Ilya Bourim - Portfolio 1 Year

8/14/2019 Ilya Bourim - Portfolio 1 Year

1/78

PAGE

1

to my friend: my wife Yuliya

,


2/78

this page was blank

PAGE2


3/78

Tab f Ctt

Statement ---------------------------------------51GA Materials ------------------------------------6Installation @ ArtCycle --------------------------- 121GA Studio -------------------------------------141GA Studio: Precedent Study ---------------------- 161GA Visual Studies: Precedent Study -------------- 20

1GA Studio: Process ---------------------------- 221GA Studio: Final ------------------------------- 241GB Studio -------------------------------------321GB Studio: Process ---------------------------- 341GB Studio: Floor Plans ------------------------- 361GB Studio: Sections -----------------------------381GB Studio: Accesibility Diagram ------------------ 39

1GB Studio: Process - Massings and Floor Plates --- 401GB Studio: Top-Down & Bottom-Up -------------- 441GB Studio: Renderings ------------------------- 461GB Studio: Final Model ------------------------- 501GB Visual Studies ------------------------------521GA Architectural Culture 1 ----------------------- 54Making and Meaning 2008 ---------------------- 62

Making and Meaning 2008: Final ------------------70

PAGE

3


4/78

not so blank anymore

PAGE4


5/78

Achtct?

The way I currently understand the term architecture has morphed dramatically inthe last year. But my thinking in regards to master builders has not changed I stillbelieve that their time has come and gone. In Rem Koolhaas words, there are starchi-

tects, but the practice of architecture has become mostly a team practice. In terms ofdefinition, in some aspects, the architecture became vaguer the more I studied it, inothers it became more and more clear.Intelligent Design:

Role of the architect to me is of someone who brings about change. And although,

after last presidential campaign, the word change has become somewhat of a clich,in my opinion an Architect is someone who is exponentially questioning everything.

Whatever the Client asks for, an Architect should ask himself whether what the clientis asking for is something that needs to be there, or should its it is something that hejust wants because that is the way things are. I am not talking about minimalism and

removal of everything that is not at first glance crucial to the program, but as a futureArchitect I should be asking if for example, established traditions should be blindlyfollowed. The program requirements should be reviewed and things have to be added,

removed and left alone with the same rigor.Artificial Intelligence:Architecture is a really interesting field with many different areas of work and research.I would like to take advantage of my knowledge in Computer Science and bring it

into the realm of Architecture. I am not yet sure of what that entails, but this is reallyexciting and could offer an infinite number of possibilities. These could range from arti-ficial intelligence to robotics and beyond.

May 2009PAGE

5


6/78

PAGE6


7/78

PAGE

7

design in-tension1gA mATeriAls


8/78

PAGE8


9/78

PAGE

9

Construction and Design Team: Cynthia Aguirre-Leda, Francisco Alarcon Ruiz,Chris Barker, Rachel Perez Bitan, Ilya Bourim & Jessica Brush.


10/78

The initial design of the individual parts was created by Ilya Bourim. The rest of the design that evolved and responded to its sur-roundings was created by the rest of the design team. One of the goals for this project was to experiment with a material and see

how far it can be taken in terms of structure. The thin sheets of veneer seemed to become stronger when they were set in tension.We used thin steel cables to set the veneer in tension. To determine the bending limit of the veneer we used tensioners that werehand adjusted. We also found that depending on the grain orientation of the veneer, the elasticity of veneer changed greatly. If bentalong the grain, it was almost impossible to break, while a twist and bend against the grain would crack and break the veneer really

easily.Several size panels were assembled using 3 or 4 sheets of tensioned veneer. Depending on the requirements many other sizeswere also used. To make certain panels respond to the program and define space, a different orientation grain panels were used to

make the veneer bend and twist.

We intended to structure to close on itself, bend over the top and reconnect. It created several different types of spaces with differentexperiences in each.While meant as a structural experiment, this project resulted in an esthetically attractive overall design. Its dynamic and flexible

PAGE10


11/78

composition created a unique design everytime it was assembled. Currently, many

design team members keep pieces ofproject as art object in their living rooms.On February 26, 2009 it was set up as anarchitectural installation at the East Hol-

lywood ArtCycle, an annual art and cyclestreet show.

PAGE

11


12/78

PAGE12

fb.26

.09installation@th

eastHollyw

oodArtCycl


13/78

PAGE

13


14/78

PAGE14

sCHindLeRs FoLds1gA sTudio - preCedenT sTudy


15/78

PAGE

15Exterior view of one of the inclined walls


16/78

PAGE1

6

Below: Birdseye view of the garage and kitchenRight: Interior view of the living room on Schindlers part of the residence


17/78

PAGE

17


18/78

PAGE1

8


19/78

Left: West courtyard

Left Bottom: Rooftop glazing on theeast courtyardRight: Exterior fireplace in the westcourtyard

P

AGE

19


20/78

Schindlers House

Counterclockwise from Left:

Exploded AxonometricWest ElevationNorth Elevation

First Floor Plan

1gA:

VisuAl sTudies

PAGE2

0


21/78

Garage

Guest

Room

Bedroom

Living

Room

Living

Room

BedroomBath.

Bath.

P

AGE

21


22/78

A basswood study modelCounterclockwise from the Left:Front view, with sleeping area as open

above.Side view - the bottom portion is theliving room.Detail of the sleeping area from above.

Detail of looking through the workspaceonto the stair leading to the sleepingarea.

Detail of the only fully enclosed space:bathroom

1gA sTudio:

th c

PAGE2

2


23/78

P

AGE

23


24/78

PAGE

24


25/78

P

AGE

25


26/78

Basswood final modelClockwise from the Top:

Side view, with sleeping area as open above, living room belowFront view, the glazing below is living room, above sleeping area

Triangular window is the bathroom

Another view of the private courtyard and living room

Visible stair is going through the bathroomPAGE

26


27/78

P

AGE

27

B d fi l d l


28/78

Basswood final modelCounterclockwise from the Bottom:

Side view, looking at the workspace

Side view, looking at the workspace from the shared courtyardTop view, looking into the small courtyard outside of the sleeping area

PAGE

28


29/78

PAGE

29

Basswood final model


30/78

Basswood final modelCounterclockwise from the Left:Side view, bathroom window

Side view, looking at the workspace from the shared courtyardTop view, looking into the small courtyard outside of the sleeping area

Side view, looking at the workspace from the shared courtyardLooking at both models in the site

PAGE

30


31/78

P

AGE

31


32/78

PAGE

32institute FoR design And

textiLe teCHnoLogY


33/78

PAGE

33

Research The design of the fashion and textile


34/78

IDEA

Development

Conceptualize

FibresYamsKnitted FabricsLace and non-

woven fabricsApparel TextilesFurnishing Fabrics

Household FabricsIndustrial textilesConsumer Textiles

PatternSourcing Textiles

ManequinLive PersonBody Type

Testing

DrawPhotograph

Costing and

Economics

Marketing

Advertisement Community

Community

Display

Show

Studio 3

Studio 4

TEXTILEFASHION

Classroom 2

Classroom A/V

Studio 6

Classroom 3

Studio 7

Studio 8

Classroom 4

Classroom 6

Classroom 5

Studio 5

Classroom 1

Studio 1

Human

Material

Admin

Studio 2

PrototypeMacroHuman

Dierent Contexts

Material Testing Lab

Document

The design of the fashion and textileinstitute had certain program require-ments which included a media library and

a materials library. Instead of designingtwo spaces: one for each type of library;

the media library is combined with thematerials library into a single body thatruns through the spaces of the school andacts like the umbilical cord that connectsstudios, classroom spaces and adminis-

tration spaces. It is used to store materi-als, tools, books and magazines, worksamples, and other types of educational

materials. The library defines space aswell as provides structural support for thebuilding. It splits up, swelling up to create

space under it, as well as sitting spacefor the auditorium.The library is organized in such a way

that its contents progress in a way a tex-tile or a fashion product is developed. It

begins with an idea, goes on to the prod-uct research, then testing, development,

etc. By making the whole building evolvearound this idea, and in a way setting apredefined rhythm to the inner workings of

the school, we are also making studentsaware of this fact and make them ques-tion this set order and find other creative

ways to design clothes and textiles.A creative environment that is condu-cive to learning is every student is also ateacher. The role of student is redefined

where student is no longer a passive re-ceptacle of information from teachers, butan active participant in his/her education.

Each student and each professor be-

comes a node in the network of learningexperiences that create a true democratic

PAGE

34

1GB Studio: Process

educational experience where a dialog is


35/78

p gconstantly encouraged between studentsand teachers.

The teaching is not broken down in sec-tions but rather happens as a flow of

continued process. This is related to realworld experiences that happen in relationto other events in the world, and are notseparated on its own in a vacuum.

Admin

Gallery

Studios & Classrooms

Admin

Shop & Lab




PAGE

35


36/78

FIRST LEVEL PLAN: NTS

GROUND LEVEL PLAN: NTS

PAGE

36


37/78

Left: Birdseye view to the west

SECOND LEVEL PLAN: NTS

PAGE

37


38/78

LONGITUDINAL SECTION: NTS

Gallery

Studios

Shop

Admin

Info.

CROSS SECTION: 1/16 = NTS

Shop

Studios

Studios

Gallery

G

PAGE

38


39/78

1gB sTudio: pc


40/78

Left: Floor Plate ModelLeft Bottom: Floor plate model with exploration of enclosureBottom: Enclosure applied to

floor plates

PAGE

40


41/78

Top: plate model with explo-ration of enclosure

Top Right: Massing ModelRight: Massing Model

PA

GE

41


42/78

Top: floor plates and skin modelTop Right: massing model

Right: floor plate model with exploration ofenclosure

PAGE

42

Left: floor plate model withexploration of enclosure


43/78

Left Bottom: massing model

Bottom: massing model

PA

GE

43


44/78

PAGE

44


45/78

Counterclockwise from Left:Bottom-Up frame

Top-Bottom surface foldsBottom-Up frameCombination of Top-Down Bottom-Up

PA

GE

45


46/78

PAGE

46


47/78

Left: street view looking west, gallery space at the topTop: looking from the roof/exterior space to the courtyard

PA

GE

47


48/78

Top: street view looking southRight : looking from inside to the court-

yard, staircase leading to the gallery

space

PAGE

48


49/78

PAGE

49


50/78

PAGE

50

Fa :

Left Top: Birdseye view looking at the roof

of the gallery spaceLeft Middle: View from north looking at of-fice administration area

Left Bottom: View from north in contextRight: Birdseye view from the south


51/78

PA

GE

51

1gB VisuAl sTudies


52/78

PAGE

52


53/78

Rapid prototyping using lasercutter.

PA

GE

53


54/78

PAGE

54

Archcral Clr 1

mt t th iii

itata

Va Tat

st. ptbh, ra - 1920

Fig. 1 - Tatlin with his Model of the Monument,1920 (Strigalev, Back Cover)

This essay will present a historical account of one of most recognizable icons of the tweneth century architecture TheMonument to the 3rd Internaonal by Vladimir Tatlin. The purpose of this essay is not to create another descripon of drytechnical characteriscs of Tatlins tower, but to try to bring light into this oen obscured, not very well known and oen


55/78

contradictory subject. To nd a simple example of a contradicon, we can look at the current online edion of EncyclopediaBritannica, and in Vladimir Tatlin: Form/Factura by Margit Rowell. According to Encyclopedia Britannica, Tatlin was born inUkraine, in year 1885 in Kharkov1, while Rowell states that Tatlin was born in Russia, in Moscow in the same year. What could

account for this discrepancy, according to Rowell2, is the fact that Tatlins family moved from Moscow to Kharkov, soon aerhis birth. David Galenson in his arcle One-Hit Wonders introduces Vladimir Tatlin as a sculptor3. It is certainly true thatthroughout his career, Tatlin worked with mulple medium and materials and oen combined the art elds of painng, sculptureand architecture to create his works. But to bluntly introduce him as a sculptor when he was never formally trained as one is justanother example of how lile do we know about him. What this seems to introduce is the fact that Russian and soviet arstsgot disconnected by the communist regime from their Western counterparts and much of the Russian avant-garde art remainedunknown to the rest of the world unl the collapse of the Soviet Union.

The Artist:

In order to beer understand the work of an architect, it is oen important to understand where he or she originates from.Rowell helps to place Tatlins life in historical context: he was een years younger than Malevich, eight years older thanMayakovsky, four years younger than Picasso 4. Every one of these arsts had a major inuence on Tatlin. Camilla Gray in herarcle The Russian Contribuon to Modern Painng, states the following on Tatlins 1913 encounter with Picasso:

Posing as a musician, Tatlin got into a conversaon with Picasso, whom he much admired. [] Picasso, taking him for a musician,showed him his work. Tatlin was enormously impressed and oered to sweep Picassos oor if he would only allow him to stay

with him. It is reported that Picasso was furious with him discovering that he was a painter and chased him out of doors5.According to Gray, upon returning to Moscow, Tatlin began working on his rst reliefs. It should not be misunderstood thatTatlin started to follow the work of Picasso, who according to Rowell, remained a painter in the classical sense of the word6.Using reliefs, Picasso extended his painngs beyond the picture frame, whereas Tatlin as an analycal cubist painter sought toeliminate illusions of depth, to split open the volume of a given object and align its dierent faces parallel to the surface of thecanvas, Picasso aempted, in these construcons, to detach the picture planes from the surface of the canvas and reassemblethem in front of the wall7.Gray states that Tatlins works are analogues to Picassos works of the same period, although Tatlinhas pursued his ideas to a far more abstract conclusion.8 This could signify beginning of Tatlins movement towards a threedimensional medium, while aening his composion in two dimensions. It was a radical turn away from what he was originally

trained in at the Moscow School or Painng, Sculpture and Architecture9. Even though it might seem as a radical transformaon,1Constructivism. Encyclopedia Britannica. 2008. 10 Nov. 2008 .2Rowell, Margit. Vladimir Tatlin: Form/Factura. Soviet Revolutionary Culture 7 (1978): 83.3Galeson, David. One-hit Wonders. Historical Methods Summer 2005: 38.4Rowell, Margit. Vladimir Tatlin: Form/Factura. Soviet Revolutionary Culture 7 (1978): 83.5Gray, Camilla. The Russian Contribution to Modern Painting. The Burlington Magazine 1 May 1960: 210.6Rowell, Margit. Vladimir Tatlin: Form/Factura. Soviet Revolutionary Culture 7 (1978): 88.7Rowell, 89.8Gray, 210.9Rowell, Margit. Vladimir Tatlin: Form/Factura. Soviet Revolutionary Culture 7 (1978): 84.

PA

GE

55

one should consider the fact that before the studies at the University, he began his painters career by painng religiousicons10, that in Russian tradion, are mostly two dimensional representaons of the religious characters and events. MargitRowell also reports that between 1909-1910, Tatlin began exhibing fairly regularly in the principal avant-garde exhibions inOdessa, Moscow, and Petrograd and was friendly with most of the signicant arsts of the period. 11


56/78

, , g y g p

Politics and Art:Tatlin clearly believed that an arst had an acve role in polical aairs of the new country, joining nothing less than the ranksof the soviet propaganda machine. John Bowlt, in his introducon to Tatlins Memorandum, writes that in 1918 Tatlin workedin the Moscow Branch (or Collegium) of the Visual Arts Secon of the Peoples Commissariat of Enlightenment (IZONKP). 12IZONKP was an organizaon responsible of educaon a largely illiterate Russian populaon through visual images. AlthoughRussian arsts had been essenally apolical prior to 1917, they nonetheless sought a substanve modicaon of theconcepon of the work of art13 Camilla Gray writes that the arst of the new soviet society had a new and dierent roleand these roles were endlessly discussed14. Furthermore, Gray claims that:

Tatlins construcvists, declaring art easel-painng to be dead, an anachronism in the new centres of acvity in industry.They declared the arst-engineer to be the role of the arst in a communist society.15

This underlines the strength of the communist movement in Russia where the role of old, established and very tradionalprofessions was redened.

