champagne: Common Luxury and the Ideals of the Good Life in Stalin’s Russia­(Oxford:­Berg,­2003).

41­ ‘Postanovlenie­Politburo­TsKVKP­(b)­“O­perestroike­literaturno-khudozhestvennykh­

organizatsii”,­23­aprelia­23,­1932­g.’,­Partiinoe stroitelstvo 9­(1932),­62,­www.hist.

msu.ru/ER/Etext/USSR/1932.htm­(accessed­15­January­2013).

42­ The­confusion­might­stem­from­the­translation­of­konstruktor as­‘designer’­in­books­

on­Soviet­engineering.

43­ Dmitry­ Azrikan,­ interview­ for­ the­ journal­Projector,­ 23­ September­ 2008,­www.

designet.ru/context/interview/?id=­37621­(accessed­17­November­2012);­Aleksandr­

Lavrentiev­and­Yuri­Nasarov,­Russian Design: Tradition and Experiment,­1920–1990­

(London:­Academic­Publishers,­1995),­p.­47.

44­ Sergei­ Khelmianov­ and­ Svetlana­ Mirzoian,­Mukha: Sankt-Peterburgskaia Shkola Dizaina­(St­Petersburg:­Iunikont­Design,­2011).

45­ Dmitry­ Azrikan,­ ‘VNIITE,­ Dinosaur­ of­ Totalitarianism­ or­ Plato’s­ Academy­ of­

Design?’,­Design Issues­15.3­(1999),­45.

46­ As­ is­ evident­ from­ the­ only­ official­ art­ journal­ of­ this­ period,­Iskusstvo;­ see­ also Vladimir­ Paperny,­Kul’tura dva (Moscow:­ Novoe­ Literaturnoe­ Obozreniie,­ 1996),­

pp.­275–7.

47­ The­Central­School­of­Technical­Drawing,­named­after­its­founder,­Baron­Alexander­

Ludvigovich­ von­ Stieglitz,­ was­ opened­ on­ 29­ January­ 1881,­ with­ the­ aim­ of­ pre-paring­artists­for­industry.­This­was­a­part­of­the­reform­of­art­education­in­Russia­

which­ occurred­ in­ the­ second­ half­ of­ the­ nineteenth­ century­ and­ was­ based­ on­

Western­ European­ models.­ Reforms­ had­ been­ themselves­ inspired­ by­ interna-tional­industrial­exhibitions­in­Europe.­In­1862­the­Stroganov­School­of­Technical­ a­counterpart­to­the­innovative­design­school­in­Moscow­–­Vkhutemas­(Higher­Art-Industrial­ Workshops),­ which­ in­ 1926­ was­ also­ renamed­ Vkhutein.­ In­ 1930­ both­

schools­were­closed.­Khelmianov­and­Mirzoian,­Mukha,­pp.­13–69.

48­ Khelmianov­and­Mirzoian,­Mukha,­pp.­123–5.

49­ The­Institute­of­Painting,­Sculpture­and­Architecture­in­Leningrad­was­the­heir­of­

the­Imperial­Academy­of­Arts.­After­several­reorganisations­in­the­1920s,­it­acquired­

the­name­of­the­nineteenth-century­realist­painter­Ilya­Repin­in­1932.

50­ Khelmianov­and­Mirzoian,­Mukha,­pp.­125–39.

51­ Russian­ State­ Archive­ of­ Literature­ and­ Art,­ Moscow­ (hereafter­ RGALI),­ f.­ 2460­

op.­1,­d.­337,­l.­4.

52­ Iurii­ Soloviev,­Moia zhizn’ v dizaine­ (Moscow:­ Soiuz­ dizainerov­ Rossii,­ 2004),­

pp.­ 67–111;­ Vladimir­ Paperny,­ ‘Vospominaniia­ o­ futurologii’, in­Mos-Angeles-2 (Moscow:­ Novoe­ Literaturnoe­ Obozreniie,­ 2009),­ p.­ 70;­ Iurii­ Vasiliev,­ ‘Korol’­

dizaina’,­Itogi 884­(20­May­2013),­www.itogi.ru/arts-spetzproekt/2013/20/190033.

html­(accessed­1­June­2012).

53­ Jonathan­ Woodham,­A Dictionary of Modern Design (Oxford:­ Oxford­ University­

Press,­2004),­p.­395.

54­ Vladimir­ Runge,­ Istoriia dizaina, nauki i tekhniki. Kniga vtoraia­ (Moscow:­

Arkhitektura-S,­2007),­pp.­225–6.

55­ RGALI,­f.­2943,­op.­1,­l.­34.

56­ Central­State­Archive­of­Literature­and­Art,­St­Petersburg­(hereafter­TsGALI­SPb),­

f.­266,­op.­1,­d.­291,­l.­70;­RGALI,­f.­2493,­op.­1,­d.­2470,­l.­34.

