UKRAINIAN IDENTITY IN ARCHITEC TURE

The full-scale russian aggression and its invasion of Ukraine has once again raised the issue of Ukrainian identity. Will this mass search of identity include architecture and in what way may it happen? We have actually obtained some of the answers after the 2014 Revolution of Dignity. Unfortunately, the trends that were put in motion back then were not sufficiently widespread — and therefore not visible enough. The above trends include activism, focusing on public spaces, participant projects, open competitions. It is these things, inspired by the revolution and implemented in small-scale projects, that distinguish Ukrainian architecture. Similarly, the current war will become the basis for forming of our contemporary identity.

We can clearly foresee that spaces will be re-designed to be multi-functional. Efforts will be focused on basic infrastructure (renovation of schools, hospitals, nursery schools, centers providing administrative services, etc.), in-depth studying of rural areas, proximity to the ground level and natural materials, nomadic lifestyle. This is not an easy surface to stand on, but given our long history of dealing with multiple mishaps, it is hoped that our attentiveness and sensitivity will help us prevail in this struggle.

Foreword

Four architects hid in a bathroom to the sounds of an air raid siren. The place already had pillows to sit on, an extra lamp and candles. Ms. T. brought the glasses from the kitchen, asking if anyone would like tea or wine. The small bathroom was turned into a mini-living room in the first days of russian rocket strikes on Ukraine after the start of the invasion on February 24th 2022. Every Ukrainian, architect or not, had to reevaluate the environment they were functioning in. Some blocked windows of their detached houses with plywood boards. Others reinforced thin doors between rooms with a table turned to the side or dragged their sleeping matrass into the hallway, away from the windows. Everyone checked out the location of nearby basements and cellars, both in cities and in rural areas. Many opted for more cramped living conditions and shared spaces in a bid for a higher degree of safety.

New ways of using space became a mundane task for those who were forced to escape from the war. People spent days living in their cars, stuck in hundred-mile-long traffic jams. In search of safety and shelter, they stayed in gyms and school classrooms. While the russian aggression may have changed some people’s lives only in certain ways, for so many more the changes have been simply dramatic.

Many civilians chose to enter the Ukrainian Armed Forces to defend their Motherland and have been experiencing space in different ways since. The servicemen and women in the military, who now constitute a much larger part of society, will bring their experience home after the war. Now many of them are staying in forests and fields, village houses and hangars, abandoned school buildings or partially destroyed factories. Such experiences are unprecedented and will change the perception of our environment and ways of interacting with it even more than the revolution of 2014.

The events which seemed unbearably hot not so long ago have now cooled down sufficiently for us to dissect and explore them without the fear of being burnt. Having stayed in this difficult situation for quite a long time, we have possibly even acquired a better ability to analyze more recent (‘hotter’) events.

Context

The last several decades after we — again — got our independence as a country seem extremely event-packed, compared to the previous history of our identity in architecture. The previous period when this identity was as distinct as it is now happened during the times of the Cossack State. We have come a long way in our fight for independence — up until now, when our post-colonial self-awareness has finally started forming.

Looking back, we can only see traditional Ukrainian huts and baroque churches which can with certainty be claimed as being ‘purely ours’. Our cities are predominantly made up of buildings designed under the influence of foreign architects from Poland, Austria, Hungary or russia — or by these very architects themselves. Although quite a lot of people identifying themselves as Ukrainians lived on our lands, we have been under the influence of different states most of the time. Those dominating states imposed their own culture while prohibiting ours at the same time. Literature, music and folk culture could barely begin their development. The period of the Ukrainian People’s Republic was brief and rough, so there was not enough time for the development of such a slowly-changing sphere as architecture. Even though in different periods of occupation by different empires the national identity was partially allowed, its development was too limited. Of course we do not exclude mod- ern, neoclassicism or masterpieces of modernism developed by Ukrainian architects from our history. It seems obvious, though, that certain architectural samples featuring elements of Ukrainian culture appeared contrary to the overall external circumstances of the time. By and large, the national architectural school and tradition did not form.

In 1990s and the first decade of the 21st century the project vision of newly-independent Ukraine was not formulated clearly enough either. It was a difficult time when resources were scarce. No new distinct style or high-quality projects came out of that time (although post-modernism, popular among the avant-garde project creators of that time deserves to be researched further).

