author: Lidiya Manolova photos: Vasil Makarinov
Over 11 500 followers on Facebook. Traveling exhibition in Varna, Burgas, Kazanlak, Stara Zagora, Plovdiv, Yambol, Gabrovo. Nominated for "Event of the Year" in the WhATA Architecture Awards 2017. a book-catalogue that collected examples of modernist architecture in the country in the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s. Dozens of interviews, articles and invitations to participate in TV and radio formats. The page "Bulgarian Architectural Modernism" by Vasil Makarinov and Teodor Karakolev is a phenomenon that shows that enthusiasm and noble intentions are inspiring.
We talk to its two founders, Vasil Makarinov and Teodor Karakolev, to get involved in promoting the topic of the attitude towards the architecture we have inherited, pass by every day and live with.
Last year was very active and successful for the Bulgarian Architectural Modernism page. At what point in your activity do we find you now?
V.M: We are returning from the opening of the exhibition in Yambol, where we were surprised to find magnificent examples of buildings from the period we are interested in. Gabrovo is next. In fact, we have begun to present the photographs, a testimony to this precious architectural heritage, first in the towns that are represented in the exhibition, but now we are being written to from other places. There are buildings of modernism everywhere in Bulgaria. In the period after the Balkan Wars and the First World War, towns were built up and the population grew rapidly. The big industrial centres developed - Gabrovo, Sofia, Yambol. The generation of architects, who graduated first in Austria, then in Germany and the Czech Republic, began to design. The interest in architecture was very strong then.
Yambol, the Mineral Bath, architect Alensander Kurtev, 1938
How do you explain this public interest in the topic of modernism in architecture of the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s? In general, architectural issues in this country usually interest only a narrow circle of people...
V.M: The interest in the subject is really huge and this is a surprise even for us. Maybe because these are buildings that we see every day. They were created only 70 - 80 years ago, people still remember and keep the memory of their construction and history. But the period is not much overlapped in the teaching at UASG. Nor is there much research, apart from the work of Arch. Lyubinka Stoilova, almost the only one who studies modernism. And the topic is huge! The apartment buildings of the pre-war period actually shape the look of our cities. This building across the street (we're sitting in a restaurant on Hristo Belchev Street) is from the 1940s.
How do you know?
V.M.: It has all the scars. At a certain point, even when you just walk the streets, you start to see them. Their architecture is rational, devoid of unnecessary ornaments, functional, in the spirit of what is done all over Europe. Their beauty is not in the decoration and ornament, but in the play of the individual component volumes, materials and surfaces, the grasp of which requires erudition and knowledge. That is why I created the Facebook page, to share the material and information I have gathered about the period.
| Sofia, apartment building, bul. "Vasil Levski, architect unknown, circa 1929 |
How do you work together, what is the role of each of you?
V.M: I am the person who digs into the archives, takes pictures, talks to the owners, goes into the buildings and apartments. I'm a researcher. That's my passion. It all started with my thesis on the manifestations of modernism in the apartment buildings of the 1920s and 1930s in Sofia. And Theodore is a journalist, looking for the connections with architects, with their heirs.
What do you see as the main mission of your platform?
T.K. a: To create an active attitude towards the environment that surrounds us. We would like to form this very attitude, to bring people out of their indifference, to see and appreciate architectural heritage. That's why we are very keen on good examples. For example, the restorations of Kantardzhiev's house in Sofia or the Sea Casino in Burgas show things can happen in the right way when this architecture is accepted as a value. Unfortunately, what is more often seen on our page are the bad examples...
| Sofia, house of Angel Kantardzhiev, bul. "Tsar Liberator", arch. Ivan Vasilyov and Dimitar Tsolov, project from 1932. |
Yes, but when you show bad modern interventions in buildings, many people don't see where the problem is. Is architecture a matter of taste?
