Essay on the topic "architectural monument". Terms and concepts of landscape art How we should treat architectural landmarks

What to write about in an essay on the topic “Architectural Monuments”? In every city, even the smallest, there is at least one building that has important historical value. This could be any building: a house, some kind of theater or university building. It won't necessarily look too old, but that's often what happens.

Very rarely do ancient buildings survive to this day in the form in which they were built or intended. They often lose some design details, are rebuilt and restored, losing their former appearance.

Why is an essay on literature about architectural monuments important?

You can include a lot of historical information in an essay on the topic “Architectural Monuments” if you approach this task responsibly. The main thing is to choose in your city ​​object that will be described in the work, and find as much information about it as possible. This is a very serious activity that brings a lot of benefits.

It often happens that, having written an essay on the topic “Architectural Monument,” schoolchildren begin to become more interested in the history of their native land and city. They learn to collect information, systematize it and highlight major and minor events in a chain of historical facts.

How to work on an essay?

When studying a building, its features, the style in which it was built, it is important for students to understand what place the building occupied in history, what events are associated with it. You can ask your parents what they know and remember about this place, search for information on the Internet, or visit the library.

Of course, the easiest way is to use the World Wide Web, but even there the necessary information is not always available. In an essay on the topic “Architectural Monument”, it is important to express your personal attitude towards the building, the description of which the student chose for his work.

Essay plan

You can start working on an essay on the topic “Cultural Monument” by describing the appearance of the structure. First, the student can answer the following questions:

1. Where is the building that will be discussed in the essay located? What surrounds him? Maybe it's a park, an alley or a square?
2. What year was the building built? In honor of what event?
3. Who participated in its construction? Who was the contractor and raised funds for the project?
4. What historical events are associated with it? Why did it become a cultural monument?
5. Has the building changed over time, have any parts been added to? Or maybe it was not completely preserved?
6. What important historical figures visited the structure?
7. Which architectural style chosen for its design? You can also find the names of architects and sculptors if the building is decorated with some kind of sculptures.
8. What is inside, how are the rooms decorated and decorated? Do these decorative elements have any special meaning?
9. If there are paintings inside a building, it is advisable to find out who the artist was who made the drawings. It may be possible to interpret some paintings and frescoes, if they exist.
10. What is the façade of the building? Describe it in detail, without omitting details. They can be important in understanding how a building has changed over time.
11. Describe the general layout of the house.

What can you add to your essay?

In an essay on the topic “Architectural monument” you can add information about which institutions were located in the building at various times time. If this is a temple, perhaps they removed the crosses and demolished the domes, turning them into something else. It could be a gym, a warehouse, a workshop. It is important to mention whether the original purpose of the site was then restored.

You also need to describe the historical events surrounding dramatic changes in the purpose of the interior spaces. Perhaps the building underwent reconstruction, which greatly changed its external or internal appearance. In an essay on the topic “Architectural Monument” you can include your attitude to these changes.

For example, in the same churches, during restoration they do not always take care of the ancient paintings located inside and outside the structure. Sometimes the historical appearance of a building is completely lost. Perhaps the structure experienced some kind of disaster, after which it was restored. You can add information about this to your work. There is no need to include photographs in an essay on the topic “Architectural Monument”, since a verbal description of the appearance of the structure is sufficient.

The preservation of historical and cultural heritage sites has long been declared a task of national importance.

The preservation of historical and cultural heritage sites has long been declared a task of national importance. However, examples of successful “adaptation” of old buildings to a modern context are still rare. How to put historical buildings into business and economic circulation and motivate the owners to care and diligently? This question is relevant for all regions of Russia. And everyone is looking for their own way.

The object must live

According to the regional department of cultural heritage, there are more than 2 thousand historical, cultural and archaeological monuments in the Ulyanovsk region. About 1.5 thousand cultural and historical monuments and 500 archaeological monuments are under state protection. Moreover, 80% of buildings recognized as cultural heritage sites are privately owned. And of the remaining 20%, regional and municipal property account for approximately the same amount - 10% each.

How to use these buildings? What needs to be done to ensure that they are preserved and restored, without disturbing their visual perception and basic characteristics, thereby not damaging the object of protection? Questions more painful than each other. Two positions: “keep them out” and “encourage” them - have coexisted for a long time and with varying victories. However, in lately Still, the dominant point of view is that preserving an object of historical heritage means maintaining it and using it competently.

I am for the architectural monument to live and for this building to be used. Including for economic purposes. If a building is not used, it begins to collapse,” says department director Sharpudin Khautiev.

And he continues:

I am often surprised by comments on social networks, on the pages of online publications, when they write: what right did they have to sell an architectural monument? Monuments of history and culture are the same real estate objects. They can be rented, sold, donated, or inherited. The question is: how to use them? Of course, we prohibit placing production in a cultural heritage site: if machines are installed in a building that is more than a hundred years old, vibration will lead to its gradual destruction. We are also very careful about the objects in which the points are located catering. We have special control over these. But we do not impose bans on businesses. We simply say what can be done and what cannot be done. And we make sure to include this in the security obligations.

However, business is very careful in acquiring buildings included in the register of historical and cultural heritage sites. And a modern sign of a crisis economy is the abandonment of these objects - with reference to strict and financially intensive security regulations.

Khautiev's counterarguments are quite reasonable. Any building requires maintenance and repair, its good condition must be maintained. But if you own an architectural monument, then in addition to you, the state also takes care of your property. It is interested in ensuring that these objects are preserved, and therefore in ensuring that the owner takes measures to preserve the unique object that he owns.

Question - how much does it cost to keep a building in good condition? And is it always necessary to hold out to the last, defending the right of an ancient house to exist?

Who needs it, special status

Disputes between historians, architects, developers and townspeople over the preservation of the historical appearance of Simbirsk-Ulyanovsk either subside or flare up with renewed vigor. Sometimes developing into conflicts, victories in which go to each side with varying degrees of success. Does the city benefit from this in principle? There is no clear answer to this question.

They demolished a practically completed four-story residential building next door to Livchak’s Teremok, and did not allow the construction of a Marriott hotel next to the Church of All Saints on Minaev Street - this is from the recent past. We lost entire pieces of the historical streets of Radishchev and Krasnogvardeiskaya -
from the modern, but already the past. For example, where the regional children's hospital stands, there were two historical buildings that belonged to the photographer Gorbunov. Many family photos of Simbirsk and Ulyanovsk residents were taken here. What is more important - to preserve these two houses or to build a modern hospital? This question is hardly rhetorical.

