• Українська
  • Русский
  • English
Where there is no law, but every man does what is right in his own eyes, there is the least of real liberty
Henry M. Robert

Architects are Reluctant, But the Monument Must be Built 

19 January, 1999 - 00:00

The Kyiv House of Artists has again displayed projects for a monument to
Independence. The show was visited by a strutting high-ranking commission
which was trying to grace with its attention all 33 sketches of the future
monument presented for the second round of the contest.

The noble faces bore a petrified mien of extreme seriousness: "Where
is it, the desired masterpiece to decorate the capital's main square?"
That the situation has now reached the point of no return and something
of what was exhibited will have to be declared a masterpiece is beyond
all doubt. There will be no third round, according to reliable sources,
and the city authorities, judging by the comments of deputy chief of the
Kyiv State Administration Stanislav Stashevsky made at the exhibition,
are all but bursting with enthusiasm to erect the monument as soon as possible
and, so to speak, incarnate a bold artistic idea in a weighty material
substance.

So what is in store for, as they would put it in the years of monumental
propaganda, capital natives and guests? What kind of magnificent symbol
of Independence shall we get? Reporting on the inauguration of the exhibition
to last, by the way, until January 15, a TV channel journalists branded
the extravaganza of the sculptural ideas of enthusiastic modern creators
with the comprehensive pejorative Sovdepiya. This viewpoint, in
essence is deeply penetrating, if rather narrow, for the exhibited works
featured not only a repeated mechanistic pretense to grandeur but also
merciless fantasy which must still be treated as the fruits of wild freedom
of creativity. There is, for example, an original composition whose author
must have been inspired by Ukraine's beautiful and matchless nature. Having
probably remembered that the present-day Khreshchatyk once was a place
where wild nature ran riot, an anonymous architect proposes to erect on
Independence Square a genuine sculptural sanctuary rather than a trivial
monument: the central composition displays grain-ears and wild running
mustangs with thick manes against a background of woods and waterfalls
- all in a down-to-earth realistic manner without any dainty stylization.

There also are other, no less original, projects. For instance, Valery
Sokolov imagined the newly-acquired independence of his motherland as an
Icarian superman reaching out his hands. The author must have forgotten
that the destiny of the mythological hero is slightly different from the
triumphal flight of Superman. So what? It looks nice! Some visitors were
taken aback by this surprisingly well-streamlined sketch. The author lost
his composure and came clean: the energetic young man he depicted turned
out to have been made at the request of air force veterans in honor of
the late aircraft designer Antonov. So why should a good thing go to waste?
Let it serve yet another glorious cause!

Have I covered the "most refined" projects? By no means. Deputy jury
chairperson of the contest Leonid Novokhatko told journalists that the
commission still had a couple of dozens of sketches at its disposal which
are out of the main exhibition due to non-compliance with the set standards.
One can only imagine what kind of gems these are. In addition, Mr. Novokhatko
complained about "old-fashioned thinking and stereotypic mentality." Well,
the exhibition is indeed brimming with plastic clichОs. For example, some
authors intend, without having consulted each other, to enrich Independence
Square with grandiose colonnades or arcades. First, this always impresses;
secondly, a statue (the larger the better) may be easily fitted in the
space between the columns and in the arches. It this principle that Ruslan
Kukharenko, Anatoly Kushch, and a couple of other contestants chose.

All this might have been all right, but creative individuals are poorly
aware of today's realities. Some kind of monument is bound to be built,
but then what? Vast free spaces inside the structure, all those niches,
nooks, and crannies could do tremendous harm to the monument while being
unlikely to inspire any special awe in the common people. For there is
no prophet in one's own country. So the monument cavities may be used by
the people for some peculiar needs in the dark. Now, that would be an outrage.

However, the situation with the laconic projects proposed by the contestants
is no better. Whatever we want, an Independence Monument should symbolize
the national spirit. And what is being proposed as this symbol? A weak-stemmed
flower with twisted petals, an acrobatic apparatus perhaps fit for a circus,
a massive trident aggressively snarling skywards, some hefty women with
a bandura player, spires, arches of triumph, and again horses. Some authors
would like to tell the whole history of Ukraine in persons, but Ukraine
did not suffer only in order to blush the rest of its life.

Passing from one sketch to another, one may hear contenders running
down their colleagues' versions. I asked one of them: "And what project
do you like in addition to your own?"

"Nothing else, it's all crap," he answered, an answer typical for all.

Thank God, at least the material appetites of the contestants went
down compared with the previous round: in fact, the exhibit featured no
projects costing over ten million hryvnias. But I have a feeling that even
this time it will all go down the drain, for the price is too high. Deputy
chairperson of the Ukrainian League of Artists Viktor Sydorenko recently
said wisely, "It will take a generation for plastic thought to catch up
with the time." I agree. And for the time being, we might have a small
pavilion built on Independence Square and set up there a permanent exhibition
of competing sketches to be periodically supplemented with new projects.
I that case we might even end up with something we deserve.

 

Issue: 
Rubric: