From Monoskop
(Redirected from Vkhutemas)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Lyubov Popova with her students.
V.A. Favorsky and N.N. Kupreyanov with students, 1926.
Vladimir Krinsky with students.
Vladimir Krinsky with students.
Vladimir Krinsky with students.
VKhUTEMAS class of 1922-23.
Nikolai Ladovsky with students, 1922-23.
Nikolai Ladovsky with students, 1929.
Nikolai Ladovsky with students.
Students, 1925.
Students, 1927.
Moisei Ginzburg with students, 1929.
Arkhitektura. Raboty arkhitekturnogo fakulteta Vkhutemasa, 1920-1927, 1927, PDF, JPGs.
VKHuTein, 1929, PDF, JPGs.
From VKhUTEMAS to MARKhI, 1920-1936, 2005, Log.

Vkhutemas (Вхутемас, acronym for Высшие художественно-технические мастерские; Higher Art and Technical Studios) was the Russian state art and technical school founded in 1920 in Moscow. The workshops were established by a decree from Vladimir Lenin[1] with the intentions, in the words of the Soviet government, “to prepare master artists of the highest qualifications for industry, and builders and managers for professional-technical education.”[2][3] The school had 100 faculty members[4] and an enrollment of 2500 students.[5] Vkhutemas was formed by a merger of two previous schools: the Moscow School of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture and the Stroganov School of Applied Arts.[6] The workshops had artistic and industrial faculties; the art faculty taught courses in graphics, sculpture and architecture while the industrial faculty taught courses in printing, textiles, ceramics, woodworking, and metalworking.[7] It was a center for three major movements in avant garde art and architecture: constructivism, rationalism, and suprematism. In the workshops, the faculty and students transformed views of art and reality with the use of precise geometry with an emphasis on space, in one of the great revolutions in the history of art.[1] In 1926, the school was reorganised under a new rector and its name was changed from “Studios” to “Institute” (Вхутеин, Высший художественно-технический институт), or Vkhutein. It was dissolved in 1930, after political and internal pressures throughout its ten-year existence. The school's faculty, students, and legacy were dispersed into as many as six other schools.[8]

Basic course[edit]

A preliminary basic course was an important part of the new teaching method that was developed at Vkhutemas, and was made compulsory for all students, regardless of their future specialization. This was based on a combination of scientific and artistic disciplines. During the basic course, students had to learn the language of plastic forms, and chromatics. Drawing was considered a foundation of the plastic arts, and students investigated relationships between color and form, and the principles of spatial composition.[2] Akin to the Bauhaus's basic course, which all first year students were required to attend, it gave a more abstract foundation to the technical work in the studios. In the early 1920s this basic course consisted of the following:

  1. the maximal influence of colour (given by Lyubov Popova),
  2. form through colour (Alexander Osmerkin),
  3. colour in space (Aleksandra Ekster)
  4. colour on the plane (Ivan Kliun),
  5. construction (Alexander Rodchenko),
  6. simultaneity of form and colour (Aleksandr Drevin),
  7. volume in space (Nadezhda Udaltsova) and
  8. tutelage by Wladimir Baranoff-Rossine.[9]

Art faculty[edit]

The primary movements in art which influenced education at Vkhutemas were constructivism and suprematism, although individuals were versatile enough to fit into many or no movements—often teaching in multiple departments and working in diverse media. The leader figure of suprematist art, Kazimir Malevich, joined the teaching staff of Vkhutemas in 1925,[10] however his group Unovis, of the Vitebsk art college that included El Lissitzky, exhibited at Vkhutemas as early as 1921.[11] While constructivism was ostensibly developed as an art form in graphics and sculpture, it had architecture and construction as its underlying subject matter. This influence pervaded the school. The artistic education at Vkhutemas tended to be multidisciplinary, which stemmed from its origins as a merger of a fine arts college and a craft school. A further contributor to this was the generality of the basic course,[12] which continued after students had specialised and was complemented by a versatile faculty. Vkhutemas cultivated polymath masters in the Renaissance mold, many with achievements in graphics, sculpture, product design, and architecture.[13] Painters and sculptors often made projects related to architecture; examples include Tatlin's Tower, Malevich's Architektons,[14] and Rodchenko's Spatial Constructions. Artists moved from department to department, such as Rodchenko from painting to metalworking. Gustav Klutsis, who was head of a workshop on colour theory, also moved from painting and sculptural works to exhibition stands and kiosks.[15] El Lissitzky, who had trained as an architect, also worked in a broad cross section of media such as graphics, print and exhibition design.[16]