Starting from the corner of Krasnogvardeyskaya and ending with the turn to Goncharova, to Plastov Boulevard, there was also ordinary development,” says Olga Sveshnikova, chairman of the board of the Ulyanovsk branch of VOOPiK. - But ordinary does not mean bad. There were two or three monuments, but they were there. The main thing is that the line was saved. Once you remove one or two houses from this line, the meaning of preservation is immediately lost. Just like the famous Teremok. Additions have appeared, but two or three historical buildings remain. So what?.. Or take the house where Dmitry Ulyanov lived. It was protected as historical. The owners live in Kazakhstan and come to Ulyanovsk periodically. And they can’t sell the house, because the sale comes with the burden of security, and they can’t maintain it, since it’s a big expense. You look at the house, all warped, and think: maybe it’s better that it doesn’t exist?..

And townspeople, including interested entrepreneurs, remember the failed pedestrian streets in modern Ulyanovsk. The intention to close part of Karl Marx Street from the intersection with Goncharova Street to Karamzinsky Square from traffic was, perhaps, a project. But pedestrian street Federation could take place. The first attempts to implement this project are almost 20 years old. At that time, many historical buildings were still preserved in the Federation, and the business located here was ready to invest both in the repair of facades and in its conceptual development - with a tourist and entertainment focus.

Today there is an object of regional significance - the landmark “Fair Quarter”. The project was developed by the architectural studio "Simbirskproekt". In fact, a place of interest is one integral monument of history and culture, within which certain urban planning regimes are permitted. However, this is where everything has stalled for now.

There are boundaries, regimes are defined, but in order to fill it all inside, we need at least some kind of big concept, in the development of which museum workers, architects, art historians, and tenants should participate, says Olga Sveshnikova. - Not yet.

Meanwhile, there is an interesting experience from Samara. At the Moscow Urban Forum in October, Vitaly Stadnikov, the former chief architect of this city, and now the deputy dean of the Higher School of Urbanism, spoke about it:

We once created public organization"Samara for people" -
to help residents of the historical part register ownership of the land, because this is the only protection against the construction of any objects there... In fact, a mechanism for creating alternative development programs for the territories has matured. A master plan for the historical part of Samara is currently being developed. As a result, I managed to enter the group strategic planning, and this is already a law of the city of Samara, adopted until 2025. And through this group of so-called spatial development, a mechanism has emerged for projecting solutions that are developed in an alternative way.

The principle of "carrot" and "stick"

In the Ulyanovsk region there is an interdepartmental working group to combat illegal development on the territory of places of interest.
And what about promoting the legal inclusion of historical buildings in modern business circulation?..

Of course, we understand perfectly well that the principle of business is making a profit. Entrepreneurs need to demolish a rotten one-story house and build a multi-story building with a large area. There is a “stick” for violators (serious penalties), but there must also be a “carrot,” said the director of the Middle Volga branch of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise “Institute “Spetsproject”” at a meeting of the “DO” round table.
restoration" Yuri Kozlov. - After all, in fact, sometimes it is more profitable to destroy an object than to carry out repair and restoration work.

Both entrepreneurs and historians agree with Yuri Kozlov’s proposal to introduce tax and other benefits for owners of cultural heritage sites if they invest money in their preservation. However, despite the fact that the federal law on cultural heritage objects will soon be 20 years old, a clear mechanism of preferences has not been developed.

Such a mechanism could well be a public-private partnership; fortunately, there is already a regional law on PPP in Ulyanovsk and a federal law. For example, a concession agreement: an entrepreneur undertakes the responsibility for restoring a cultural heritage site, and the building is provided to him by the city (if it is municipal property) for rent at a minimum fixed price, taking into account all repair costs. At the end of the agreement, the building must be returned to the city. If the parties do not agree to extend the contract.

Today, the city of Cherepovets talks about an example of such agreements. Without forgetting to emphasize that these are the first concession agreements in Russia that were concluded with the aim of restoring a cultural heritage site. Are they the first? Just take my word for it.

In Ulyanovsk, according to a similar scheme, ten years ago it was returned to active life building on Goncharova Street, 50. It was reconstructed and restored by the Ulyanovsk-GSM company: it improved its conditions and preserved the historical appearance of the city. To this day, when it comes to a successful example of “integration” commercial structures in the historical environment, most business owners and officials remember this particular object.

Meanwhile, a rather attractive mechanism has been proposed for federal property. In September, a decree of the Government of the Russian Federation came into force, which makes it possible to hand over objects of historical and cultural heritage requiring restoration into private hands for 49 years for one ruble.

Huge block federal monuments, thousands and thousands, are in a deplorable state! Now, thanks to this resolution, if you have repaired it, you can do whatever you want there, you can develop a business there. Forty-nine years is two generations. “Almost eternal possession,” Russian Minister of Culture Vladimir Medinsky said at the September congress of restorers in Kazan.

However, we are talking about a conditional price: one ruble is the starting price of the auction, as a result of which the real rental price will appear. It is clear that in standard contract the conditions for terminating the contract will be specified if the tenant does not fulfill his obligations. The criteria for an object being in unsatisfactory condition are defined by another government decree.

But, we repeat, this is a decision for federal property. What about regional and municipal?

The Department of the Ulyanovsk Region for Cultural Heritage says that together with district administrations, the issue of selling architectural monuments at the minimum price was discussed, but with the condition that the new owners will invest in the preservation of these objects and sign security obligations. The initiative did not take root. First of all, because such objects are interesting not in the outback, but in major cities, where you can actually do business with them.

According to regional patterns?

However, the first measures of regional support have already appeared. In 2014, the Government of the Ulyanovsk region adopted a resolution to provide subsidies to reimburse costs associated with the preservation of cultural and historical heritage sites of regional significance. Individuals, public and non-profit organizations, and individual entrepreneurs can count on state support. To do this, a number of conditions must be met. The restoration or repair project must be agreed with regional Ministry art and cultural policy. The contractor must be an organization that has the appropriate license from the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation
(there are 15 of them in Ulyanovsk). The contractor's requirements must be open and clear (an estimate must be provided). The fact of payment for work must be documented. And then 50% of the cost of the work performed is reimbursed by the state.

This measure has already been assessed by the Simbirsk Metropolis of the Russian Orthodox Church and the Regional Spiritual Administration of Muslims of the Ulyanovsk Region. WITH individuals- more difficult. The owners of buildings recognized as historical heritage sites are often elderly and low-income people. Payment after the fact is unacceptable for them: they can bear the costs of project documentation, repair and restoration “according to the rules” they are simply not able to do. Therefore, in 2016, the region plans to approach the situation differently - not to reimburse costs, but to provide funds in advance.

“My greatest fear is that such objects in the regions are doomed to destruction,” says Sharpudin Khautiev. - Therefore, it is very important for us that people live there and preserve these buildings.