After 2010 and up till now, renown project organisations have been able to produce projects of a high quality, but the issue of identity as such remained largely unaddressed, since many architects did not really identify themselves as Ukrainians. It can be said with certainty, that numerous European projects appeared in Ukraine. The architects learnt English and got integrated into the global community, but at this stage of development many lacked the understanding of who we are, with our national tradition having been interrupted multiple generations earlier.

After gaining independence, the consciousness of the Ukrainian people still needed to awaken. The first call was the revolution of 2004. Soon after, in 2008 the possible soul-searching was curbed by the 2008 financial crisis. Only in 2014, as a result of the second revolution, the russian annexation of Crimea and the beginning of the war in eastern Ukraine, did the issue of ideology really resurface.

Tents and barricades became the first forms of something genuinely authentic. They were followed by activist projects aimed at mastering public spaces. They were mostly wooden structures, sometimes assembled jointly with the local residents. The need for open and fair architectural competitions appeared, which bore the first fruit. Mobilizing the civil society and active cooperation can truly be called the ‘Ukrainian’ feature of local architecture. It was these very activists, who marked themselves as Ukrainians and implemented this identity-based philosophy. The time of this identity-geared search has not been sufficient for a fullfledged development and acquiring distinctive features. Since 2014, during just 9 years, hundreds of small-scale projects were implemented all around Ukraine. The trend for research gained momentum.

After the beginning of the full-scale invasion, which has now been ongoing for almost a year, new unique circumstances and spatial experiences have appeared. They can become a new starting point for reclaiming our lost identity.

WHERE DO WE LOOK?

Someone will ask about architecture of the past and the present-day architecture of Ukraine. We need to clarify that we are talking about our war front lines. This is the most relevant issue now. This will determine our development. Of course the city processes are close to our hearts and much of the ‘could-be-better’ architecture is valuable, since it embodies the spirit of the era and thus needs to be preserved. One example is postmodernist experiments in late 1990s and early 2000s. There are also high-quality Central European projects which stand out, despite not possessing any signs of the Ukrainian identity, which their creators — given their Soviet occupation environment — either did not feel or could not discover at the time.

The boundary of today’s front line, including the architectural sphere, is not an obvious one. Some architects do not give much thought about their role in society. Such people continue creating projects for the rich and for the ultra-rich in order to make money and satisfy their ambitions. In my opinion, such approach is outdated. Oligarchs make their grand orders while most of the rest of the population can be classified as poor or extremely poor. Where is the end of this? When will architects work together with the community? When will they fight for the right to have open and fair tenders and competitions? In any case, architecture for the rich is only interesting to the rich themselves and to the poorest layers of society, for whom getting rich is like a fairytale dream. Ordinary — including reasonably well-off — people are more interested in the architecture which serves the whole of society, like a new library, a school, affordable and comfortable accommodation for their family.

Of course, war or no war, some will still create projects of kiosks made of the least eco-friendly materials, villas filled with various types of marble. Even though such architecture definitely has the right to exist, we are searching for an answer to other questions, so architects whose activity does not reflect their involvement in the war effort are not the focus of our attention. Yes, life goes on and we need to think about the future. However, those who have not really experienced and lived through the present situation will hardly gain a real understanding of where and how we need to proceed. I am talking of people who have not spent weeks and months in the state of emergency, who have not fought on the battlefield or helped in other ways.

Today, when different theories of city rebuilding are put forward (for some reason there is less talk of rebuilding villages), the war is still on — very much so! The war front spans overs thousands of kilometers and millions of lives.

Remember the group of four, hiding in the bathroom? After that rocket strike alert finished, they went back to removing old and peeling-off paint from the walls of an abandoned dor- mitory building. Together with other like-minded volunteers, who also felt the urge to act and help out. They refurbished the dorm and made it into a shelter for those fleeing the war-torn eastern regions of Ukraine. These people did not have a paying customer. The driving force was their desire to be involved, volunteer organizations, charity foundations from Ukraine and abroad, local authority figures helping them find the building and obtain the necessary permissions and approvals, ordinary citizens supporting the project with their donations and countless others willing to give a hand.

The full-scale military invasion needs to be a force for change and re-evaluation of the profession. Those who are fighting the war at their workplaces cannot ignore the changes the war has brought. Of course there are those who choose to ignore the war or misinterpret its lessons. The first ones continue on the course they used to follow before the invasion, others believe the future now is no different from the pre-24th-February future. Some believe that was is a perfect opportunity to share their old work with the world, without re-thinking or re-evaluating it. Many architects’ healthy urge in the initial stages of the war was to help create decent living conditions for those who have lost their home or the possibility to stay safe in their hometown. A trend for re-thinking the existing spaces became apparent. People were sheltered in schools, dorms, at friends’ apartments. Some architects explored the topic of modular accommodation — a controversial but plausible application of their talents.