В. M.: No, of course. We as historians have no right to judge aesthetically. Modernism exists visibly in our urban environment, it is the style with the strongest presence. But buildings today are not counted as beautiful because of the lack of ornament... To such an extent are attitudes imposed to accept ornament as a sign of aesthetic value that ornaments are sometimes pasted on buildings with extremely fine detail! One example - on Slaveykov Square they reconstructed a whole building, right next to the COOP Hotel on the corner. It was a very nice building. It didn't have that horrible, kitschy to the point of being plain finish on the top floor, there were no ornaments... It was a nice example of very early modernism, but someone decided it was very boring!
The word modernism entered many people's vocabulary. What is there to know about it, apart from the fact that it connects us with the whole of Europe, unites us with the rest of the civilised world?
В. M: That's right, it's no coincidence that historians call this architecture international. That is to say, it is not so much connected with the local, but permeates everywhere.
Т. К. a: Modernism is not just international, that's just one interpretation. It often includes the specificity of the local. At the end of the 1920s, we are both European and there are specificities of the local architecture. The references are sometimes purely decorative, visual. The mass shearing never fully responds to the modernist manifesto. In Bulgaria and elsewhere, modernism is a framework within which one can work. It is not so dogmatic in its manifestations.
| Gabrovo, residential building of Btoyu Radev, ul. "Aprilovska Street, architect Neno Yamantiev, 1935-38. |
Which architects are today's heirs of modernism?
T.K.: The house is built from the inside out, from comfort to aesthetics - this is a basic principle of modernism. One does not come at the expense of the other, but it starts from function. Those architects who emphasize function are today's heirs of modernism.
What is your main concern, the main problem of buildings of the modernist period today?
V.M. a: Not to forget authenticity. It is key to historical memory. Not to have a rough replacement. In spite of all the changes, the style is very resistant, it's wiry, and it's a great chance that with an awareness the buildings will be well preserved.
Whose responsibility do you think it is - the owners, the public, the institutions?
Т. K.: I think the responsibility starts from the bottom up... But it is also a two-way process. We have set the framework for modernism, but it could be for any other period. When large sites - like the Largo, Pliska - are made in a butaphoric way, it is normal that this will affect the homes, the buildings. A lot of things depend on the people in the entrance. Should we change the windows or keep the old ones? We should not take these things for granted, but think of them as an asset. But usually we say - it's old, so it's bad. And it isn't. History is in the living environment we inhabit. People should feel proud and happy to inhabit old buildings. The majority downtown live in nearly 100 year old co-ops. And they are healthy, functional. But for some reason they don't feel they are valuable and worthy of preservation. The authenticity is in all the details we're talking about - the doorknob, the windows, the front doors - things that are hard for institutions to control.
V.M.: There's a terrible wrong tendency - when they make renovations, the owners insist on seeing the result. Somehow to note that he has invested funds, the new to scream.
T.K.: That's why we should talk about the good examples. To have a positive reaction - from the media, from other people. That will make everybody want to do the right thing.
| Plovdiv, Protohristovi's house, ul. "Emile de Lavele No. 4, architect Stoyko Stoykov, 1936 |
What is the right way in your opinion?
V.M.: Here is the role of architects. The city is a living organism, some things are demolished, fall down, but you can always fit the modern into the historical part of the city without standing out, getting in the way, imitating. I get most annoyed by imitations. They are the most vulgar and vulgar thing. Modernism avoids this - in old Plovdiv, for example, there are modernist buildings that fit perfectly into the environment. Without imposing, without getting in the way. From today's point of view we should do the same. The tobacco warehouse in Plovdiv, for example, does not need to be rebuilt as it was. We need a modern approach that complements history. Only if you have the full documentation, the original documentation, and the original materials, then you can approach reconstruction... Otherwise it's just a bad fiction.
T.K.: Architecture is part of the urban language, we are all users of it, more or less. It creates the image of the city. That's why we have to look at this heritage in this way; the status of cultural property often kills the consciousness of what actually needs to be preserved. Why are you not allowed to touch anything? It shifts the responsibility onto the institutions, obliterates people's consciousness. And that is a responsibility - a personal one, of the owner. There is no collective responsibility. It is important to know what one owns.