A person lives in a house and wants to preserve it for posterity,” says Olga Sveshnikova. - For example, a wooden house with interesting beautiful decor, the author of the project is also known. The owner maintains its historical appearance with his own efforts. But once the building is put under protection, as an object of cultural heritage, a security obligation is concluded with the owner. And from now on he is obliged to carry out any repair and restoration work through projects and examinations, which requires a lot of money. I sometimes think: perhaps this legislation is designed for reputable cities in terms of historical heritage -
St. Petersburg, Pskov, Vologda, Vladimir, where considerable funds are allocated from the state budget for the preservation of cultural heritage, including the restoration of immovable monuments.
By the standards of the capital, our objects are more “modest”, but this is our history, our monuments, and we must preserve them.

Everything related to the protection of cultural heritage sites has already been adopted at the legislative level, experts say. It's time to think about supporting those who own them. It is impossible to equate all objects classified as historical and cultural monuments, as well as the requirements for these objects. The price categories of buildings located in Moscow and, say, in the Sengileevsky district of the Ulyanovsk region vary significantly. The income of the people who live in these buildings also varies.

The protection and preservation of objects of historical and cultural heritage is regulated by Federal Law No. 73-FZ “On objects of cultural heritage (historical and cultural monuments) of the peoples of the Russian Federation” dated June 25, 2002. Legislation classifies objects older than 100 years as archaeological monuments. Architectural monuments include buildings that are at least 40 years old. A historical monument can be younger than 40 if it is associated with a famous person or is of a memorial nature.

For those who live in the village, these houses are their usual place of residence, and it is impossible to drive them into a dead end with strict restrictions and encumbrances, -
Sharpudin Khautiev believes. - In my opinion, there is a big gap in the legislation. There must be a different approach to these people. We need to think about serious measures to stimulate them, about how we can help them. Bringing to justice a person who lives on one pension, fining him - sometimes the hand does not rise. He will simply leave this property; he does not need such a house. And then what will happen to the building?

How to work with the cultural environment

There is one more question “on topic”: how successful are attempts to preserve the environment through pseudo-historical remakes? At city planning councils, conflicts of opinion often arise regarding the central part of the city. And it concerns not so much the preservation of historical heritage as the architectural appearance of new objects.

If you look at modern architecture, which tries to claim historicity, there are no good examples. Neither in the center of Ulyanovsk, nor in the city in general. In the country it is, but somehow it didn’t happen in Ulyanovsk,” Sergei Frolov, deputy chairman of the Ulyanovsk branch of the Union of Architects of Russia, is categorical.

The dominant view in much of the architectural community is that every building should be of its time. Pseudo-historical remakes often cause nothing but rejection.

In Russia there are quite striking examples of such “historicism,” notes Sergei Frolov. - I was struck by the picture in Moscow’s Pykhov-Tserkovny Proezd. The neoclassical building by Mikhail Filippov, with columns, balusters, cornices - it seems beautiful. But when the gaze slid to the right to the real Stalinist Empire style - everything fell into place! Simple, natural architecture outshines modern patterns - a living classic! I believe that a modern building should speak a modern plastic language. This could be a modest glass façade that will highlight a historical heritage site. There is no need to play hide and seek with him, you need to have your own face.

Everyone who is interested in preserving historical heritage must, first of all, work with the cultural environment, with the formation of citizens’ interest in historical and cultural monuments, an understanding of their value and significance, according to the Union of Architects. Unfortunately, rich people still have no desire to show off not just their expensive beautiful house, but because this house has some kind of cultural layers, historical layers. And business structures for the most part consider housing in historical buildings not an advantage for business, but a burden.

We need to somehow introduce a fashion for living in a historical building, for working in a historical building,” says Sergei Frolov. - So that a person, setting up an office in such a building, not only sees problems and burdens, but feels connected to the culture of the nobility or to some layer of historical heritage. So that it would be cool and prestigious.

Of course, this process is slow. But we need to start small. The Ulyanovsk branch of the Union of Architects of Russia, for example, held a series of lectures on urban planning in October. For everyone.
The architectural school of Sergei Kangro has been operating on the basis of the construction lyceum in Ulyanovsk for the third year. And excursions to the architectural monuments of Simbirsk-Ulyanovsk, organized by the creative space “Kvartal” on the site of the museum courtyard of the Goncharov House, have become a real event today.
this summer.

Several years ago, at one of the DO round tables, there was a proposal to make Ulyanovsk, following the example of Moscow and St. Petersburg, a Historical Heritage Day. What is it? People who are in historical buildings understand the prestige of this building for their business. Once a year the doors open - it doesn’t matter whether it’s a construction company, a treasury office or a bank - and everyone is invited on a tour. The owners tell guests about their building, its history, and how they carry out continuity. Historical Heritage Day can be designated as a single day in the city. Or everyone would choose this day for themselves. The proposal seemed interesting, but Historical Heritage Day in business and cultural life Ulyanovsk never entered.

However, residents of the city and anyone interested in its history and architecture should know that you can visit any object of historical and cultural heritage that is of interest.
The security obligation for each such facility stipulates: to ensure unimpeded access to the building for everyone on specified days or hours. This is done to popularize the historical heritage.

With any appeal from citizens who are not indifferent to their history and architecture, we coordinate all actions with the owner and provide access to the building they would like to visit, the Department of Cultural Heritage told DO.

Lyudmila Ilyina

Photo: S. Larin

As can be seen from the previous presentation, the content of the concepts of “architectural monument” and “restoration” has changed over time. These concepts, having emerged relatively late, were interpreted differently depending on the philosophical, artistic and other ideas of each individual period. At the same time, they tended to become more complex, enriched due to more and more multilateral consideration of the connections that arise between the architectural work of the past and the world of modern man.

In different European countries To denote what we call an architectural monument, the terms “monument”, “historical monument”, “ architectural monument" In our country in the past the term “monuments of antiquity and art” was used, and currently the concept of “architectural monument” is included in more general concept“historical and cultural monuments”, or, even more broadly, “cultural heritage”. These terms reflect the dual value of the buildings that we classify as monuments—historical and artistic. To imagine the full significance of monuments for modern man, such a division is still not enough, since each of these two main aspects of the value of monuments is far from elementary, representing a very complex combination of various aspects.

Thus, historical value manifests itself not only in the cognitive plane, but also in the emotional plane. The fact that this building is a witness to events either very distant or significant for the history and culture of a given area, country or humanity as a whole, gives it special significance in the eyes of contemporaries. This side of the value of old buildings is reflected in the recognition by existing legislation of a special category of monuments - the so-called “historical monuments”. Historical monuments may include buildings that have no architectural or artistic value and are of interest only as a reminder of certain historical events or faces. However, this special value no less often extends to artistically valuable buildings included in state lists under the heading of “architectural monuments.” Thus, the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin, built by Aristotle Fioravanti during the formation of the Russian national state, is not only outstanding monument architecture, but also the most important monument to the formation of Russian statehood. The ensemble of Tsarskoe Selo is inextricably linked with the names of Pushkin and many other figures of Russian culture and is valuable for modern people this memory is no less than high artistic merits. A special category is represented by structures erected in memory of a specific event (triumphal arches, obelisks, monument temples, etc.).

In cognitive terms, the historical value of a monument is expressed primarily in the fact that it serves as a carrier of information about the past, i.e. historical source. This information is multifaceted and manifests itself in very various fields, which allows us to consider the monument as a specific and complex historical source. From the point of view of historians, the direct evidence of monuments about social structure society. Thus, on the enormous scale of southern Russian churches of the 10th-11th centuries, rising among small wooden and wood-earth buildings, the essential features of the social structure of Kievan Rus were clearly revealed.

The specificity of architecture as an art, which includes engineering and technical aspects, allows us to see in works of architecture a direct reflection of the level of development of production forces: the embodiment of engineering knowledge, a product of material production. The typological features of the surviving buildings of the past carry precious information about the everyday life of distant eras. From this point of view, the ancient structure is considered as a monument material culture. But since architecture is to the same extent an art that operates in ideological and figurative language, monuments serve as the most important historical evidence of the ideology and spiritual culture of various eras.

Not being a fine art, architecture does not express ideas in such a direct form as painting or sculpture, therefore, in architectural monuments, for the most part, one can find reflection of the most common features worldview of any historical period. However, this expression can be extremely strong and vivid. Suffice it to recall the Byzantine temple or gothic cathedral. The information provided by monuments as works of art is also very diverse. For example, Romanesque construction technology of buildings in Vladimir-Suzdal Rus' of the 12th century. and the similarity of their sculptural decoration with Western monuments provide important historical evidence of the cultural connections of this era and the migration of artels of builders and sculptors characteristic of the Middle Ages.

It is quite clear that all of the listed aspects of the significance of the monument as historical source are valid when considering not only parts of the monument dating back to the time of its origin, but also to all later layers, each of which multifacetedly reflects the characteristics of its historical era.

No less obvious is the presence of artistic value in architectural monuments. The works of architects of the past, be they buildings of the ancient, medieval period or modern times, are capable of causing a keen aesthetic experience in modern people. Previously, this aspect prevailed in the assessment of ancient buildings as monuments, although the concept of artistic and, accordingly, the criteria applied to individual buildings changed significantly. Classicism was based on the idea of ​​the existence of unshakable, timeless laws of beauty, comprehended by reason and embodied in examples of ancient art. When applied to specific monuments, this meant recognizing the right to such a title only for buildings of classical antiquity and removed the question of the significance of the layers of subsequent eras. Romanticism was more flexible in evaluating the works of the past as monuments, transferring this concept to later eras and to manifestations of national style features. At the same time, however, the poeticization of individualism, and especially the artistic and creative personality, characteristic of romanticism, gave rise to a tendency to see in the monument not so much a given historical specificity, but rather the author’s intention behind it, distorted by time and even perhaps not yet embodied. While arguing with the romantics, supporters of archaeological restoration, while not denying the artistic value of the monument, nevertheless highlighted the historical value and significance of the monument as a document. At present, the prevailing desire is to see in a monument the unity of the artistic and the historical, which in reality cannot always be clearly separated.

Modern approach to consideration artistic value monument is based on the position that the monument always exerts its emotional and aesthetic impact in a certain context. First of all, it's context modern culture, which includes the developed attitude towards art in general and the art of the past in particular. The historicism of thinking inherent in the consciousness of people of our century allows us to perceive phenomena related to very different artistic systems much more widely and flexibly than was the case in the past. Modern world cultured person includes mandatory knowledge of examples of art different countries and eras with which he involuntarily compares the evaluated work. The assessment of an architectural monument inevitably includes associations associated with taking into account phenomena familiar to us, relating not only to architecture, but also to literature, painting, music and other forms of art. This determines the complexity of the aesthetic perception of the monument as a work of architecture, and our perception cannot claim to be adequate to the perception of contemporaries of its creation, which took place in a different context and included a different range of associations.

But the monument not only fits into the context of modern culture. A truly existing monument, with all the changes and additions accumulated during its centuries-old life, can itself be considered as a context in which artistic elements from different periods are combined. Reconstructions, additions and even losses do not always lead to the destruction of the monument as an artistic whole, sometimes modifying it, creating a new whole with new aesthetic qualities. The Moscow Kremlin with its towers topped 200 years after their construction with tall stone tents is no longer a work of 15th-century architecture, nor is it a work of 17th-century architecture, but a unique fusion artistic elements of both centuries, and in some parts of a later time. Rastrelli's Winter Palace with its later interiors of the Classical era, despite the loss of the original interior decoration, despite the difference in styles, is an artistically integral structure, the image of which is based on complex system interactions of elements of different times. The examples given are the most obvious, but in many other buildings that have undergone various changes in the later years of their existence, parts of different times and styles enter into certain relationships with each other, ultimately determining the unique individuality of each monument. This applies to both outstanding buildings and so-called ordinary buildings. Later layers should be assessed not only as having or not having artistic significance in themselves, but also as elements included in the overall artistic system monument. In this regard, not only changes made by human hands turn out to be significant, but also those that bear traces of the destructive effects of time. Thus, the ruins of an ancient structure have enormous aesthetic expressiveness, different from that which this structure had many centuries ago. Traces of the long existence of a monument, the so-called patina of time, not only obscure and distort information about a work of art from the distant past, but also carry their own emotional information about the life of the monument in time, which is an important component of its present-day aesthetic perception.

For an architectural monument as a work of art, there is another context, outside of which it is unacceptable to consider it, according to modern concepts. This is the context of its architectural and natural environment, the environment that the monument forms and on which, in turn, its artistic perception largely depends. The context of the environment is no less subject to transformation over time than the context of the monument itself. Changes material conditions and social lifestyle of people inevitably affect the appearance of their environment. The older the monument, the less, as a rule, the character of its modern surroundings corresponds to what existed during the period of its creation. This is especially evident in large cities involved in the process of urbanization. Irreversible changes take place even where, it would seem, there are no radical redevelopments or reconstructions. The appearance of asphalt instead of wooden or stone paving, the installation of modern street lighting, and the introduction of urban vehicles actively influence the perception of both the environment and the individual monument. The natural environment of the monuments is by no means stable: trees are growing, the landscape is constantly changing.