The months that followed brought new challenges and the need to think about the issue in a more thorough way. The issue of Ukrainian identity in architecture has stayed out of public focus, despite the broadly discussed renovation and re-structuring of cities. Before February 24th many architects may not have fully identified themselves as Ukrainians, so they certainly didn’t focus on Ukrainian identity in their professional activity. It often happens that something seemingly hidden is actually staring us in the face.

Contemporary Ukrainian architecture is the architecture of those who have been touched by war. Those who are part of the Ukrainian history, those who see themselves as its part. Those who fight. They are right here, in front of us! Take a good look! They are the ones who live up to the challenge, those who find the solutions around without borrowing ideas from overseas. We have a new contemporary architecture now — and it’s different from the one we had before. Our identity is in mobilization and active involvement of the civil society — something which awed the world. An apartment housing eight instead of three, a house being renovated by refugees, the trenches of the military — this is the architecture of today. This is where all the meaningful trends of our immediate future will stem from. The frontline experience will then be applied elsewhere. The front line is the very place where experiments and research are needed. Here and now. The next frontier is public places like schools, kindergartens and libraries. Being polycentric while simultaneously enjoying the local reality is one ongoing trend, which may, nevertheless, disappear under the influence of borrowed ideas, which blossom quickly and then fade rapidly, like a flower cut off from its roots.

Roots, earth, the warmth of embrace are the images that are more important than their form. ‘Local’, ‘traditional’, ‘common’ are words that need to be filled with new meanings.

Setting aside emotions is difficult, but let’s move on to the final chapter of this piece and attempt to systematize everything above.

WHAT LESSONS CAN WE LEARN?

It’s a good question in any unpleasant situation. It is also one of the ways of somehow interacting with the tragedy of war and finding the strength to continue with our resistance. So what is there to be learnt?

The experience of the military is one of the most extreme and most interesting phenomena, as they are literally at the front lines. They literally exist at ground level. We, the military, live in it, interact with it in a physical way, we have it in front of our eyes during combat missions. We are actually fighting for the opportunity to give this particular piece of land a meaning that it deserves, we fight for our right to stay on this land. Mykhailo Kotsiubynsky described peasant uprisings carrying the slogan ‘Land and Freedom’, words which have remained with us through generations. It then becomes evident that our first direction for research is turning to nature and working with rural areas.

In every new place the military organize sleeping places, workplaces, kitchen, places to wash themselves. These are basic needs which require new answers in these conditions. So the notion of ‘home’ acquires a new meaning too. It is not about the ‘spirit of home’, as it may be viewed by those who lost their homes or were forced to leave them. It is about the most pragmatic understanding of the word. We re-think those basic needs and the means of satisfying them. A generator replaces the traditional power grid, a trench becomes a bed, firewood becomes a source of heating, a hole in the ground takes on the role of a sewage system. All furniture is foldable. This is where the issue of nomadic lifestyle becomes relevant. Relocating and doing it quickly has become an essential skill for millions of Ukrainians. New and creative housing forms need to address the demand for such a lifestyle. One more aspect is minimizing. War is about living on limited resources. How limited can they be, exactly? What can we go without? What is the necessary minimum?

We see the answer to this question in the countryside. We see what poor lives people can have without basic utilities, such as electricity, gas and water — something city dwellers casually regard as the norm. However, city dwellers may still recall the difficult life in the 90s or recent russian terrorist attacks on critical civilian infrastructure. So now city people have also been pushed to minimizing. It is the solutions to such difficult problems that we require today, particularly investing in the common facilities. It is those common areas that became shelters for the military and life-saving places for the civilian population.

Taking into account the experience of 2004 and 2014 revolutions, this list will need to be complemented with participant practices of common creation of spaces, working with any nearby materials (such as the Maidan barricades), new public spaces and creating key projects on a tender basis, making it more democratic and transparent for community control.

On a separate note, the notion of identity in architecture can be discussed, postcolonial experience of relatively newly-independent countries can be researched (it may be more relevant that European post-war rebuilding processes). We can rediscover the lost pages of our architectural history, creating modern popular publications (such as little-known practitioners V. Krichevskiy, O. Linetskiy or A. Anishenko, who are — unjustly so — likely to be unfamiliar to a typical Ukrainian student of architecture).