Tatlin at Sea

Tatlins love for the sea, proves to be another major inuence on his works. Rowell states that by the age of seventeen, [Tatlin]had run away from home and joined the Merchant Marine. Furthermore, states that Tatlins naval years had inuenced mostof his art and design throughout his life16. This is hard to contest aer a second look at model of the Monument to the 3rdInternaonal. Margit Rowell proposes that the general silhouee of the monument, including its heeling to one side, may wellhad a naucal inspiraon found also in some of the arsts theater designs. Furthermore, Margit proposes that the masts, therigging and the lted smokestacks of the ships, echo in many Tatlins works, and it is unmistakably apparent in the Monumentto the 3rd Internaonal. 17

10Rowell, Margit. Vladimir Tatlin: Form/Factura. Soviet Revolutionary Culture 7 (1978):84.11Rowell, 84.12 Bowlt, John, Vladimir Tatlin, and S. Dymshits-Tolstaia. Memorandum from the Visual Arts Section of the Peoples Commissariatfor Enlightenment to the Soviet of Peoples Commissars: Project for the Organization of Competitions for Monuments to Distin-

guished Persons (1918). Design Issues 1 (1984): 70.13Rowell, 10014 Gray, Camilla. The Russian Contribution to Modern Painting. The Burlington Magazine 1 May 1960: 210.15 Gray, 21016Rowell, Margit. Vladimir Tatlin: Form/Factura. Soviet Revolutionary Culture 7 (1978):10017Rowell, Margit. Vladimir Tatlin: Form/Factura. Soviet Revolutionary Culture 7 (1978):103

PAGE

56

Constructivism:

In order to tackle the concept of the Tatlins monument, it is important to understand the term construcvism. Accordingto Encyclopedia Britannica, Tatlin was the rst arst who began working with materials, the way a construcvist would.F th E l di B it i t t th f ll i th bj t f t i


57/78

Furthermore, Encyclopedia Britannica states the following on the subject of construcvism:

The expatriate Russian sculptors Antoine Pevsner and Naum Gabo joined Tatlin and his followers in Moscow, and upon

publicaon of their jointly wrien Realist Manifesto in 1920 they became the spokesmen of the movement. It is from themanifesto that the name Construcvism was derived; one of the direcves that it contained was to construct art.18

Construcvist movement created followers in many disciplines of the art world. Chrisna Lodder writes that for Construcvistsin Russia and the West, Tatlins Tower was a talisman, adumbrang a synthesis of art and architecture, and ulmately, in thebrave new world, of art and everyday life. 19

Tower: The Precedents

Tatlins tower although a revoluonary in concept, is not without precedents. Many of enne-Louis Boulle unbuilt projectshave similar grandiosity, monumentality and certainly the outcome. Rowell menons the following as the precedents to theTatlins Tower: Eiel Tower, Boccionis 1912 Development of a Bole in Space, Breughels Tower of Babel, Rodins project fora Tour du Travail of 1894-97, Hermann Obrists 1902 project for socialist monument, the chimneys of Gaudis Casa Mila inBarcelona, the Great Mosque at Samarra, Borrominis SantIvo della Sapienza, oil wells at Baku.20 Kestus Zygas discusses howTatlins Towers programmac antecedents may be found in public discussion about monumental propaganda launched circaJune 1918 while the Towers physical precursor was Tatlins cubo-futurist project for a Monument to the October Revoluondated March 191921. It is necessary to understand that the Tatlins Tower was a project intended for the most part as aninstrument of social engineering and not as a structure or a monument. John Milner states: Tatlins Tower was closer in

appearance to an apparatus than to a building or a monument, in its combinaon of skeletal framework and moving parts.22 Theupwards spiraling form of the Monument is not a faux pas. According to Milner as we move towards the top of the tower, theinterior space also decreases. In so doing they provide a perfect parallel of the evoluon of decision-making and power whichemerges from the broad earth to the largest assembly hall, and thence upwards to bodies both smaller and higher in authorityand altude. 23

Tower: The Form

Margit Rowell describes the Towers form: a giganc iron spiral wrapped around a cone and inclined at a 45-degreeangle. Vercally aligned within it were four glass enclosures, each a dierent shape, serving a dierent governmental acvity,and revolving at a dierent speed24. Rowell also menons that the internal geometric forms of the tower were to rotate at the

18Constructivism. Encyclopedia Britannica. 2008. 10 Nov. 2008 .19Lodder, Christina. Tatlin. Baden-Baden and Moscow. The Burlington Magazine 136 (1994): 46.20Rowell, Margit. Vladimir Tatlin: Form/Factura. Soviet Revolutionary Culture 7 (1978):10421Zygas, Kestutis P. Punins and Sidorovs Views of Tatlins Tower. Oppositions Sept. 1977: 69.22Milner, John. Vladimir Tatlin and the Russian avant-garde. Frome: Yale University Press, 1983:154.23Milner, 160.24Rowell, Margit. Vladimir Tatlin: Form/Factura. Soviet Revolutionary Culture 7 (1978):103

PA

GE

57

dierent speeds according to their specic funcons25. Margit relates the Towers super and substructures that housed themechanisms to rotate the internal structure in naucal terms: it recalls the sailboats light, open, evanescent silhouee andthe heavy machinery, keel, and ballast below deck.26


58/78

Tower: The Program

The program of the Tower according to Zygas was a child of Tatlins own creaon. Zygas writes that it is conceivable thatTatlin was not given a program: we surmise Tatlin improvised as he went along, adding and deleng facilies at will, and, ineect, wrote his own program27. Rowell gives a throughout descripon of the Towers program:

The lowest, a broad-based cylinder, was designed for annual meengs of the legislave body and was to revolve once a year.The second, a pyramid, would house monthly execuve meengs and revolve once a month. The two uppermost chambers,a narrow cylinder and a hemisphere, would serve respecvely as an informaon bureau and to emit propaganda to thestreet. The cylinder was to revolve once a day, the hemisphere, hourly. Radio antennae and lm projectors were to be rigged

to the top.28

Tower: The Materials

Milner states that Tatlin worked as a creave person and not as a man as a man fullling predetermined funconalrequirements by the appropriate disposion of materials.29

Although it is well known that the model of the 3rd Internaonal was wood, cast-iron and glass, it is only assumed that thenal would have been constructed of the same materials.

Contradictions:

Although this project is visually well-known, there is very lile academic discussion that focuses on many aspects of thisproject. It could very well be due to the Tatlins status that is vaguely lost somewhere between arst, sculptor and architect.In any case, the project does produce controversy and therefore some discussion is inevitable. Immediately aer theconstrucon of the project in 1920, A. Sidorov in his review of the Tower gives a rather harsh stab at the Monument tothe 3rd Internaonal by calling it useless and suggesng it has no value30. John Milner on the other hand while doing amore throughout invesgaon of the Tatlins project, makes the following statement: Tatlin had radically adjusted his own

standpoint, moving from construcon dened by material characteriscs, to a more diagrammacal construcon relatedto the process of government and its role within the social body. In providing a social of construcon, Tatlin evolved apioneering and a vigorously dimension to his process work, disnctly communist in its commitment.31 Furthermore, Robert25Rowell, Margit. Vladimir Tatlin: Form/Factura. Soviet Revolutionary Culture 7 (1978):10426Rowell, 103.27Zygas, Kestutis P. Punins and Sidorovs Views of Tatlins Tower. Oppositions Sept. 1977: 7028Rowell, Margit. Vladimir Tatlin: Form/Factura. Soviet Revolutionary Culture 7 (1978):10329Milner, John. Vladimir Tatlin and the Russian avant-garde. Frome: Yale University Press, 1983:17530