Changes in the architecture of an individual structure occurred in parallel with changes in its surroundings. Later layers of the monument reflect this connection in various ways. Many alterations of ancient buildings were dictated by compositional considerations caused by changes in the nature of the relationship between the monument and its surroundings. Thus, the appearance of tall onion domes on the Kremlin cathedrals is certainly associated with a general change in the silhouette of the Kremlin, in particular, with the superstructure of the towers. In turn, the appearance of high hipped tops on the towers was largely due to a change in the urban planning situation, the transformation of the Kremlin from the fortified center of Moscow, surrounded by a relatively small suburb with low buildings, into the central ensemble of a large and densely built-up city. The color scheme of the Kremlin ensemble also changed: the motley combination of red-brick and white colors of the central cathedral group with the inclusion of polychrome gave way to the predominance of a monochromatic white color, which corresponded to a larger urban planning scale. This kind of compositional connections must be taken into account when artistic appreciation monument.

In addition to the compositional connections between the layers of the monument and the elements of its surroundings, there are connections of a stylistic order. Both the alterations of the monument and the change of buildings around it, not always connected by obvious compositional dependence, were carried out to a certain extent synchronously, due to which the monument received layers that, to one degree or another, corresponded to the style of the new elements of its surroundings. Sometimes they tried to completely bring the architectural language of the monument to the character of the architecture of the new period, sometimes they limited themselves to individual additions that introduced new stylistic features into the architecture of the building. As a result, very complex combinations of stylistic order arose between the monument and its architectural environment, far from the embodiment of any one style. The complexity of such relationships does not mean the absence of artistic unity. During the long life of a monument and its surroundings, a harmony of a higher order is sometimes created. Of course, completely different situations are possible and actually occur, when it is not an artistic connection that arises, but an irreconcilable dissonance. In this area, as in others, individual assessment is required based on a comprehensive consideration of various aspects.

Such a complex understanding aesthetic nature The monument is largely due to the historicism of consciousness characteristic of the modern worldview, which manifests itself not only in the sphere of theoretical thinking, but also in the artistic and emotional sphere.

The main purpose of carrying out any work on an architectural monument is to extend its life as a structure of multifaceted value. Most directly this task comes down to conservation, i.e. to a set of measures aimed at protecting or strengthening a structure in its existing form. Conservation is unanimously recognized as the main type of work that should be carried out on monuments.

An important condition for extending the life of a monument is its active inclusion in life modern society. This goal is achieved in two ways: through the emphatic identification of the artistic and historical value of the monument (restoration) and through endowing it with a practical function (adaptation).

Unlike conservation, restoration (the literal translation of the term into Russian means “restoration”) involves making certain changes to the structure, dictated by the awareness of its special significance as a monument. Because of this, restoration is always a violation of the existing system of relationships. Therefore, it is usually considered as an exception, subject to a number of restrictions.

One of the main theoretical premises on which modern ideas about restoration are based is the recognition that the artistically valuable object that determines its direction is not the creative plan of the ancient master, but the monument existing in our time with its losses, later additions and established connections with architectural and spatial environment. The old system of ideas, according to which restoration was understood as a new adequate embodiment of the plan, is completely rejected. The idea of ​​a repeated creative act, in which the restorer is identified with the creator of the work being restored, is an illusion that does not take into account the huge difference in the artistic perception of the masters of past eras and modern people. The restorer does not act on the ideal artistic image monument, but on its material structure. The monument in its reality appears as a keeper of artistic and historical information, which can, however, be present in it not only explicitly, but also in a hidden form, as if potentially. The intervention of a restorer can reveal the hidden part of this information, in best case scenario- with more or less exhaustive completeness. Taking an example from a related field, we can recall ancient icon, preserving the remains of ancient painting under a late entry. It is this pictorial layer revealed by the restorer that has the value of the monument, and not the original intention of the icon painter.

From the position that restoration is focused on a given existing structure, and not on a design, it follows that its goal should not be either a return to the original appearance, or the recreation of a later formed, but also lost appearance (the so-called “restoration at the optimal date” ), but the maximum disclosure of the artistic qualities of the monument that has come down to us and its historically valuable features. Artistic qualities are understood in the sense mentioned above, i.e. they include the entire context of the artistic relationships that arose between the original parts of the structure and later layers, as well as between the monument and the historical architectural and spatial environment.

For the same reason, it is fundamentally not allowed to erect parts of the structure that were not implemented at the time, even if they were part of the author’s probable intention. This position remains valid not only when the original plan is reconstructed by guesswork (as was often the case in the restoration practice of the 19th century), but also when we have seemingly indisputable materials in the form of author’s drawings. There are many examples of how the final formation of the architectural appearance of buildings of the past occurred during the construction process, when the architect himself clarified and revised the previously drawn up project. This is confirmed, in particular, by a comparison of the design drawings of Bazhenov and Kazakov with the buildings of the Tsaritsyn palace complex erected under their leadership. The unrealized version of the project saves for us independent meaning as a monument to the artistic thought of its era, but only a truly embodied work can be considered as an architectural monument and as an object of restoration.

Modern theory establishes a fundamentally different attitude towards layers than that which took place during the period of dominance of stylistic restoration. They are recognized not only for their own historical and artistic value as independent works reflecting the cultural characteristics of their time, but also for their role as components the monument as a whole. They not only obscure and distort the original artistic concept of the structure (according to previous ideas, mainly, if not the only valuable one), but are also capable of complicating and enriching artistic structure monument. The Venice Charter clearly indicates that the purification of the monument from complicating layers and the unity of style are rejected as the final goal of restoration.

Recognition in theory of the value of later layers should not be dogmatically perceived as the need to preserve any additions to the monument. Late plaster covering an ancient painting, a faceless utilitarian extension to the facade, the latest laying of an arched passage not only are not carriers of artistic information, but also literally they obscure and distort the valuable things that are actually present in the monument. The Italian Charter of 1931 characterized this kind of stratification as “devoid of meaning and meaning.” Of course, the differences between valuable and valueless layers are not always completely obvious, and a carefully balanced differentiated assessment of each individual case is necessary.

Other general requirement The requirement for restoration is maximum preservation of authenticity. Authenticity is important from many perspectives. An ancient structure, replaced by a new copy, loses its value as a historical witness of the past, retaining only the value of a visual illustration. It no longer exists as a monument of material culture. But even as a work of art, a copy cannot claim to be adequate to the original, no matter how perfectly it is executed. Moreover, an indispensable condition for the full perception of a work of art is the viewer’s awareness of its authenticity. Partial loss of authenticity, which to one degree or another is almost inevitable during restoration, is also sensitive. This, first of all, results in a special attitude towards replacing damaged building elements. In contrast to the usual repair and construction practice, preference should be given to special strengthening methods, and only in extreme cases is the replacement of original material allowed, which should be considered a necessary evil. This general position this is true to varying degrees in different cases. It is not indifferent whether we are talking about a centuries-old building or a relatively recent construction, about the most artistically active elements of the monument - carved details, paintings, ordinary wall masonry or hidden structures. The more historical or artistic information a particular element of a monument contains, the more obligatory the requirement of preserving authenticity becomes.