Industrial faculty[edit]

The industrial faculties had the task of preparing artists of a new type, artists capable of working not only in the traditional pictorial and plastic arts but also capable of creating all objects in the human environment such as the articles of daily life, the implements of labor, etc.[2] The industrial department at Vkhutemas endeavored to create products of viability in the economy and functionality found in society. Class-based political requirements steered artists toward crafts, and the designing of household or industrial goods. There was significant pressure in this respect by the Central Committee of the Communist Party, that in 1926, 1927, and 1928, required a student body composition “of worker and peasant origins”, and several demands for “working class” elements.[17] This push for design economy resulted in a tendency towards working, functional designs with minimised luxuries. Tables designed by Rodchenko were equipped with mechanical moving parts, and were standardised and multi-functional. The products designed at Vkhutemas never bridged the gap between workshops and factory production, although they cultivated a factory aesthetic — Popova, Stepanova, and Tatlin even designed worker's industrial apparel.[18] Furniture pieces constructed at Vkhutemas explored the possibilities of new industrial materials such as plywood and tubular steel.[14]

There were many successes for the departments, and they were to influence future design thinking. At the 1925 Exposition Internationale des Arts Décoratifs et Industriels Modernes in Paris, the Soviet pavilion by Konstantin Melnikov and its contents attracted both criticism and praise for its economic and working class architecture. One focus of criticism was the “nakedness” of the structure,[19] in comparison to other luxurious pavilions such as that by Émile-Jacques Ruhlmann. Alexander Rodchenko designed a worker's club,[20] and the furniture that the Wood and Metal Working Faculty (Дерметфак) contributed was an international success. The student work won several prizes, and Melnikov's pavilion won the Grand Prix.[21] As a new generation of artist/designers, the students and faculty at Vkhutemas paved the way for designer furniture by architects such as Marcel Breuer, and Alvar Aalto later in the century.[14]

Metalwork and woodwork[edit]

The dean of this department was Alexander Rodchenko, who was appointed in February 1922. Rodchenko's department was more expansive than its name would suggest, concentrating on abstract and concrete examples of product design. In a report to the rector of 1923, Rodchenko listed the following subjects as being offered: higher mathematics, descriptive geometry, theoretical mechanics, physics, the history of art and political literacy. Theoretical tasks included graphic design and “volumetric and spatial discipline”; while practical experience was given in foundry work, minting, engraving and electrotype. Students were also given internships in factories. Rodchenko's approach effectively combined art and technology, and he was offered the deanship of Vkhutein in 1928, although he refused.[22] El Lissitzky was also a member of the faculty.


The textile department was run by the constructivist designer Varvara Stepanova. In common with other departments, it was run on utilitarian lines, but Stepanova encouraged her students to take an interest in fashion: they were told to carry notebooks so that they could note the contemporary fabrics and aesthetics of everyday life as seen on the high street. Stepanova wrote in her 1925 course plan that this was done “with the goal of devising methods for a conscious awareness of the demands imposed on us by new social conditions”.[23] Lyubov Popova was also a member of the textile faculty, and in 1922, when hired to design fabrics for the First State Textile Print Factory, Popova and Stepanova were among the first women designers in the Soviet textile industry.[24] Popova designed textiles both with asymmetrical architectonic geometries, and also work that was thematic. Before her death in 1924, Popova produced fabrics with grids of printed hammers & sickles, which would predate work by others in the political climate of the First Five Year Plan.[25]

Architectural schools[edit]

Architectural training at Vkhutemas was divided in two camps—the neoclassical school of Ivan Zholtovsky, the first dean of the Architectural Department, and the United Left Workshop or Obmas headed by Nikolai Ladovsky. A third independent department, called Experimental Architecture, emerged in the 1924/1925 season, headed by non-conformists Konstantin Melnikov and Ilya Golosov. Through the basic course, architectonic art such as constructivism and suprematism, also became significant influences upon the architectural design curricula.[12]

