Pseudo-Russian style in architecture. Pseudo-Russian style: history of origin, characteristic features Neo-Russian style in architecture characteristic features

The pseudo-Russian style originated in the first half of the 19th century. This concept includes a number of trends that originated in Europe and Russia in the 19th-20th centuries. It was based on the basic elements of architecture that were common in Ancient Rus', and Byzantine, very competently included in big picture buildings.

Concept

The Russian style began its existence during a period of increased public attention to the architecture of its state. Around the same time, its main distinctive features, characteristic exclusively for him. They determine not only the appearance of buildings made in this style, but also many technical architectural aspects.

Within the framework of the pseudo-Russian style, there are several trends, the differences between which may not be visible to an ignorant person, but a professional will notice them with the naked eye. Each of them is based on a certain element or several, which determine general, unified rules for the entire architectural movement.

Pseudo-Russian style. Traits

The main feature of this style is the competent combination of Russian architecture with other styles, for example, romanticism, or even modernism.

Red, white and beige are three colors that are often found in architecture.

The Russian style combines vertical and horizontal strict lines with graceful barrel-shaped curves.

Buildings often contain many volumetric elements of different sizes.

In the Russian style there are three types of roofs - hipped, gable and barrel. All of them will definitely be decorated with various volumetric elements, for example, cockerels, columns and others.

History of origin and development

The emergence of this style in art, and, above all, in architecture, coincided with the growing interest of all European peoples in their national culture and trends in art.

Among the first substyles that emerged within the framework of the pseudo-Russian style is Russian-Byzantine, which began to stand out approximately in the second quarter of the 19th century. It was used primarily in the construction of Orthodox churches.

This style has elements of both native Russian architecture and classical Byzantine architecture. architectural style.

Despite its relative popularity among architects of the time, the pseudo-Russian style was not the only one that existed and was used at that time. It coexisted in parallel with other movements, such as romanticism, classicism, sentimentalism, etc.

In addition to the Russian-Byzantine style, some other trends developed within the framework of the pseudo-Russian style, which were of somewhat less importance for domestic architecture. Only a few decades later this trend began to penetrate almost all layers of society.

Pseudo-Russian style in the architecture of the late 19th century

By the end of the 19th century, this style had already become so popular that it began to be used not only in the construction of important government, religious and other large, expensive buildings.

Largely thanks to the populist movement and other similar ideas, many ordinary rural residents, and not only wealthy ones, began to build houses in the pseudo-Russian style or using its elements.

Development and its mass popularization led to the fact that people began to almost completely copy Russian houses of the 17th century. Of particular interest in the 70s. XIX century was devoted to peasant houses.

Further development

At the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, the pseudo-Russian style began to undergo some changes, thanks to which a new direction in architecture emerged, based on folk Russian architecture. This new style began to be called “neo-Russian”.

It was based on character traits old Novgorod and Pskov architecture, as well as the architecture of other northern cities of Rus'. Many buildings created in this style were influenced big influence from the northern modern side.

It was most often used in the construction of temples and churches. Among the most famous architects who worked in this direction are V. Pokrovsky, A. Aplaksin, G. Grimm.

Experts note that the neo-Russian style, in contrast to the pseudo-Russian one, is closer to modernism than to eclecticism, which significantly differs them.

Temple buildings

As mentioned above, the pseudo-Russian style is characteristic of religious buildings. Therefore, even today it is most clearly represented by temple and church buildings. It is in Orthodox architecture that the pseudo-Russian style is best demonstrated. Temples created according to his rules are distinguished by some special attractiveness, authenticity and spirituality.

The most striking examples of buildings include: the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, the Grand Kremlin Palace and others. You can also select a building Historical Museum, Church of the Savior Not Made by Hands and many others.

Many architectural structures belonging to this direction in art and architecture are today considered the property of Russian architecture. They create a “face” for the cities and towns in which they are located. Many visitors purposefully go to admire the sights built in Russian and pseudo-Russian style.

This is not surprising, because buildings that incorporate the features of this style look very presentable and beautiful, which attracts everyone’s interest and attracts attention. In addition, most of them were made by experienced architects, real virtuosos of their craft.