57­ Catherine­Cooke,­‘Modernity­and­Realism:­Architectural­Relations­in­the­Cold­War’, in­Susan­E.­Reid­and­Rosalind­P.­Blakeley­(eds),­Russian Art and the West: A Century of Dialogue in Painting, Architecture and the Decorative Arts (DeKalb,­IL:­Northern­

Illinois­University­Press,­2007),­p.­173.

58­ ‘Direktivy­ po­ piatiletnemy­ planu­ razvitiia­ SSSR­ na­ 1951–1955­ gody’,­Pravda,­ 20­

August­1952,­pp.­1–2.

59­ TsGALI­SPb,­f.­78,­op.­4,­d.­386,­l.­1–3.

60­ ‘On­ Liquidation­ of­ Excesses­ in­ Planning­ and­ Building’,­ 4­ November­ 1955,­www.

sovarch.ru/postanovlenie55/­(accessed­28­August­2011).

61­ Mark­B.­Smith,­‘Khrushchev’s­Promise­to­Eliminate­the­Urban­Housing­Shortage:­

Rights,­Rationality­and­the­Communist­Future’,­in­Melanie­Ilic­and­Jeremy­Smith­

(eds),­Soviet State and Society under Nikita Khrushchev (London:­Routledge,­2009),­

pp.­26–7.

65­ Castillo,­Cold War at the Home Front,­ pp.­ 148–70;­ Walter­ L.­ Hixson, Parting the Curtain: Propaganda, Culture and the Cold War (New­York:­St­Martin’s­Press,­1996),­

pp.­151–215;­Susan­E.­Reid,­‘Who­Will­Beat­Whom?­Soviet­Popular­Reception­of­the­

and­ Industrial­ Exhibition­ was­ held­ at­ Earl’s­ Court­ in­ London­ on­ 7–29­ July­ 1961.­

‘Selling­to­Russia’,­Design 145­(January­1961),­67;­‘USSR­at­Earl’s­Court’,­Design 154­(October­1961),­42–9.

68­ Azrikan,­‘VNIITE’,­48.

69­ RGALI,­f.­2082,­op.­2,­d.­2171.­l.­3.

70­ Runge,­Istoriia dizaina, nauki i tekhniki,­p.­229.

71­ Azrikan,­‘VNIITE’,­50.

72­ Katarina­Serulus,­‘“Well-Designed­Relations”:­Cold­War­Design­Exchanges­between­

Brussels­and­Moscow­in­the­Early­1970s’,­Design and Culture­9.2­(2017),­147–65,­

doi:10.1080/17547075.2017.1326231;­Soloviev,­Moia zhizn’ v dizaine,­pp.­112–228.

73­ ‘Past­ Boards­ of­ Directors’,­ World­ Design­ Organization,­ https://wdo.org/about/

people/board/past-boards/­(accessed­4­April­2019).

74­ Runge,­Istoriia dizaina, nauki i tekhniki,­pp.­233–4;­Soloviev,­Moia zhizn’ v dizaine,­

pp.­199–227.

75­ Andres­Kurg,­‘The­Prehistory­of­Contemporary­Environment:­Multimedia­Program­

in­the­ICSID­’75­Congress­in­Moscow’,­in­Anna­Romanova­et­al.­(eds),­The Islands of Yuri Sobolev­(Moscow:­The­Moscow­Museum­of­Modern­Art,­2014),­pp.­274–8.

76­ TSGALI­SPb,­ f.­ 781,­op.­1,­ d.­ 1,­ll.­8–10;­ Runge,­Istoriia dizaina, nauki i tekhniki,­

pp.­366–70.

77­ Z.­ Sherengovaia,­ ‘O­ kombinatakh­ dekorativnogo­ iskusstva­ i­ ikh­ zadachakh’,­ in­

N.­Stepanian­and­V.­R.­Aronov (eds),­Sovetskoe dekorativnoe iskusstvo’ 76­(Moscow:­

Sovetskii­khudozhnik,­1978),­pp.­98–106.

78­ Ksenia­ Guseva,­ ‘Anna­ Andreeva­ and­ her­ Experimental­ Designs’,­ Russian­ Art­ +­

Culture,­ posted­ 13­ September­ 2018,­www.russianartandculture.com/anna-andree­

va-and-her-experimental-designs/­(accessed­24­September­2018).

79­ Ibid.;­RGALI­f.­2082,­op.­3,­ed.­Khr.­866;­Julia­Vasilievna­Gusarova,­‘Leningradskaia­

keramika­ kak­ Fenomen­ Otechestvennoi­ Kul’tyry­ Vtoroi­ Poloviny­ XX­ veka’,­ PhD­

­dissertation,­Herzen­State­Pedagogical­University­of­Russia,­2011,­p.­76.

80­ Betts,­The Authority of Everyday Objects,­p.­150.

Im Dokument Design history and the study of materialities (Seite 34-43)