Two competing Moscow architectural schools of the period were Bauman Moscow State Technical University (MVTU) led by Alexander Kuznetsov, and Moscow Institute of Civil Engineers led by the Vesnin brothers. This latter merged with MVTU in 1924,[26] and it was also proposed that Vkhutemas be merged with MVTU in 1924 in an effort to consolidate architectural education.[27] The artistic and industrial design faculties were retained, further differentiating Vkhutemas from MVTU which, after acquiring the institute, was focusing more on engineering. MVTU was the stronger school for expounding constructivism in architecture,[28] while Vkhutemas applied it primarily to art and design. Members of the OSA Group were divided between MVTU and Vkhutemas and participated in both schools. OSA staged the “First Exhibition of Modern Architecture” exhibition at Vkhutemas in 1927.[29] Many of the faculty shared jobs with other colleges, and the student body was especially mobile. Vkhutemas absorbed many students who, in a better world, would have chosen a different profession. For example, Nadezhda Bykova, born in 1907 and raised in Serpukhov, aspired to be a doctor, but since those from Serpukhov at that time was not eligible for admissions into medical school, she took a ticket to Vkhutemas and joined Ladovsky's class. In 1932, she designed her first subway station (Sokolniki) and eventually became one of the most prolific architects of the Moscow Metro.[30] The educational system, like the society itself, was boiling and constantly changing.

Academic workshop[edit]

The original architectural department of Vkhutemas was the “Academic Workshop”. It was a direct descendant of Zholtovsky's First Architectural Workshop that lasted from 1918 to 1919, and was heavily influenced by the personality of Ivan Zholtovsky and his staff of Alexey Shchusev, and Ivan Rylsky. Zholtovsky practiced a peculiar style of education—which entailed lengthy conversations with very small groups of students (беседы Жолтовского)—at the same time enforcing rigorous training in draftsmanship and classical composition.[31] Zholtovsky had created a two-tier faculty organisation with three residents and a few part-time “managers” supervising a body of “masters” - postgraduate-level instructors (Ladovsky, Golosov brothers, Nikolai Dokuchayev and others). The system began breaking apart however in 1919 before the establishment of Vkhutemas.

Towards the end of the Civil War, disgruntled “masters” preferred to tow Zholtovsky's line, while at the same time practicing Modernist art with numerous independent unions. Most important of these, the First Creative Union (Первое Творческое объединение, Живскульптарх), was actually made of unemployed architects.[32] By 1920, the breakaway faction consolidated around Nikolai Ladovsky, now the leader of rationalist architecture; and the neoclassical minority shrank to a small group around Zholtovsky. In 1923, Zholtovsky left the country for three years, surrendering his Vkhutemas chair to Ladovsky.[33]

Nikolai Ladovsky workshop[edit]

In the beginning of the 1920/1921 academic year, Ladovsky, together with fellow instructors Dokuchayev and Vladimir Krinsky set up Obmas. Obmas was an acronym for United Left Workshop (Обмас, Объединенные левые мастерские) these studios were active for three years and took over the entire Architectural Department in 1923.

Ladovsky was known for his innovative teaching methods, notably his statement that the primary material of architecture was space. His training program was superficially similar to classical training: first, study a particular architectural element of the past; then, use it in abstract drafts; finally, apply it to real-world architectural tasks ranging from seaside jetties (1922–1923) to skyscrapers (VSNKH Tower, 1924-1925).[34] To Ladovsky's own surprise, this program became a fountain of architectural novelties.[35] At Obmas, the creative concept of rationalism was formulated,[7] and the faculty and students became distinct from the other prominent group within the school, the constructivists.[14]

In 1923, Ladovsky founded another rationalist group, ASNOVA.[36] Between 1925 and 1930 Ladovsky's department at Vkhutemas-Vkhutein and the Vesnin brothers, divided between Vkhutemas and MVTU, were engaged in a vocal professional competition of students' projects, which further separated the rationalist and constructivist strains of avant-garde architecture.[37] Perhaps the most notorious of the works produced in this atelier was Georgy Krutikov's Flying City, a graduation project of 1928.