Conclusion

The Russian people know, love and honor their ancestors, so interest in the art, culture and folklore of their ancestors is quite high. IN modern Russia This is most clearly expressed in architecture.

Thanks to ancient buildings and buildings created in more modern styles, you can trace almost the entire historical path of the people and the entire state. Therefore, both the government of the country and public organizations, and the majority ordinary people strive to preserve the architectural heritage by any means.

Despite the great influence Western culture to the Russian one, Russian architects and artists managed to harmoniously and very successfully combine not only native Russian cultural elements, but also new trends, coming mainly from Europe.

Thanks to this, many different directions arose, but the most developed in Russia were the directions that absorbed the features of both Russian architecture and European architecture. Eclecticism, pseudo-Russian and neo-Russian styles acquired unprecedented proportions at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, and many buildings that were once built in these directions are today considered places of interest.

Pseudo-Russian style in architecture

Pseudo-Russian(otherwise - Neo-Russian, False Russian) style is a general conventional name for a set of trends in Russian architecture, different in their ideological origins, that arose in the second quarter of the 19th century. and representing a synthesis of the traditions of Old Russian and Russian folk architecture, as well as the elements of Byzantine architecture associated with them.

The pseudo-Russian style arose as part of the general rise of interest in national architecture that reigned in Europe in the 19th century, and represents the interpretation and stylization of the Russian architectural heritage. Currently, the pseudo-Russian style is often mistakenly called Russian or Old Russian architecture, although it does not directly inherit the Russian architectural tradition. Representing a skillful stylization, the pseudo-Russian style was consistently combined with other, international styles - from the architectural romanticism of the first half of the 19th century V. to Art Nouveau style. Is one of the directions of the architectural style of historicism.

Development

Cathedral of Christ the Savior - an example of Russian-Byzantine style

One of the first trends to emerge within the framework of the pseudo-Russian style is that which originated in the 1830s. "Russian-Byzantine style" in the architecture of churches. The development of this direction was facilitated by very broad government support, since the Russian-Byzantine style embodied the idea of ​​​​official Orthodoxy about continuity between Byzantium and Russia. Russian-Byzantine architecture is characterized by the borrowing of a number of compositional techniques and motifs of Byzantine architecture, most clearly embodied in the “model projects” of churches by Konstantin Ton in the 1840s. As part of this direction, Ton built the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, the Grand Kremlin Palace and the Armory Chamber in Moscow, as well as cathedrals in Sveaborg, Yelets (Ascension Cathedral), Tomsk, Rostov-on-Don and Krasnoyarsk.

Another direction within the pseudo-Russian style arose under the influence of romanticism and Slavophilism, which was characterized by buildings using arbitrarily interpreted motifs of ancient Russian architecture. Within this direction Many buildings by Alexey Goronostaev were erected; a striking example is the wooden “Pogodinskaya Izba” of Nikolai Nikitin, built in Moscow on Devichye Pole.

In the early 1870s. under the influence of populist ideas that embraced wide sections of the democratically minded intelligentsia, especially young people, a new democratic version of the pseudo-Russian style arose, which boiled down to the abundant decoration of buildings with patterns typical of Russian folk architecture, primarily embroidery and wood carving. The ideological foundations of populism led to sharp criticism of Western retrospectivism and aroused in artistic circles an increased interest in folk culture, peasant architecture and Russian architecture of the 16th and 17th centuries. One of the most prominent representatives pseudo-Russian style of the 1870s. became Ivan Ropet (“Terem” in Abramtsevo near Moscow) and Victor Hartman (Mamontov’s printing house, now No. 16 of the Glavpoligrafprom in Moscow, 1872). This trend (also known as “Ropetovism”), actively promoted by the famous art critic of the time, Vladimir Stasov, spread first in the architecture of wooden exhibition pavilions and small city houses, and then in monumental stone architecture.

GUM is an example of the pseudo-Russian style of the late 19th century.