I admit that this list may be incomplete and imprecise. These notes resemble a sketch, created in the rapidly changing environment, being a foreword for a larger and deeper professional search.

November-December 2022, eastern part of the Kharkiv region, Ukraine Bohdan Volynskyi

ВІКТОРІЯ, 11 РОКІВ Ідея проєкту — створити зручності для наших воїнів в польових умовах. Тому я вигадала смітник, який легко поставити в будь-якому місці.

Це металеві трубочки, які встромляються в землю, а зверху надівається багаторазовий мішок.

VICTORIA, 11 Y. O.

The idea of the project is to create a more comfortable environment for our military in field conditions. This is why I came up with a rubbish bin, which is easy to place anywhere. It consists of metal tubes, which are stuck in the ground, with a multiple-use bag placed on the top.

МАКСИМ, 12 РОКІВ Це простий легкозбірний душ. Він складається з чотирьох основних металевих трубок, дев’яти допоміжних, дерев’яного піддону, баку для води з лійкою та тенту. Це чудовий середньо бюджетний варіант.

MAKSYM, 12 Y. O.

This is a simple easy-toassemble shower. It consists of four main metal tubes, nine supporting tubes, a wooden pallet, a water reservoir with a shower head and a tent. It is an excellent mid-range budget option.

КАТЯ, 10 РОКІВ

Для того, щоб нашим захисникам було більш зручно спати в окопі, я робила оздоблення для окопів. В нашому окопі є невеличка поличка для особистих речей, зручний гамак для відпочинку.

А щоб наші воїни не намокли від дощу, ми зробили навіс з щільної непромокаючої тканини.

Перемога за нами!

Слава Україні!

KATYA, 12 Y. O.

Героям Слава!

In order for our defenders to be more comfortable in the trenches, I have researched the idea of trench decking. Our trench features a small shelf for personal things, as well as a comfortable hammock for relaxation. In order for our warriors not to get wet under the rain, we have made a canopy tent made of heavy-duty waterproof material.

Victory will be ours!

Glory to Ukraine!

Glory to Heroes!

ІЛЛЯ, 13 РОКІВ Край необхідним в польових умовах, зокрема військовим на передовій, є зручно облаштований санітарно-гігієнічний куток. Він має бути ергономічним, легким в транспортуванні та такий, що можна швидко змонтувати.

В основі представленого проєкту — мотузки, що кріпляться до стовбура дерева, з кількома багатофункціональний гачками. На них, окрім базового комплекту навісних пристосувань, що пропонується (складний бак для води, дзеркало, органайзер з кишеньками для зубних щіток, гребінців, бритв), можна вішати рушники, одяг, тощо, тримаючи всі необхідні речі під рукою.

ILLYA, 13 Y. O.

What is really needed in field conditions, particularly for the military at the frontlines, is a comfortable-to-use sanitation and hygiene section. It needs to be ergonomic, easy to transport and quick to assemble.

The idea is based on attaching some ropes to a trunk of a tree with the help of several multifunctional hooks. In addition to being able to hold a basic set of appliances which we suggest is included (a foldable water reservoir, a mirror, an organizer with pockets for toothbrushes, combs and razors), the hooks can be used for keeping towels, clothing, etc., which allows for all the necessary items to be in order and easily accessible.

ДІМА, 9 РОКІВ Це місце де можуть зібратись кілька людей, щоб укритись від дощу, поговорити або поїсти.

Його легко зробити, якщо у тебе є лопата, непромокаючий навіс та кілька дерев. Місце для сидіння можна вкрити настилом з зібраних в лісі гілок, скріплених мотузкою.

DIMA, 9 Y. O.

This is a place where several people can come together in order to hide from the rain, talk or eat. It’s easy to make if you have a shovel, a waterproof canopy tent and a few trees. The place for sitting can be covered with small sticks, gathered in the forest and bound together with a rope.

ЛЮБОМИР, 12 РОКІВ Проєкт розроблено Любомиром Бєляєвом. Основна ідея цієї розробки допомогти військовим підтримувати чистоту та полегшити зберігання харчів та одягу. Органайзер зроблений із непромокаючої тканини подібної до брезенту та містить спеціальний каркас із алюмінієвих трубок.

LUBOMYR, 12 Y. O.

The project was created by Lubomyr Belyaev. The main idea of the project was to help the military keep their environment clean and to make storing food and clothing easier. The organizer is made of waterproof cloth, similar to canvas and is placed on a special carcass made of aluminum tubes.