Constructivist workshops[edit]

Alexander Vesnin's students produced several innovative designs that contrast interestingly with the products of Ladovsky's workshop. For instance, Lydia Komarova's project for a Comintern headquarters was a glass clad, cylindrical structure that prefigured high-tech work later in the century; while Sokolov designed, under Vesnin, a plan in 1928 for “resort-hotels” as glass pods, set in the countryside, which became a prototype for Soviet disurbanism. The most famous graduation project was Ivan Leonidov's Lenin Institute in 1927, produced under Moisei Ginzburg. One student, Kirill Afamasev remarked on the close relationships that developed and the high level of attention from the faculty, and stated that, “The Vesnin studios - of Alexander and Leonid Vesnin in Vkhutemas, and Victor Vesnin at MVTU - were the heart of Soviet constructivism.”[38] Meetings occurred outside of the school at the Vesnin's apartment, which attracted visits from abroad, including Le Corbusier among others.

The New Academy[edit]

Konstantin Melnikov, who had been a professor at Vkhutemas since 1920, and Ilya Golosov formed a joint workshop known as the New Academy and Workshop No.2. These studios were known for their individualist approach.[14] Melnikov and Golosov resisted both the academic and left-wing camps, but had aspects of both in a middle ground between Zholtovsky's Classicism and Ladovsky's rationalism. Slogans of the New Academy drafted by Melnikov and Golosov in 1923, spoke in polemics regarding other departments and the dialectics between old and new, form and imitation, absence and decadence, start and end. One such slogan read, “The true mark of architecture that is NEW is that it does not simply reuse forms, but is based through-and-through on reusing the established perceptual gradations of the architecture that is OLD.”[39] In design Melnikov was an undoubted success, but at Vkhutemas he found a less favourable climate. In 1924, the architectural department made an effort at organizational simplification, and the management merged the New Academy with the Academic Workshop. Melnikov quit Vkhutemas having lost the program that he had created and led.[40] In the fall of 1924, Melnikov was offered the position of chair of the Department of Metalworking, but he did not accept.[41] Melnikov distanced himself from the school at this point but was not completely removed; he exhibited alongside students and other faculty at the 1925 Paris exhibition.

Lenin's visit[edit]

Vladimir Lenin signed a decree to create the school although its emphasis was on art rather than Marxism.[1] Three months after its founding, on 25 February 1921,[2] Lenin went to Vkhutemas to visit the daughter of Inessa Armand[15] and to converse with the students, where in a discussion about art he found an affinity among them for Futurism.[1] There he first viewed avant garde art, such as suprematist painting and he did not wholly approve of it, expressing concern over the connection between the student's art and politics. After the discussion, he was accepting and stated, “Well, tastes differ” and “I am an old man”.[42]

Although Lenin was not an enthusiast for avant garde art,[43] the Vkhutemas faculty and students made projects to honor him and further his politics. Ivan Leonidov's final project at Vkhutemas was his design for a Lenin Institute of Librarianship.[44] Vladimir Tatlin's Monument to the Third International was built by students and displayed at their workshop in Saint Petersburg.[12] Furthermore, Lenin's Mausoleum was designed by faculty member Aleksey Shchusev. Alexei Gan's book Constructivism, published in 1922, provided a theoretical link between the new emerging art and contemporary politics, connecting constructivism with the revolution, and Marxism.[45] The founding decree included a statement that students have an “obligatory education in political literacy and the fundamentals of the communist world view on all courses”.[46] These examples help justify the school's projects in terms of the early political requirements but others would arise throughout the school's existence.

