Suchergebnisse

During practically the entire development of Lithuanian architecture in the 20th century, one can observe open architectural politicisation as being one of the most important ideological ways of giving meaning to space. Themes of national romanticism that were exploited during the interwar period were followed by a feverish attempt during the Soviet period to create a "socialist city", and replaced by subsequent variants enabling the search for a national identity within the "union of nations". These tendencies may be associated both with the peripeteia of politics, and the principled disposition – especially with reference to the modern movement – of architecture in the 20th century, or to open politicisation. At the turn of the 21st century, however, one finds an inclination to erase the more distinguishing ideological boundaries. In architecture, the direct and unambiguous examples that give a political sense to space, and that are demonstrated in an explicit manner, are replaced by multifaceted phenomena manifesting themselves via secondary (latent) subsequences. The urbanistic texture of a city/town is transformed by encompassing ideas and interests that are obviously even contradictory in the sense of their ideological meaning. In assessing a major portion of the architecture of the Soviet period, we acknowledge that only the most general and most telling examples of an ideology, articulated in the simplest way (high-rise buildings from the Stalinist period, monumental. [to full text]

During practically the entire development of Lithuanian architecture in the 20th century, one can observe open architectural politicisation as being one of the most important ideological ways of giving meaning to space. Themes of national romanticism that were exploited during the interwar period were followed by a feverish attempt during the Soviet period to create a "socialist city", and replaced by subsequent variants enabling the search for a national identity within the "union of nations". These tendencies may be associated both with the peripeteia of politics, and the principled disposition – especially with reference to the modern movement – of architecture in the 20th century, or to open politicisation. At the turn of the 21st century, however, one finds an inclination to erase the more distinguishing ideological boundaries. In architecture, the direct and unambiguous examples that give a political sense to space, and that are demonstrated in an explicit manner, are replaced by multifaceted phenomena manifesting themselves via secondary (latent) subsequences. The urbanistic texture of a city/town is transformed by encompassing ideas and interests that are obviously even contradictory in the sense of their ideological meaning. In assessing a major portion of the architecture of the Soviet period, we acknowledge that only the most general and most telling examples of an ideology, articulated in the simplest way (high-rise buildings from the Stalinist period, monumental. [to full text]

The goal of Master thesis is to investigate expression and features of postmodern style of private dwelling-houses of Lithuania, from the middle of the 9th decade to the 10th decade of the twentieth century. In order to reveal the characteristics, features and cultural significance of the style in Lithuania, the private dwelling-houses of postmodern style of the Western world (the U.S., Western Europe, Japan) are analyzed, as well as conditions which prompted their development. The paper discusses that the social, political and economic factors of Lithuania at that time, led to the suspicion and critical evaluation of postmodern architecture in general.It is assumed that due to the political-economical factors, the Western magazines were one of the main tools for Lithuanian architects to get to know postmodern architecture. Therefore, a comparative analysis between private dwelling-houses published in foreign periodicals, and of Lithuania, is conducted. Consequently the most common features of private dwelling-houses of postmodern style in Lithuania and their links with Western architecture are determined. Houses of Lithuania of high quality postmodern architecture are named, their valuable properties are defined. Thesis consists of: 92 p. text without extras, 57 pictures., 9 schemes, 99 bibliographical entries, 3 appendixes included.

The goal of Master thesis is to investigate expression and features of postmodern style of private dwelling-houses of Lithuania, from the middle of the 9th decade to the 10th decade of the twentieth century. In order to reveal the characteristics, features and cultural significance of the style in Lithuania, the private dwelling-houses of postmodern style of the Western world (the U.S., Western Europe, Japan) are analyzed, as well as conditions which prompted their development. The paper discusses that the social, political and economic factors of Lithuania at that time, led to the suspicion and critical evaluation of postmodern architecture in general.It is assumed that due to the political-economical factors, the Western magazines were one of the main tools for Lithuanian architects to get to know postmodern architecture. Therefore, a comparative analysis between private dwelling-houses published in foreign periodicals, and of Lithuania, is conducted. Consequently the most common features of private dwelling-houses of postmodern style in Lithuania and their links with Western architecture are determined. Houses of Lithuania of high quality postmodern architecture are named, their valuable properties are defined. Thesis consists of: 92 p. text without extras, 57 pictures., 9 schemes, 99 bibliographical entries, 3 appendixes included.