By the beginning of the 1880s. “Ropetovism” was replaced by a new official direction of pseudo-Russian style, which almost literally copied the decorative motifs of Russian architecture of the 17th century. As part of this trend, buildings, usually built of brick or white stone, using international construction technologies, began to be richly decorated in the traditions of Russian folk architecture. Characteristic techniques of this time, such as “pot-bellied” columns, low vaulted ceilings, narrow loophole windows, tower-like roofs, frescoes with floral ornaments, the use of multi-color tiles and massive forging, are manifested in both the external and interior decoration premises. One of the typical examples that pseudo-Russian architecture of this period is oriented towards is St. Basil's Cathedral - a building built in a kitschy eclectic style based on traditions, primarily of oriental architecture. As part of this direction, the Upper Trading Rows (now the GUM building, - gg., architect Alexander Pomerantsev), the building of the Historical Museum (- gg., architect Vladimir Sherwood) were erected, completing the ensemble of Red Square in Moscow and the Savvinskoe Compound of the architect I.S. Kuznetsova.

At the beginning of the twentieth century, the “neo-Russian style” received further development. In search of monumental simplicity, the architects turned to the ancient monuments of Novgorod and Pskov. The buildings of this direction bear the imprint of stylization in the spirit of Art Nouveau. In St. Petersburg, the “neo-Russian style” found application mainly in the church buildings of V. A. Pokrovsky, S. S. Krichinsky, A. P. Aplaksin.

Literature

• Ilyin M. A., Borisova E. A., Architecture, in the book: History of Russian Art, vol. 9, book 2, M., 1965
• Kirichenko E. I. [Architecture of the 2nd half of the 19th century - beginning. 20 centuries], in the book: Brief artistic encyclopedia. Art of countries and peoples of the world, vol. 3, M., 1971

Wikimedia Foundation.

See what “Pseudo-Russian style in architecture” is in other dictionaries:

Pseudo-Russian style- PSEUDO-RUSSIAN STYLE, imitation of Old Russian or Russian models in architecture and art industry of the 19th century. In the 1830s. the official “Russian Byzantine” style arose (K.A. Ton). The ideas of Slavophilism are inspired by the patterned pseudo-Russian... ... Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary

The request "Russian style" is redirected here; see also other meanings. The request “Russian Byzantine style” is redirected here. A separate article is needed on this topic. Pseudo-Russian style or Russian style (includes neo-Russian style and Russian byzantine ... Wikipedia

Conventional general name for several eclectic trends in Russian architecture of the 2nd half of the 19th century, different in their ideological origins. Since the 1830s in the architecture of churches, the use of government... ... began to spread.

A style direction in architecture of the second half of the 19th century, in search of national identity, oriented towards ancient Russian architecture. Since the 1830s many large cathedrals and public buildings were built in the forms of the so-called Russian... ... Moscow (encyclopedia)

Style in literature and art, stable integrity or commonality of the figurative system, means artistic expression, figurative devices that characterize a work of art or a set of works. S. also called system... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia

I (Stál) André (b. 1.4.1921, Ernyy, Nord department), French writer, publicist. Member of the French communist party(FKP) since 1942. Graduated from the University of Lille. Licentiate in Literature and Philosophy. Participated in the Movement... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia

Aya, oh. 1. Using external signs of Russian culture, life, thinking, etc.; not being truly Russian. Dancing. P ie interests. 2. Architect. A movement in Russian architecture of the 19th century that tried to revive forms, decorative design,... ... encyclopedic Dictionary

pseudo-Russian- oh, oh. 1) Using external signs of Russian culture, life, thinking, etc.; not being truly Russian. Dancing. P ie interests. 2) architect. A movement in Russian architecture of the 19th century that tried to revive forms, decorative design,... ... Dictionary of many expressions

Pseudo-Russian (otherwise Neo-Russian, False Russian) style is a general conventional name for a set of trends in Russian architecture, different in their ideological origins, that arose in the second quarter of the 19th century. and representing a synthesis of traditions... ... Wikipedia

Books

• Masterpieces of Russian architecture, Tatyana Borisovna Ivashkova, Russian architecture developed along with the country. Together with her, she experienced the influence of other cultures - first Byzantine, later Western European. But every time, having absorbed the best, it gave birth to... Category: Architecture. Sculpture Series: Gift editions. Collection Publisher:

A special direction in the architecture of the early 20th century. forms the so-called neo-Russian style. In contrast to the “pseudo-Russian” architecture of the middle XIX century, which naturalistically copied the decorative details of Old Russian architecture, the architects of the neo-Russian style sought, first of all, to convey the character of ancient monuments, to recreate the very spirit of Old Russian architectural creativity, to embody in their buildings not external decorative forms and details, but to proceed from the basic compositional and plastic principles of Old Russian architecture .

It is characteristic that the painters V. Vasnetsov and S. Malyutin, who went through a good school of mastering the traditions of Russian art, played an important role in the development of this style. folk art, who thoroughly studied Russian ornament and folk arts and crafts.

The initiator of a new appeal to ancient Russian architecture should be considered V. M. Vasnetsov, who was deeply imbued with the beauty of ancient Russian architecture and understood it national identity and for the first time creatively interpreted the forms of Novgorod, Pskov and early Moscow architecture. According to Vasnetsov's design, a picturesquely designed façade was implemented Tretyakov Gallery in Moscow (1901 -1906). Its composition is independent; original details arose as a result of processing elements of decoration of ancient Russian architecture. The festive colorful façade masks the ordinary appearance of the building. Several small windows cutting through the surface of the walls evoke the idea of ​​sparingly lit “upper rooms”, and not of halls flooded with overhead light hidden behind a solid facade. At the same time, from a purely decorative point of view, the master achieves great expressiveness, especially in the composition of the white stone portal and central window. Their bizarre shapes contrast with the calm smoothness of the brick walls, topped with a wide frieze with an ornamental inscription and a patterned cornice.

The largest architect based on the traditions of ancient Russian architecture was A. V. Shchusev. Had a strong influence on his work ancient architecture Novgorod and Pskov. Being a deep connoisseur of the forms of ancient Russian architecture, Shchusev, however, never resorted to copying them, but always creatively reworked them, achieving originality of composition and artistic expressiveness of the architectural appearance of the building.

Among early works Shchusev, a special place is occupied by the temple-monument on the Kulikovo Field, built in 1906-1908 in memory of the victory over the Mongol-Tatars. The project of this church defined Shchusev’s creative personality as a mature master of Russian architecture. The small cubic church, adjoined by a refectory with two round fortress-type towers located on the front facade, is very simple in design. At the same time, it is distinguished by great plasticity and picturesque richness of forms.

In 1908-1912, Shchusev built the Marfo-Mariinsky Convent on Bolshaya Ordynka in Moscow, which is one of his most typical works of this time. The monastery church is close in composition to ancient Pskov and early Moscow architecture. It is characterized by brevity general solution, bold proportions and picturesque forms. Details of the external and interior design testify to the great skill and creative ingenuity of Shchusev. Kazansky Station in Moscow (1913-1926) is the most significant work of Shchusev of the pre-revolutionary period. The ensemble of station buildings represents a volumetric-spatial composition that is complex in shape, silhouette and polychrome, distinguished by acute expressiveness and echoing Moscow architecture of the 17th century.

Shchusev managed to overcome the difficulties regarding the plan (the railway tracks are located parallel to the main facade) and create a free, picturesque and at the same time original composition, which is based on the architecture of ancient Russian palace complexes, although there are no direct analogies with ancient Russian architecture. Each of the volumes is completed with a special covering, which corresponds to the traditions of ancient Russian architecture. The volume of the main lobby is emphasized by a high stepped tower, the idea of ​​which arose from the author under the influence of the towers of the Moscow Kremlin.

V. A. Pokrovsky worked in the same direction as Shchusev. In Moscow, he built the building of the Loan Fund (1913-1916). The composition of the building is inspired by Moscow architecture of the 17th century; it is picturesque and varied in form. The appearance of the boyar chambers was supposed to camouflage here business structure structures, and “terem windows” illuminate large spaces of operating rooms.

A number of original architectural compositions were created by the painter S. V. Malyutin, who also worked in the field applied arts and architecture. He also owns numerous drawings of furniture and a number of architectural monuments in the Russian style, sometimes reaching the point of obvious stylization. Malyutin's architectural works were essentially just enlarged examples of those objects of applied art that were carried out according to his plans in Talashkino. And him decorative works, and architectural buildings (teremok in Talashkino, 1900: Apartment house Pertsov in Moscow. 1905-1907) were equally characterized by an emphasized fabulousness, whimsicality of forms and coloristic richness.

In his work, the desire to bring painting, applied art and architecture closer together, to blur the clear boundaries between them, and to their mutual enrichment, was especially clearly manifested. In Pertsov's house, the composition of the facades is constructed in such a way as to disguise the multi-story structure of the apartment building and create the impression of a fairy-tale tower. Horizontal floor divisions are interrupted by high pediments with majolica inserts, balconies are deliberately asymmetrically located, and the outlines of windows and entrance portals are varied. The location behind these fabulous walls of ordinary, prosaic, sometimes small apartments seems to be ignored.

The gap between the external appearance and internal structure of a modern building was quite typical for the “neo-Russian” style. The “façade” and decorative nature of buildings of this style sometimes required almost pictorial and decorative solutions, so that masquerade clothing would clothe the building, successfully hiding its prosaic essence.

From Wiki:

At the beginning of the 20th century, “ neo-Russian style" In search of monumental simplicity, the architects turned to the ancient monuments of Novgorod and Pskov and to the architectural traditions of the Russian North. The buildings of this direction bear the imprint of stylization in the spirit of northern modernism. In St. Petersburg, the “neo-Russian style” found application mainly in church buildings of Vladimir Pokrovsky, Stepan Krichinsky, Andrei Aplaksin, Herman Grimm, although some were also built in the same style apartment buildings(a typical example is the Cooperman house, built by architect A.L. Lishnevsky on Plutalovaya Street).

An interesting example of the neo-Russian style (with a touch of modernity) is the Church of the Savior of the Image Not Made by Hands in Klyazma, built in honor of the 300th anniversary of the Romanovs by the architect V. I. Motylev according to a drawing by S. I. Vashkov (1879-1914), a student of Vasnetsov, in 1913-1916 -s years.

Architectural historians have expressed the opinion that the neo-Russian style is closer to modernism than to eclecticism, and this differs from the “pseudo-Russian style” in its traditional sense.

Related information.

Church construction, an example of which is the architecture of Ancient or Muscovite Rus' - a whole era in the formation appearance Petersburg. An era largely forgotten or lost. Buildings of the “neo-Russian style” were destroyed more than others in the 20th century. How these churches appeared, how they influenced the modern appearance of the city and how they disappeared is our story today.

IN mid-19th centuries, Russian social consciousness experienced important stage, one might even say - a turning point. There was an interest in everything Russian, traditional, and above all in Russian traditional culture. Previously, with rare exceptions, no one saw much value in traditions, fairy tales, costume, customs, towers and huts. The famous dispute between “Westerners” and “Slavophiles” took a turn public opinion to Russian folk culture, to traditions, to the past.

By the way, such quests were not always approved by the authorities. But, however, even during the reign of Nicholas I, the construction of churches using elements of traditional Russian architecture developed very widely. The most famous were the works of K.A. Tones.

In general, the middle - second half of the 19th century was characterized by the concept of “smart choice” of building style. In many ways, the neo-Russian style became such a “smart choice” - it reflected the desire of the authorities to turn public opinion towards traditional values.

The largest works by Konstantin Ton in St. Petersburg - the Vvedensky Cathedral of the Semenovsky Life Guards Regiment - opposite the Vitebsk railway station, Annunciation Cathedral of the Life Guards Cavalry Regiment- on Blagoveshchenskaya Square (now Truda Square; photo from 1913). A canon of such churches very quickly developed - this is a tent-type main dome with a small dome at the top, sometimes with a similar hipped bell tower. Standard designs were released, which became widely used in construction throughout the country, especially in the case of certain “government needs” - for example, the construction of churches at hospitals, in the location of regiments.