Comparisons with the Bauhaus[edit]

Vkhutemas was a close parallel to the German Bauhaus in its intent, organization and scope. The two schools were the first to train artist-designers in a modern manner.[2] Both schools were state-sponsored initiatives to merge the craft tradition with modern technology, with a Basic Course in aesthetic principles, courses in color theory, industrial design, and architecture.[2] Vkhutemas was a larger school than the Bauhaus,[47] but it was less publicised and consequently, is less familiar to the West.[5] Vkhutemas's influence was expansive however—the school exhibited two structures by faculty and award-winning student work[12] at the 1925 Exposition in Paris. Furthermore, Vkhutemas attracted the interest and several visits from the director of the Museum of Modern Art, Alfred Barr.[4] With the internationalism of modern architecture and design, there were many exchanges between the Vkhutemas and the Bauhaus.[48] The second Bauhaus director Hannes Meyer attempted to organise an exchange between the two schools, while Hinnerk Scheper of the Bauhaus collaborated with various Vkhutein members on the use of colour in architecture. In addition, El Lissitzky's book Russia - an Architecture for World Revolution published in German in 1930 featured several illustrations of Vkhutemas/Vkhutein projects. Both schools flourished in a relatively liberal period, and were closed under pressure from increasingly totalitarian regimes.


As early as 1923, Rodchenko and others published a report in LEF which foretold of Vkhutemas's closure. It was in response to students failure to gain a foothold in industry and was entitled, The Breakdown of VKhUTEMAS: Report on the Condition of the Higher Artistic and Technical Workshops, which stated that the school was “disconnected from the ideological and practical tasks of today”.[15] In 1927, the school's name was modified: “Institute” replaced “Studios” (Вхутеин, Высший художественно-технический институт), or Vkhutein. Under this reorganisation, the 'artistic' content of the basic course was reduced to one term, when at one point it was two years.[12] The school appointed a new rector, Pavel Novitsky, who took over from the painter Vladimir Favorsky in 1926.[49] It was under Novitsky's tenure that external political pressures increased, including the “working class” decree, and a series of external reviews by industry, and commercial organisations of student works' viability.[50] The school was dissolved in 1930, and was merged into various other programs.[8] One such merger was with MVTU, forming the Architectural-Construction Institute, which became the Moscow Architectural Institute in 1933.[51] The Modernist movements which Vkhutemas had helped generate were critically considered as abstract formalism,[52] and were seceded historically by socialist realism, postconstructivism, and the Empire style of Stalinist architecture.