Sidorov, A. Review of N. Punins Pamiatnik III Internatsionala, Pechat I Revoliutsia, (1921):7531Milner, John. Vladimir Tatlin and the Russian avant-garde. Frome: Yale University Press, 1983:160PAGE

58

Hughes says that the Monument to the 3rd Internaonal remains the most inuenal non-existent object of the twenethcentury, and one of the most paradoxicalan unworkable, probably unbuildable metaphor of praccality.32

It also seems like Sidorov disagrees with another cric Nikolai Punin, saying that Punin interpreted the design of the Monumentto the 3rd Internaonal incorrectly: we categorically disagree that it is based on an organic synthesis of architectural, sculptural,


59/78

y g y g g y , p ,and painng principals. Sidorov says that he is unable to see any harmoniously related forms whatsoever in Tatlins project.33John Milner on the other hand says that: This apparent spiraling upward and forwards would be enforced by opcal impressions

for an observer moving round and through the structure, and emphasized by the recession abruptly expressed in the diminuonof the curves of the spiral towards the apex of the tower. In addion John states that: the circular movements of the hallswithin, contrasng with the staonary spirals, set up a mobile relaonship.34

Is it falling or is it flying?

Sidorov also makes a observes that whatever comrade Punin might say with great inspiraon about the spiral expressingcontemporaneity and its dynamism, all the same we feel that the projects evaluaon does not convey the desired idea

successfully. He then adds: the enre structure is inclined, and instead of a struggle towards the sky, it gives an impression ofcollapse.35 David Galenson has a dierent opinion and states the following: the tower appeared to lean forward, bet ng aprogressive new form of government. John Milner suggests the following: in interpreng the lean of the tower, it is reasonableto suggest that it signies a forward stride.36

Utopia and USSR:

Almost all of early communist ideals in one way or another grow out of utopian social roots. Tatlins tower has not escaped

this percepon, but in a way is the communist ideal of utopia. Perhaps, this is one of the main reasons it could not be built. Italmost seems like it was meant to fail. But Milner states that in the 1920s USSR the material realizaon of Utopia had become atheorecal possibility and requirement 37. And the Soviet government, at least at the beginning, was prepared to provide socialand material support to further utopian ideals. Aer the construcon of the model of tower, the construcvist and utopian idealsmerged.38

Final Notes:

In conclusion, the Monument to the 3rd Internaonal was never realized because of nancial and technical problems inthe post-revoluonary period39 But maybe, just like the Russian communist experiment it was all that it needed to be. A

32Robert Hughes, The Shock of the New. New York: Afred A. Knopf, (1991):92.33Sidorov, 75.34Milner, John. Vladimir Tatlin and the Russian avant-garde. Frome: Yale University Press, 1983:15535Sidorov, A. Review of N. Punins Pamiatnik III Internatsionala, Pechat I Revoliutsia, (1921):7536Galeson, David. One-hit Wonders. Historical Methods Summer 2005: 39.37Milner, John. Vladimir Tatlin and the Russian avant-garde. Frome: Yale University Press, 1983:18038Milner, 180.39Lloyd, Frances. Tatlin Exhibition in Moscow. The Burlington Magazine June 1977: 468.

PAGE

59

curious issue comes up when one tries to idenfy why Tatlin aributed the shapes of the geometric forms inside the Towerto specic programs. For example, why was the pyramid, a symbol of the Masonic movement, assigned to the execuvegovernment branch? But John Milner has a dierent explanaon: he states that the pyramid in the monument is used to relatethe monumentality of the project to one of the ancient wonders of the world.40 According to him, the project readily recalledand challenged the monumental Wonders of the Ancient World.This was viable possibility in the early age of the soviet made


60/78

g p y y gcommunism. What followed the 1920 and the construcon of the Monuments model was naon-wide man-made famine thatkilled millions and denoted the end of communist utopia in soviet Russia. Tatlin, even though he lived another 20 years, had

produced not a single work that comes anywhere close to his chef-doeuvre the Monument to the 3rd Internaonal.