This paper sets out to describe and conceptualize the social status and role of the architectural profession in post-socialist society. The turn towards market democracy from state socialism changes the material and symbolic conditions of the architectural profession. Privatization of the building and housing sectors transforms the architectural profession from previously a profession that had a say (even if it was limited) in city development processes into an entrepreneurial profession, depending on commissions from the private sector. In the article, I argue that architects claim a certain status as public intellectuals, but fluctuate towards an autonomisation of aesthetics in architecture, claiming architecture as art and trying to establish cultural capital as a legitimating strategy of certain decisions. The central theme in public discourse on architecture – generated by architects – is a dichotomy between architecture as art versus commercialized architecture. In this discourse, the role of "architects' people" remains preempted. I argue that while claiming a status of "opposition", architects ultimately add to the establishment and solidification of the current neoliberal order.

This paper sets out to describe and conceptualize the social status and role of the architectural profession in post-socialist society. The turn towards market democracy from state socialism changes the material and symbolic conditions of the architectural profession. Privatization of the building and housing sectors transforms the architectural profession from previously a profession that had a say (even if it was limited) in city development processes into an entrepreneurial profession, depending on commissions from the private sector. In the article, I argue that architects claim a certain status as public intellectuals, but fluctuate towards an autonomisation of aesthetics in architecture, claiming architecture as art and trying to establish cultural capital as a legitimating strategy of certain decisions. The central theme in public discourse on architecture – generated by architects – is a dichotomy between architecture as art versus commercialized architecture. In this discourse, the role of "architects' people" remains preempted. I argue that while claiming a status of "opposition", architects ultimately add to the establishment and solidification of the current neoliberal order.

This paper sets out to describe and conceptualize the social status and role of the architectural profession in post-socialist society. The turn towards market democracy from state socialism changes the material and symbolic conditions of the architectural profession. Privatization of the building and housing sectors transforms the architectural profession from previously a profession that had a say (even if it was limited) in city development processes into an entrepreneurial profession, depending on commissions from the private sector. In the article, I argue that architects claim a certain status as public intellectuals, but fluctuate towards an autonomisation of aesthetics in architecture, claiming architecture as art and trying to establish cultural capital as a legitimating strategy of certain decisions. The central theme in public discourse on architecture – generated by architects – is a dichotomy between architecture as art versus commercialized architecture. In this discourse, the role of "architects' people" remains preempted. I argue that while claiming a status of "opposition", architects ultimately add to the establishment and solidification of the current neoliberal order.

This paper sets out to describe and conceptualize the social status and role of the architectural profession in post-socialist society. The turn towards market democracy from state socialism changes the material and symbolic conditions of the architectural profession. Privatization of the building and housing sectors transforms the architectural profession from previously a profession that had a say (even if it was limited) in city development processes into an entrepreneurial profession, depending on commissions from the private sector. In the article, I argue that architects claim a certain status as public intellectuals, but fluctuate towards an autonomisation of aesthetics in architecture, claiming architecture as art and trying to establish cultural capital as a legitimating strategy of certain decisions. The central theme in public discourse on architecture – generated by architects – is a dichotomy between architecture as art versus commercialized architecture. In this discourse, the role of "architects' people" remains preempted. I argue that while claiming a status of "opposition", architects ultimately add to the establishment and solidification of the current neoliberal order.