Recognition of the importance of authenticity imposes restrictions not only on the replacement of dilapidated elements, but also on new additions made to the monument during restoration, which should not have the nature of falsification. The fundamental solution to the problem was suggested by theorists of archaeological restoration late XIX- beginning of the 20th century: the use of a system of techniques for the artificial isolation of new inclusions, the so-called signature. But since the distinction between the original parts of a monument and restoration additions is carried out due to one degree or another of violating the integrity of its perception, determining the methods and measures of signification is far from a simple problem. In each individual case, an individual approach to the system for identifying restoration additions should be developed based on the specific situation.

Even if the signature is conscientiously carried out, new additions made during restoration, depending on their quantitative relationship with the surviving ancient elements, can have a negative impact on the perception of the monument as a whole, “compromise” it as a genuine work of antiquity. To prevent this undesirable effect from occurring, it is necessary that the original prevail over the restoration in the monument, and not vice versa. In the practical implementation of this requirement, it is important, however, to take into account what we mean by a monument: a fragment of an ancient building, a structure as a whole, an architectural ensemble. Depending on this, the same action of the restorer may be considered unacceptable, legal, or even necessary. Thus, a significant restoration of one of the symmetrical wings of the estate, bordering on its complete reconstruction, if we consider it only in relation to this wing, would probably be a violation of the norms of restoration in its modern understanding; at the same time, when correlated with the restoration of the estate as a whole, it will turn out to be just as legitimate as the restoration of the lost column of the portico. Thus, the inclusion of the assessment of a monument in the ensemble and urban planning context can lead to an expansion of the scope of possible restoration solutions, while allowing us to remain within the framework of the previously formulated general principles of restoration.

The possibility of restoration additions is also limited by the condition of the reliability of the reconstruction, which must be based on a strict documentary basis. According to the Venice Charter, restoration should stop where the hypothesis begins. Documentation of restoration has two sides. First of all, this is proof of principle, confirming that this element of the monument really existed and existed in the exact edition provided for by the restoration project.

However, even with an impeccable fundamental justification for restoration, determining the size, pattern, texture of the lost element is possible only with one degree or another of approximation. The construction culture of the past, based on artisanal production methods, is characterized by deviations from the ideal geometric shape and individual interpretation of each individual detail. Fixation drawings also have a lesser or greater, but in any case, a finite degree of accuracy. From this point of view, the documentary justification for restoration always remains relative, and the criterion for the admissibility of recreating lost elements is not absolute accuracy, but only relative accuracy, the degree of which depends on the conditions of visual perception. The idea of ​​a monument as a real structure forces us to give preference to direct material remains over all other types of sources when assessing the documentary basis for restoration. Along with them, data from fixation performed in accordance with modern standards can be placed scientific research. But in all cases, a comparison of the entire complex of materials remains a prerequisite.

Invading the existing system of artistic relationships in order to identify certain important qualities of a monument, the restorer is obliged to carefully weigh what the new artistic whole created as a result of restoration will be. In this case, it is necessary to take into account the integrity of the perception of the monument, taken separately, and its connection with the architectural and spatial environment. In this regard, restoration includes elements not only of scientific analysis, but also of creativity. The means available to the restorer for achieving a new artistic unity are relatively limited, but they should not be underestimated. First of all, this is a correctly found relationship between the measure of disclosure and reconstruction. Much in the perception of the monument also depends on the skillful use of modern elements introduced into the monument, serving to ensure safety, fill gaps, etc. The height and projection of the roof, the design of the joinery, and the color scheme, in cases where they are not clearly determined by the actual restoration requirements, should be used as a means of creating artistic harmony.

The provisions stated above fix only the most general principles of restoration. Almost all theoretical works in this area note that monuments and cases of restoration have an infinite variety that does not allow a dogmatic approach. Therefore, there is not and cannot be a set of strict requirements that the restorer must mechanically comply with. Restoration should be considered as a specific creative process. At the same time, making a decision on the fate of the monument cannot be entrusted to the judgment of one person, no matter how highly qualified he may be, but is confirmed by an authoritative circle of specialists.

Architecture in a broad sense covers a large area human activity, special place in which landscape architecture occupies a separate section.

Landscape architecture includes the process of creating and optimally organizing the surrounding space, which helps to aesthetically design gardens and parks.

The main material for working in landscape architecture is vegetation and the surrounding landscape.

The concepts of landscape design and architecture are often equated. But you need to understand that they carry different meanings. Architecture here is the organization of a favorable surrounding space, an external environment for the daily life of the population, as well as recreation. Elements of landscape architecture can be seen both in city parks and in rural areas, on a private plot. This area of ​​human life must meet aesthetic, functional and economic requirements.

To put it simply, landscape architecture is a way of designing parks, gardens, and recreational areas for the population in such a way that a person will feel as comfortable as possible, and his aesthetic requirements will be fully satisfied.

Architectural specialists achieve their goals with the help of water, green spaces, stone, and special terrain.

Landscape design is a more general concept that includes landscape architecture. Today it is difficult to separate one concept from another, since in fact they are inextricably linked. Modern educational institutions train broad-spectrum specialists - construction designers, landscape architects, who are engaged not only in landscaping areas of city parks or private gardens, but also participate in the development of construction projects.

IN recent years The demand for the services of specialists in the field of landscape architecture is steadily growing. This is due to the fact that an increasing number of people are striving to live in landscaped estates, parks, and courtyards. In Europe, landscape architecture and design are at the highest level; domestic specialists can learn a lot from foreign colleagues and adopt a lot of techniques and ideas.

Modern landscape architecture should be environmentally oriented. This means that the pristine landscape must be preserved as much as possible. It is important to emphasize its beauty with the help of architectural objects and techniques, using environmentally friendly building materials.

In our country, the term “landscape architecture” first began to be used in the 70s of the 20th century. Then, in 1961, the first All-Union Conference on Landscape Architecture was organized.

Landscape architecture objects

There are many approaches by which landscape architecture objects can be classified. The traditional approach highlights the following elements:

• functional objects, for example, historical, cultural (reserves), as well as recreation parks;
• objects of landscape-genetic origin, such as natural parks formed naturally and preserved by humans as parks and water areas;
• urban planning objects - zones or corners of nature with a natural landscape in the city or in a suburban area.

Today, almost all landscape architecture objects are located in cities. Most of them are presented in the form of city parks, which can be divided into:

• multifunctional, which are used by several categories of the population both for recreation and for various cultural and sports events;
• specialized, performing one specific function (botanical gardens and parks; zoological parks; complex exhibition parks consisting of ponds, exhibition pavilions, green spaces; open-air museum; parks with an ethnographic focus that show the life of different peoples; arboretums).

Not a single landscape object can do without a communication network. For the convenience of visitors, transport roads, pedestrian paths, paths for cyclists and walks are organized.

Since any object of landscape architecture involves transformation and change of the surrounding natural environment to a greater or lesser extent, we distinguish:

• macro-level objects that occupy large areas on a national scale. They are of regional importance, and their design is carried out taking into account the rational use of natural resources. Typically, such objects remain virtually unchanged. For the convenience of visitors, a communications network is laid in them. These are national parks, nature reserves, urban landscaping, reservoirs;
• meso-level objects. They are located within a specific locality. Parks, hydroparks, gardens. Designed for recreation of the population, entertainment and sports events;
• micro-level objects. Their design is carried out based on reference to a specific architectural object - a building or structure. These are gardens, squares, areas of various establishments, terraces, boulevards, embankments.

Directions of landscape architecture

Modern landscape architecture consists of the following areas:

Landscape construction, its main task is the construction of landscape objects around which there will be green spaces. These are reservoirs created artificially, alpine slides, waterfalls, rock gardens.

Landscape planning involves the organization and transformation of the natural environment on a national scale, which allows it to be preserved as much as possible in its original form.

Landscape design - more detailed description of what future facilities in the landscaped area will look like.

The main objectives of landscape architecture are:

• preservation of the natural landscape in its original form;
• protection of natural monuments;
• improving the landscape and transforming it for the most convenient and safe human use.

Styles in landscape architecture

IN architectural design It is customary to distinguish two main styles:

Regular style, which is characterized by the presence of a main smooth axis. It is around it that all the main elements and objects will be located.

Mirror symmetry is often used. For communications, I use straight paths or those made on the plan using a ruler and compass. The regular style is characterized by the presence of strict geometrically correct lines, shapes and proportions. Circle or square shapes are often used. When choosing plants for plantings, preference is given to those species that are easy to trim and form the necessary shapes from them. Most often these are shrubs or small trees. When planting them, they focus on the alley type. In every corner of the garden, designed in a regular style, there are decorative elements in the form of fountains, sculptures, pools, gazebos and arches.

Landscape style, the main task of which is the maximum preservation of the pristine natural appearance and features of the area. All natural elements are only emphasized with the help of landscape objects and are ennobled to make them convenient to visit. There are no clear and regular geometric shapes and lines. The only requirement is that the final landscape must be complete

Really, for what? It would seem that such a question is easy to answer. Since childhood, we have been taught that literature and art help us understand the meaning of life, make us smarter, more receptive, and spiritually richer. All this is true, of course. But it happens that even a correct thought, having become habitual, ceases to disturb and excite a person and turns into a common phrase. Therefore, before answering the question “Why?”, and answering it in an adult, serious manner, you need to think about a lot and understand a lot again.

On the banks of the Nerl River near the city of Vladimir stands the Church of the Intercession. Very small, light, lonely on a wide green plain. It is one of those buildings that the country is proud of and which are usually called “architectural monuments.” In any, even the most short book in the history of Russian art you will find mention of it. You will learn that this church was built by order of Prince Andrei Bogolyubsky in honor of the victory over the Volga Bulgarians and in memory of Prince Izyaslav, who died in battle; that it was placed at the confluence of two rivers - the Klyazma and the Nerl, at the “gate” of the Vladimir-Suzdal land; that on the facades of the building there are intricate and magnificent stone carvings.

Nature is also beautiful: ancient dark oaks sometimes enchant our eyes no less than works of art. Pushkin never tired of admiring the “free elements” of the sea. But the beauty of nature hardly depends on man, it is forever renewed, new cheerful growth grows to replace dying trees, dew falls and dries, sunsets fade. We admire nature and try to protect it to the best of our ability.

However, the hundred-year-old oak tree, which remembers times long gone, was not created by man. It does not have the warmth of his hands and the thrill of his thoughts, like a statue, a painting or a stone building. But the beauty of the Church of the Intercession is man-made, all this was done by people whose names have long been forgotten, people, probably very different, who knew grief, joy, melancholy and fun. Dozens of hands, strong, careful and skillful, folded, obeying the thoughts of an unknown builder, a white stone slender miracle. There are eight centuries between us. Wars and revolutions, brilliant discoveries of scientists, historical upheavals, great changes in the destinies of peoples.

But here stands a small, fragile temple, its bright reflection slightly sways in the calm water of the Nerl, gentle shadows outline the outlines of stone animals and birds above the narrow windows - and time disappears. Just like eight hundred years ago, excitement and joy are born in the human heart - this is what people worked for.

Only art can do this. You can perfectly know hundreds of dates and facts, understand the causes and consequences of events. But nothing can replace a living encounter with history. Of course, a stone arrowhead is also a reality, but it does not contain the main thing - a person’s idea of ​​​​good, evil, harmony and justice - about the spiritual world of man. But art has all this, and time cannot interfere with it.

Art is the memory of the heart of the people. Art not only does not lose its beauty, it preserves evidence of how our ancestors looked at the world. Birds and lions, slightly angular human heads on the walls of the church - these are the images that lived in fairy tales, and then in the imagination of people.

No, the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl, like hundreds of other buildings, is not just an architectural monument, but a clot of feelings and thoughts, images and ideas that connect the past and the present. They are related in the most literal sense of the word, because the white stone church near Vladimir has absorbed the features of Russian, national culture, in all its uniqueness. People want to understand each other, they strive to comprehend the main thing, the most essential in the spiritual life of each country.

One single church, built many centuries ago, can make you think about a lot; it can stir up thousands of thoughts that a person had never suspected before; it can make each of us feel our indissoluble connection with the history and culture of our Motherland. In art, generations convey to each other the most valuable, intimate and sacred things - the heat of the soul, excitement, faith in beauty.

How can you not protect the priceless heritage of the past! Moreover, among all types of arts, it is fine art and architecture that are unique and inimitable. In fact, even if out of a million copies of War and Peace one survives, the novel will live on and be published again. The only score of Beethoven's symphony will be rewritten and played again; people remember the poems, poems and songs by heart. And paintings, palaces, cathedrals and statues, alas, are mortal. They can be restored, and even then not always, but it is impossible to repeat them the same.

This is partly why they evoke trembling excitement, a feeling of uniqueness. Museum workers carefully look at the instrument readings to see if the air is dry, if the temperature has dropped a degree; New foundations are laid under ancient buildings, ancient frescoes are carefully cleared, statues are renewed.

When reading a book, you are not dealing with the author’s manuscript, and it is not so important what ink “Eugene Onegin” is written in. And in front of the canvas we remember - Leonardo’s brush touched it. And for painting or architecture there is no need for translation; we always “read” the picture in the original. Moreover, to a modern Italian, Dante’s language may seem archaic and not always understandable, but for us it is simply a foreign language, and we must use a translation. But the smile of the “Benois Madonna” touches both us and Leonardo’s compatriots; it is dear to a person of any nation. And yet Madonna is undoubtedly Italian - with her elusive lightness of gesture, golden skin, cheerful simplicity. She is a contemporary of her creator, a Renaissance woman, with a clear gaze, as if trying to discern the mysterious essence of things.

These amazing qualities make painting a particularly precious art. With its help, peoples and eras speak to each other in a friendly and simple manner, becoming closer to centuries and countries. But this does not mean that art reveals its secrets easily and without difficulty. Often antiquity leaves the viewer indifferent, his gaze dispassionately glides over the stone faces of the Egyptian pharaohs, so equally motionless, almost dead. And, perhaps, someone will have the thought that the rows of dark statues are not so interesting, that it is hardly worth getting carried away with them.

Another thought may arise - yes, science needs historical values, but why do I need them? Respectful indifference impoverishes a person; he will not understand why people sometimes save works of art at the cost of their lives.

No, don't go quietly! Look closely at the granite faces of the cruel, forgotten despots, do not let their external monotony confuse you.

Think about why ancient sculptors depicted their kings with such twins, as if they were people sleeping in reality. After all, this is interesting - people probably haven’t changed that much in appearance since then, what made sculptors make statues exactly like this: indifferent flat eyes, a body filled with heavy strength, doomed to eternal immobility.

How amazing is the combination of very specific, unique facial features, eye shape, lip pattern with detachment, with the absence of any expression, feeling, excitement. Take a closer look at these portraits, look through the books. And even small grains of knowledge will cast new light on stone sculptures that seem boring at first. It turns out that the cult of the dead forced the ancient Egyptians to see in statues not just images of a person, but the abode of his spiritual essence, his vitality, what in Ancient Egypt was called “ka” and which, according to their ideas, continued to live after the physical death of people.

And if you imagine that these sculptures existed already when even Ancient Greece was still in the future, that they are not one thousand years old, and their stone eyes saw Thebes, the floods of the Nile at the foot of completely new pyramids, the chariots of the pharaohs, the soldiers of Napoleon. .. Then you will no longer ask yourself what is interesting about these granite figures.

Statues, even the most ancient ones, are not always kept in museums. They “live” on city streets and squares, and then their destinies are closely and forever intertwined with the destinies of the city, with the events that took place at their pedestals.

Let us remember the monument to Peter I in Leningrad, the famous “Bronze Horseman”, created by the sculptor Falconet. Is the glory of this monument, one of best monuments world, only in artistic merits? For all of us, the “giant on a galloping horse” is a source of complex and exciting associations, thoughts, and memories. This is both an image of the distant past, when our homeland was “the man with the genius of Peter,” and a magnificent monument to the political figure who “raised” Russia. This monument became the personification of old St. Petersburg, built up with low houses, which did not yet have granite embankments, and had not yet achieved its full grandeur. Only one bridge, a temporary pontoon, then connected the banks of the Neva, just opposite the Bronze Horseman. And the monument stood in the very center of the city, its busiest place, where the Admiralty Side connected with Vasilyevsky Island. A crowd flowed past him, carriages rushed with a roar, in the evenings the pale light of lanterns barely illuminated the formidable face of the king “he is terrible in the surrounding darkness...”. The sculpture became one with Pushkin’s poem and, together with it, a symbol of the city. The flood sung by the poet, the menacing roar of December 1825 and much that the history of St. Petersburg is famous for happened here - at the Thunder stone, the pedestal of the statue. And the famous white nights, when misty transparent clouds slowly stretch across the bright sky, as if obeying the gesture of Peter’s imperiously outstretched hand, is it possible, when thinking about them, not to remember the “Bronze Horseman”, around whom many generations saw so many poetic and unforgettable hours!

Art accumulates the feelings of hundreds of generations and becomes a container and source of human experiences. In a small hall on the first floor of the Paris Louvre, where reverent silence reigns near the statue of Venus de Milo, you can’t help but think about how many people were blessed by the contemplation of the perfect beauty of this dark marble.

In addition, art, be it a statue, a cathedral or a painting, is a window into an unfamiliar world, separated from us by hundreds of years, through which one can discern not only the visible appearance of an era, but also its essence. The way people felt about their time.

But you can look deeper: in the care of the strokes of the Dutch painters, in their sensitivity to the charm of the material world, to the charm and beauty of “inconspicuous” things - love for the established way of life. And this is not petty philistine love, but a deeply meaningful, lofty feeling, both poetic and philosophical. Life was not easy for the Dutch; they had to conquer lands from the sea, and freedom from the Spanish conquerors. And therefore, a sunny square on a waxed parquet floor, the velvety skin of an apple, the fine chasing of a silver glass in their paintings become witnesses and expressors of this love.

Just look at the paintings of Jan van Eyck, the first great master of the Dutch Renaissance, at the way he paints things, the microscopic details of existence. In every movement of the brush there is a naive and wise admiration for what the artist depicts; he shows things in their original and surprisingly attractive essence, we feel the fragrant elasticity of fruits, the slippery coolness of dry rustling silk, the cast heaviness of a bronze shandal.

Thus, in art, the spiritual history of humanity passes before us, the history of the discovery of the world, its meaning, and not yet fully understood beauty. After all, each generation reflects it anew and in its own way.

On our planet there are many things that have no utilitarian value, that cannot feed or warm people, or cure illness; these are works of art.

People protect them as best they can from the merciless time. And not only because “useless” works cost millions. That's not the point.

People understand: cultural monuments are the common heritage of generations, which allows us to feel the history of the planet as our own personal and dear.

The art of the past is the youth of civilization, the youth of culture. Without knowing it or neglecting it, you can live your life without becoming a real person, conscious of responsibility for the past and future of the Earth. Therefore, we are not surprised that they spend effort, time and money on restoring ancient buildings, that paintings, like people, are treated, given injections and X-rayed.

A museum, an old church, a picture darkened by time - for us this is the past. Is it only the past?

Many years will pass. New cities will be built; modern jet planes will become funny and slow-moving, and a train ride will seem as amazing as a post-coach journey to us.

But the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl will remain the same as eight centuries ago. AND . And the statue of Venus de Milo. All this already belongs to the future today. To our grandchildren's grandchildren. This is something we must not forget about. That the cultural monuments of distant eras are an eternal torch that is passed on to each other different generations. And it depends on us so that the flame in it does not waver for a minute.

Paradoxical as it may sound, it is by meeting the culture of the past that we can feel the breath of the future. That future when the value of art and humanity will be clear and undeniable for everyone. The Romans said that art is eternal, but life is short. Fortunately, this is not entirely true, because immortal art is created by people. And it is in our power to preserve the immortality of humanity.