Works Cited

Bowlt, John, Vladimir Tatlin, and S. Dymshits-Tolstaia. Memorandum from the Visual Arts Secon of the Peoples Commissariatfor Enlightenment to the Soviet of Peoples Commissars: Project for the Organizaon of Compeons for Monuments toDisnguished Persons (1918). Design Issues 1 (1984): 70-74.

Construcvism. Encyclopedia Britannica. 2008. 10 Nov. 2008 .

Galeson, David. One-hit Wonders. Historical Methods Summer 2005: 38-3.

Gray, Camilla. The Russian Contribuon to Modern Painng. The Burlington Magazine 1 May 1960: 205-11.

Robert Hughes, The Shock of the New. New York: Afred A. Knopf, (1991):92.

Lodder, Chrisna. Tatlin. Baden-Baden and Moscow. The Burlington Magazine 136 (1994): 46-48.

Lloyd, Frances. Tatlin Exhibion in Moscow. The Burlington Magazine June 1977: 467-68.

Milner, John. Vladimir Tatlin and the Russian avant-garde. Frome: Yale University Press, 1983.

Rowell, Margit. Vladimir Tatlin: Form/Factura. Soviet Revoluonary Culture 7 (1978): 83-108.

Sidorov, A. Review of N. Punins Pamiatnik III Internatsionala, Pechat I Revoliutsia, (1921):217-218

Strigalev, A., and Jurgen Harten. Vladimir Tatlin Retrospekve. Dusseldorf: Dumont, 1993.

Zygas, Kestus P. Punins and Sidorovs Views of Tatlins Tower. Opposions Sept. 1977: 68-75.

40Milner, John. Vladimir Tatlin and the Russian avant-garde. Frome: Yale University Press, 1983:161PAGE

60


61/78

PA

GE

61


62/78

PAGE

62

expLosion & impLosion

mAKing And meAning 2008


63/78

PAG

E63

mak a ma 2008

Taf 2d t 3d


64/78

The initial parts of this object were de-

rived from solid wood cubes that werecut according to an earlier design draw-ing. The cubes were cut; the pieces

were reattached using tape and thencut according to a subsequent pattern,which was on another side of the cube.There were cuts made on another side

of the cube and the process repeatedagain. There were total five cuts percube and there was eight total cubes

cut in this design. Next the tempo-rary holding tape was removed andeach cube was reassembled using a

new typology. There were two typolo-gies used in this design: one where thetotal shape was exploding, the otherthe shape was imploding. The second

shape was based on the first; in factit was assembled in the reverse orderfrom the first shape, to create the op-

posite effect. There are four explodingunits and four imploding units. In thefollowing stage, the eight elements were

assembled together to create a dynamicwhole. Although the new design mightlook like many different parts, it is infact assembled from only two types of

similar elements: one imploding, oneexploding.

PAGE

64


65/78


66/78

PAGE

66


67/78

Left: sequence of shots describing the

interiorRight: A detail

PAG

E67


68/78


69/78



PAG

E69


70/78

PAG

E

70


71/78

PAGE

71

m+m 2008 FinAL


72/78

PAG

E

72

sCi-Arc mak a

ma 2008

Fal prjc:

This is a three member project thatconsisted of combining 3 individual


73/78

consisted of combining 3 individual

elements that were designed by eachdesigner. It seemed that the integrationof potentially very different elements to

create one whole was the main goal.The elements played on each othersdynamic features to provide continuity in

the final design while at the same timemerging each part with each other. We

tried to preserve individuality of eachpiece as well as to create a new whole,

where it would become impossible totake the whole apart.

Design and Construction teammembers: Rachel Perez Bitan, IlyaBourim & Andrew Brombach



PAG

E73


74/78

PAG

E

74


75/78

PAG

E75


76/78

PAG

E

76

Design and Construction teammembers: Rachel Perez Bitan, Ilya Bourim & Andrew Brombach - August 2008


77/78

PAG

E77


78/78

PAG

E

78

Documents

Ilya Bourim - Portfolio 1 Year