A lot of public places there privatized after the restoration of independence in Lithuania. A real threat occurred for monumental artworks in architecture after the biulding was privatized. In this situation a public opnion about soviet heritage is really important. Despite the political aspect, there is economical factors as well. Stained glass windows, can't be fixed because of lack of finance. Though soviet times in Lithuania was "golden age" for stained glass it has real preservation problem in nowdays. There is a lack of information about these days soviet stained glass situation. The first part of this work contains short history of soviet stained glass and the sources of prosperity. There was two main assumptions for prosperity of stained glass in soviet times: first was orders from soviet goverment and the second was artist and architectures cooperation. The exposition part is illiustration about stained glass destruction, and real situation of soviet stained glass in these days. The final part of the work is about the heritage of soviet art works and preservation of stained glass.

There are no studies on the historical development of manor houses' interiors from the mid-1700s to early 1900s in Lithuanian art history that delve into the interior in terms of function, planned structure and form. The focus most often is on researching general features of manor architecture (building volumes, style development, estates' spatial structure). Because of this, this doctoral thesis analyses the issue of manor interior modernization in a narrower perspective, concentrating on one space in manor houses of highest-level nobility: the dining room. The dissertation aims to reconstruct the structure and image of the dining space in the context of manors' modernization processes from the mid-1700s to the early 1900s. The work investigates the causes of the emergence, prevalence and change of the dining room, the development of planning, form, structure, equipment and decor during that period. Object research complements the historiography of the development of the Lithuanian nobility's culture. The methods of monads and clues and the social history of art were chosen to approach this micro-historical research, using historiographical and factual research methods and comparative analysis. The newly found data and the insights based on it provide a broader view of manor houses' planning and decoration phenomena and aspects of the nobility's lifestyle, cultural and social contacts. From the perspective of regional art and architecture history, the thesis is significant in that it covers the manors of the former Grand Duchy of Lithuania in Lithuania, Belarus and Poland, and ties them into an aggregate of common cultural tradition. In the Lithuanian art history framework, the research is important because it rethinks the processes of manor modernization in the context of Lithuanian historical and social development and broader European modernization processes. It also analyses their social, political, cultural settings and how the everyday home environment, in this case – the dining room, responded to them. ...

There are no studies on the historical development of manor houses' interiors from the mid-1700s to early 1900s in Lithuanian art history that delve into the interior in terms of function, planned structure and form. The focus most often is on researching general features of manor architecture (building volumes, style development, estates' spatial structure). Because of this, this doctoral thesis analyses the issue of manor interior modernization in a narrower perspective, concentrating on one space in manor houses of highest-level nobility: the dining room. The dissertation aims to reconstruct the structure and image of the dining space in the context of manors' modernization processes from the mid-1700s to the early 1900s. The work investigates the causes of the emergence, prevalence and change of the dining room, the development of planning, form, structure, equipment and decor during that period. Object research complements the historiography of the development of the Lithuanian nobility's culture. The methods of monads and clues and the social history of art were chosen to approach this micro-historical research, using historiographical and factual research methods and comparative analysis. The newly found data and the insights based on it provide a broader view of manor houses' planning and decoration phenomena and aspects of the nobility's lifestyle, cultural and social contacts. From the perspective of regional art and architecture history, the thesis is significant in that it covers the manors of the former Grand Duchy of Lithuania in Lithuania, Belarus and Poland, and ties them into an aggregate of common cultural tradition. In the Lithuanian art history framework, the research is important because it rethinks the processes of manor modernization in the context of Lithuanian historical and social development and broader European modernization processes. It also analyses their social, political, cultural settings and how the everyday home environment, in this case – the dining room, responded to them. This study is expected to be used as a practical aid for manor managers and heritage experts.