And in a simple town or small village it was easier, cheaper and more faithful to build a church according to a standard design than to try to create something original. While studying the history of northwestern Russia, the author repeatedly encountered a situation in which an attempt to find out what kind of church stood in this or that locality led to the same standard project in the archive. Sometimes funny incidents happened with standard projects: in the Krasnoselsky military camps there were two pairs of churches built according to two standard army projects.

The “standard” nature of the buildings formed among art critics in general negative attitude to this style, called “pseudo-Russian”. This attitude partly contributed to the fact that during the years of Bolshevik persecution, these churches were the first to suffer; they were destroyed “as having no artistic value.”

But among a whole series of truly unoriginal buildings there were also original masterpieces. The brightest and most famous, of course, was Savior on Spilled Blood(photo by S.M. Prokudin-Gorsky, 1905 - 1910). Very typical for that time, a competition was held for best project- the version of the architect Parland was accepted, in particular because his co-author, Archimandrite Ignatius, abbot of the Trinity-Sergius Hermitage in Strelna, allegedly saw him either in a dream. or at the moment of spiritual insight.

The image of the temple was clearly inspired by Moscow church architecture - of course, the Church of the Intercession on the Moat served as a model. And, perhaps, in another context the temple would have looked organic, but in the strict and geometrically precise center of St. Petersburg it still catches the eye. The asymmetry of the location of the building (the original requirement was to erect it strictly above the site of the assassination of Emperor Alexander II) enhances the general dissonance.

However, over the years the cathedral has become a completely integral part of the St. Petersburg landscape. The second significant object was the Peter and Paul Cathedral in Peterhof. Built according to the design of the architect Sultanov, it also stands out clearly and also echoes the Moscow cathedrals. It, like the Savior on Spilled Blood, is characterized by an abundance of architectural details and decor, which, like a mosaic, make up the overall appearance of the building.

At the beginning of the twentieth century, a new movement began to form as part of the Art Nouveau style - an appeal to the traditions of Pskov and Novgorod temple architecture. One of the brightest representatives of this trend was Spas on Waters A.M. Peretyatkovich (photo of the first quarter of the 20th century) is a temple built near the Admiralty Shipyards in memory of the sailors who died in the Battle of Tsushima. An unusual rethinking of ancient Russian and Moscow architecture was the Church of Metropolitan Alexei of Moscow in Taitsy.

Looking through catalogues, you always see next to old photo Church signature: “destroyed in the 30s”, “exploded in the 60s of the twentieth century.” The Bolshevik authorities declared a formal war on neo-Russian churches. Temples not only united communities of believers around themselves. In a city limited in height by building rules, they performed an important urban planning function of high-rise dominants. And, destroying them, the rulers of the city destroyed the complex, thin fabric that united historical Center into a single whole. The places of churches near the Vitebsk railway station, on Labor Square and in many other places still strike the eye as a kind of “knocked out teeth”. The ensemble was built so that there would be a temple here, but there isn’t. The war on churches turned into a cultural and urban disaster.

When in beginning of XXI century, society began to actively turn towards Orthodoxy, and church construction began. The destroyed churches began to be recreated - and this, undoubtedly, is a kind of duty of society - to return to the city its losses. New churches began to be built: in the South-West, in Shushary, on the Moscow Highway and in many other places. And, with rare exceptions, builders and architects are guided precisely by examples of the neo-Russian style.

On the one hand, such construction is gratifying. In terms of architecture, the new areas of new buildings (and especially new buildings of the 60s - 80s) are dead and soulless. And the appearance of temples certainly enlivens the dull landscape. But on the other hand, the only possible solution remains the same neo-Russian style, with a minimum of deviations from the canon.

I would like to note that St. Petersburg provides many examples of the construction of Orthodox churches with completely different appearances. Gothic temples of Alexandria, classical Kazan and St. Isaac's Cathedrals, non-standard “Kulich and Easter”. But now no diversity is welcomed. So buildings spring up in new areas, very similar to each other and to the official temple architecture second half of the 19th century.