  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 (Russian) D. Shvedkovsky, Пространство ВХУТЕМАСа, Современный Дом, 2002.
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 (Russian) Great Soviet Encyclopedia, Вхутемас
  3. (Russian) "подготовить художников-мастеров высшей квалификации для промышленности, а также конструкторов и руководителей для профессионально-технического образования" - Собрание узаконений и распоряжений Рабочего и Крестьянского Правительства, 1920, 19 декабря, № 98, ст. 522, с. 540 - Great Soviet Encyclopedia, Вхутемас
  4. 4.0 4.1 Sybil Gordon Kantor, Alfred H. Barr, Jr., and the Intellectual Origins of the Museum of Modern Art, MIT Press, 2002, ISBN 0262611961
  5. 5.0 5.1 Tony Fry, Inc NetLibrary, A New Design Philosophy an Introduction to Defuturing, UNSW Press, 1999, Page 161, ISBN 0868407534
  6. George Heard Hamilton, Painting and Sculpture in Europe, 1880–1940, Yale University Press, 1993, page 315, ISBN 0300056494
  7. 7.0 7.1 (Russian) T. V. Kotovich, Encyclopedia of the Russian Avantgarde, Minsk: Ekonompress, 2003, page 83.
  8. 8.0 8.1 (Russian) КАК проект, ШКОЛА МОДЕРНИЗМА accessed 2 August 2007.
  9. Alexander Rodchenko, Experiments for the Future, Museum of Modern Art, 2005, Page 273, ISBN 0870705466
  10. Gilles Néret, Kazimir Malevich 1878–1935 and suprematism, Taschen, 2003, Page 93, ISBN 3822819611
  11. T. J. Clark, Farewell to an Idea: Episodes from a History of Modernism, Yale University Press, 1999, Page 268, ISBN 0300089104
  12. 12.0 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 Penelope Curtis, Sculpture 1900–1945: After Rodin, Oxford University Press, 1999, Page 188, ISBN 0192842285
  13. (Russian) ЛенДекор.Инфо, Взаимодействие архитектуры и левого изобразительного искусства
  14. 14.0 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 Alan Colquhoun, Modern Architecture, Oxford University Press, 2002, Pages 110, 125–126, ISBN 0192842269
  15. 15.0 15.1 15.2 Margarita Tupitsyn, The Soviet Photograph, 1924–1937, Yale University Press, 1996, ISBN 0300064500
  16. Victor Margolin, The Struggle for Utopia: Rodchenko, Lissitzky, Moholy-Nagy, 1917–1946, University of Chicago Press, 1997, Pages 4–5, ISBN 0226505154
  17. Catherine Cooke, Russian Avant-Garde: Theories of Art, Architecture, and the City, Academy Editions, 1995, (Cooke, 1995), p.168,172–173.
  18. Lewis H. Siegelbaum, Soviet State and Society Between Revolutions, 1918–1929, Cambridge University Press, 1992, Page 114, ISBN 0521369878
  19. Cooke, 1995, p.143.
  20. Museum of Modern Art, Worker's Club 1925 accessed 1 August 2007.
  21. Cooke, 1995, p.143.
  22. Rodchenko, 2005, p.194.
  23. Christina Kiaer, Imagine no Possessions - the Socialist Objects of Russian Constructivism, MIT Press, 2005, Page 122, ISBN 0262112892
  24. Abbott Gleason, Peter Kenez, Richard Stites, Bolshevik Culture: Experiment and Order in the Russian Revolution, Indiana University Press, 1985, Pages 209–210, ISBN 0253205131
  25. Lesley Jackson, Twentieth-Century Pattern Design: Textile & Wallpaper Pioneers, Princeton Architectural Press, 2002, Page 55, ISBN 1568983336
  26. (Russian) С. О. Хан-Магомедов, Сто шедевров советского архитектурного авангарда, URSS, М., 2004, ISBN 5-354-00892-1 (Khan-Magomedov, 2004), p.54–67
  27. Cooke, 1995, p.89.
  28. Cooke, 1995, p.93.
  29. Cooke, 1995, p.169.
  30. (Russian) Memoirs of Andrey Taranov, son of Nadezhda Bykova [1]
  31. Khan-Magomedov, 2004, p.19–21
  32. Khan-Magomedov, 2004, p.45–47
  33. Khan-Magomedov, 2004, p.83
  34. Khan-Magomedov, 2004, p.169, 217
  35. Khan-Magomedov, 2004, p.52
  36. Sima Ingberman, ABC: International Constructivist Architecture, 1922–1939, MIT Press, 1994, Pages 13–15, ISBN 0262090317
  37. Khan-Magomedov, 2004, p.66, 135
  38. Cooke, 1995, p.174–175.
  39. Cooke, 1995, p.181.
  40. (Russian) Хан-Магомедов, С.О., "Константин Мельников", М, 2006, p.52, ISBN 5-9647-0095-0
  41. (Russian) Гаврилова Екатерина, Творческий путь архитектора Мельникова, Русская Цивилизация, 22.3.2005.
  42. Susan Buck-Morss, Dreamworld and Catastrophe: The Passing of Mass Utopia in East and West, MIT Press, 2002, Page 301, ISBN 0262523310
  43. Bernard Smith, Modernism's History: A Study in Twentieth-Century Art and Ideas, Yale University Press, 1998, Page 166, ISBN 0300073925
  44. Stephen Bann, The Tradition of Constructivism, Da Capo Press, 1990, Page xl, ISBN 0306803968
  45. Cooke, 1995, p.89.
  46. Cooke, 1995, p.161.
  47. Paul Wood, The Challenge of the Avant-Garde, Yale University Press, 1999, Page 244, ISBN 0300077629
  48. Timothy J. Colton, Moscow: Governing the Socialist Metropolis, Harvard University Press, 1995, Page 215, ISBN 0674587499
  49. Cooke, 1995, p.173.
  50. Cooke, 1995, p.168.
  51. Moscow Architectural Institute, History of the Institute accessed 2 August 2007.
  52. (Russian) M. Klyuev, Российское направление развития дизайна., RosDesign.

See also[edit]