There are no studies on the historical development of manor houses' interiors from the mid-1700s to early 1900s in Lithuanian art history that delve into the interior in terms of function, planned structure and form. The focus most often is on researching general features of manor architecture (building volumes, style development, estates' spatial structure). Because of this, this doctoral thesis analyses the issue of manor interior modernization in a narrower perspective, concentrating on one space in manor houses of highest-level nobility: the dining room. The dissertation aims to reconstruct the structure and image of the dining space in the context of manors' modernization processes from the mid-1700s to the early 1900s. The work investigates the causes of the emergence, prevalence and change of the dining room, the development of planning, form, structure, equipment and decor during that period. Object research complements the historiography of the development of the Lithuanian nobility's culture. The methods of monads and clues and the social history of art were chosen to approach this micro-historical research, using historiographical and factual research methods and comparative analysis. The newly found data and the insights based on it provide a broader view of manor houses' planning and decoration phenomena and aspects of the nobility's lifestyle, cultural and social contacts. From the perspective of regional art and architecture history, the thesis is significant in that it covers the manors of the former Grand Duchy of Lithuania in Lithuania, Belarus and Poland, and ties them into an aggregate of common cultural tradition. In the Lithuanian art history framework, the research is important because it rethinks the processes of manor modernization in the context of Lithuanian historical and social development and broader European modernization processes. It also analyses their social, political, cultural settings and how the everyday home environment, in this case – the dining room, responded to them. This study is expected to be used as a practical aid for manor managers and heritage experts.

In the last few years, a negative impact on the environmental values of the Lithuanian urban landscape was made by an increasingly growing urbanization: more densely situated buildings, growing areas of solid concrete or other surface, less and less space for greenery. Soon, roofs shall be equipped not only with antennas, but also with solar collectors and small wind turbines. All this will undoubtedly have an impact on the architectural expression of buildings and landscapes and in the near future, the impact will become even more significant. To achieve high aesthetic value and ecological stability of Lithuanian urban landscapes, the necessary number of studies are required as well as regulatory planning and legislative measures to guarantee the high quality of landscapes not only in the coming years, but in the long term as well. Dust and gas polluted air creates major threat to human health in urban areas. Atmospheric air saturated with harmful substances penetrates into residential housing, hospitals, educational institutions and classrooms, and industrial premises. Indoor air is saturated with chemicals and substances, such as xylene, benzene, formaldehyde, ammonia, acetone and others, are released by building materials and furniture. Besides, there is also human and bio-depleted air. Free planting of trees and shrubs, flowers, grass, balcony attached trays, and plants in pots at the premises is no longer sufficient in urban areas. Drastic architectural and urbanistic measures are required to help people in the city to restore the natural environment. We are children of nature and we have to move closer to it. To hide urban monotony, considerable efforts have to be made: plans – our friends – should take their places on building roofs and walls, balconies and terraces.

Historic architectural and urbanistic entirety of Laisvės avenue had been formed over three historic periods: government (1847-1918), interwar period (1918-1940) and Soviet times (1940-1990). Each of these periods is reflected by distinct urbanitics and architectural transformations shaping mixed visual environment of Laisvės avenue. Its uniqueness lies in the overall view of constant change. Therefore, such change should preserve not only unique urbanistic and architectural features of each era, but also the intangible heritage – the general meanings of street culture and spirit, as essential and relevant identifiers of this site. There are 19 separate and complex objects from Laisvės avenue included in the Register of Cultural Values. This makes less than 1⁄5 of all the buildings located in the avenue, which form an integral perimetrical development of both street parts. Thus, legally enforced values reflect only a part of values of Laisvės avenue, as a cultural treasure. Given that, the first part of this paper, with reference to the documents of modern heritage protection and comparing them with those of the heritage protection of the Republic of Lithuania, creates a broader assessment system, on the basis of which the buildings are evaluated in the urbanistic, façade, volume-spatial dimensions in pursuance of their identity, contextuality values, as well as artistic and rarity values of architecture. Upon the application of the given system on each architectural element forming Laisvės avenue, the predominant values of the entire Laisvės avenue, as a cultural treasure, were disclosed, namely identity and contextuality. At least a minimum identity value is characteristic to almost every building on Laisvės avenue. It stands outs that such object features like social "activity", continuity of function are the features changing in the course of time; however, namely these features are likely to link the society with the environment of Laisvės avenue by emotional relations. Contextuality value is characteristic to almost every building of government and interwar periods, whereas new objects (buildings of modern architecture) exist not as modern contextual complements to the historic setting, but as an architectural dominant disrupting the character of street historical structure and shape. The most valuable architectural objects in Laisvės avenue emerged during the period between wars, which is greatly predetermined by the relevance of their location in the composition of the urban street, as well as public/cultural purpose and high art value of architecture. Aesthetic attractiveness of Laisvės avenue is mostly disturbed by the Soviet and modern architectural buildings. Value of rarity is least characteristic to the architectural medium of Laisvės avenue. The majority of buildings do not carry this value or have minimum suchlike characteristic features. Thus, in order to preserve the cultural character of Laisvės avenue, as well as its local identity, first of all, it is necessary to protect or bring to life the former relevant functions of buildings to make them more "active" socially, ensure the affection of inhabitants or grant the features of identification that form the principal factors leading to public identification with the environment of Laisvės avenue. In the meantime, new architectural objects in Laisvės avenue should rise as qualitative modern complements of historic environment considering the feature of contextuality as the major quality criterion.

Historic architectural and urbanistic entirety of Laisvės avenue had been formed over three historic periods: government (1847-1918), interwar period (1918-1940) and Soviet times (1940-1990). Each of these periods is reflected by distinct urbanitics and architectural transformations shaping mixed visual environment of Laisvės avenue. Its uniqueness lies in the overall view of constant change. Therefore, such change should preserve not only unique urbanistic and architectural features of each era, but also the intangible heritage – the general meanings of street culture and spirit, as essential and relevant identifiers of this site. There are 19 separate and complex objects from Laisvės avenue included in the Register of Cultural Values. This makes less than 1⁄5 of all the buildings located in the avenue, which form an integral perimetrical development of both street parts. Thus, legally enforced values reflect only a part of values of Laisvės avenue, as a cultural treasure. Given that, the first part of this paper, with reference to the documents of modern heritage protection and comparing them with those of the heritage protection of the Republic of Lithuania, creates a broader assessment system, on the basis of which the buildings are evaluated in the urbanistic, façade, volume-spatial dimensions in pursuance of their identity, contextuality values, as well as artistic and rarity values of architecture. Upon the application of the given system on each architectural element forming Laisvės avenue, the predominant values of the entire Laisvės avenue, as a cultural treasure, were disclosed, namely identity and contextuality. At least a minimum identity value is characteristic to almost every building on Laisvės avenue. It stands outs that such object features like social "activity", continuity of function are the features changing in the course of time; however, namely these features are likely to link the society with the environment of Laisvės avenue by emotional relations. Contextuality value is characteristic to almost every building of government and interwar periods, whereas new objects (buildings of modern architecture) exist not as modern contextual complements to the historic setting, but as an architectural dominant disrupting the character of street historical structure and shape. The most valuable architectural objects in Laisvės avenue emerged during the period between wars, which is greatly predetermined by the relevance of their location in the composition of the urban street, as well as public/cultural purpose and high art value of architecture. Aesthetic attractiveness of Laisvės avenue is mostly disturbed by the Soviet and modern architectural buildings. Value of rarity is least characteristic to the architectural medium of Laisvės avenue. The majority of buildings do not carry this value or have minimum suchlike characteristic features. Thus, in order to preserve the cultural character of Laisvės avenue, as well as its local identity, first of all, it is necessary to protect or bring to life the former relevant functions of buildings to make them more "active" socially, ensure the affection of inhabitants or grant the features of identification that form the principal factors leading to public identification with the environment of Laisvės avenue. In the meantime, new architectural objects in Laisvės avenue should rise as qualitative modern complements of historic environment considering the feature of contextuality as the major quality criterion.