There is another problem - the disproportion of the scale of construction. St. Petersburg is famous for its ensemble buildings. Grandiose residential buildings usually suppress small temple buildings, block them, block them from light. The art of combining temples and surrounding buildings has been lost. Temples cease to be architectural dominants; they are replaced by skyscrapers.

Architects have to learn the art of building churches again: the tradition was interrupted in the 20s of the twentieth century. We hope that the near future will give us new examples of the formation of harmonious architectural ensembles, in which temples will also occupy an important place.

The Pseudo-Russian style is an architectural movement in Russia in the 19th and 20th centuries. The predominant elements here are the traditions of architecture and folk art. It includes several subgroups, including Russian-Byzantine and neo-Russian directions.

The pseudo-Russian style has many elements borrowed from European architecture and culture. We can say that only creative motives are national here. That is why the style has such a name.

Emergence

In the middle of the 19th century, when the fashion for national motifs and trends began, many artists and architects in Russia decided to create a certain “alloy” of old folk forms, but without sacrificing modern (for that period) achievements. This is how the pseudo-Russian style appears. It is intended to revive its use not only in small toys, craft activities or furniture, for example, but also in larger projects.

In fact, there is no pseudo-Russian style as such. This name is conditional. It combines several movements, sometimes with conflicting motives. Therefore, today there is some confusion when architects combine two buildings that are completely different in their shapes, lines and decor into one pseudo-Russian style.

The most important difference is the styling. The pseudo-Russian style is so flexible that it can be combined with other architectural movements, including Art Nouveau and Romanticism.

Development

The pseudo-Russian style includes several trends. They appeared as it developed:

1. Russian-Byzantine. Originating in the 1830s, this style was widely practiced in the construction of religious Christian buildings (Cathedral of Christ the Savior, Ascension Cathedral, Bolshoi
2. Romanticism and Slavophilism. In fact, the style, which appeared a little later than the previous one, has no name. But he was influenced by the listed architectural trends. A striking example is the Pogodinskaya hut.
3. Ropetovism. The trend appears in the 1870s, it is oversaturated folk culture and peasant architecture (Terem, Mamontov Printing House). It was this trend that became widespread due to propaganda famous critic Stasova.
4. Official. Pot-bellied columns, frescoes with national ornament, low ceilings in the form of vaults - all these are characteristic features of the direction. Here, too, preference is given to traditions and folk art. Examples - Top shopping arcades, building of the Historical Museum.
5. Neo-Russian. It appears at the beginning of the 20th century. Architects are inclined towards monumental simplicity, so they combine elements of ancient monuments and the traditions of northern architecture. Many notice the similarity with modernity (Church of the Savior Not Made by Hands).

IN Lately historians separate the neo-Russian style from the pseudo-Russian, considering it as an independent architectural movement. But there are also those who unite them. Pseudo-Russian style buildings are widespread throughout the country, including its most remote regions.

Features of appearance

Like any other country, Russia had a period of borrowing. Various motifs and trends were adopted from Europe, Eastern states and the West. And the time has come for lack national elements. Therefore, the pseudo-Russian style in Russia, as well as its appearance, can be considered natural.

The features of this architectural direction lie in many ways. The predominant colors are beige, white and red.

One can also note the style’s ability to merge. There were no clear boundaries. It was easily combined with many other styles, such as Gothic, pseudo-Gothic or Art Nouveau.

Character traits

The pseudo-Russian style in architecture has its own differences, by which it is defined. Characteristic features can be viewed in the table.

Very often during construction, roof decor in the form of a spinning cockerel or flag was used.

Many buildings in Russia that have survived to the present day fit the description and characteristic features of the pseudo-Russian style.

Conclusion

At the beginning of the 20th century, the pseudo-Russian style and the craving for corresponding construction gradually began to fade away. The facades of many buildings with all the turrets, high roofs, and frequent small windows are no longer suitable for the architectural and administrative purposes of buildings.

For example, the Great Halls in the Duma, built during the dominance of the movement, are already being built using new advances in both architecture and technology (use of equipment, big cars). Needs modern buildings I do not correspond to the pseudo-Russian style. Architecture assignments are updated. And the style is becoming a thing of the past, leaving behind many monuments and unique buildings.