| |
Ton was more successful with his second
major work, the Grand Palace in the Kremlin, which he built for Nicholas I in
1838-1849. The style of this huge quadrangular edifice, about 370 by 200 feet
and with some 700 rooms, is again a mixture of Classic and pseudo-Russian
forms. (View of grand
palace.)Thus
the shape of arches that decorate the first floor were borrowed by Ton from the
Cathedral of the Archangel; the window architraves resemble those of the old
Terem Palace; and the "Tent" roof over the central part of the palace
is another imitation of traditional Russian forms. Despite all this, the palace
is not so dull as it is often pictured by Soviet critics. That criticism is
often repeated by foreign critics, probably chiefly because the palace was
commissioned by Nicholas I, for whom a special dose on animosity is customarily
reserved. Its location is beautiful and dominant as it should be, and its
interior sumptuous. A palace, wooden or stone, has stood from the early times
on the same site. Napoleon was the last occupant of the one that Rastrelli
built before it burned in 1812.
To the left of a large entrance hall, the vault of which is supported by four
monoliths of grey granite, was the private apartment of the Emperor; to the
right, a staircase that led to the Cathedral of the Annunciation; and in the
middle, a magnificent granite parade staircase, leading to the antechamber and
from there to several halls, all located on the second floor. There were five
festal halls, named after the 5 highest Russian orders: The Hall of Saint
George (Gheorgievskii zal), Alexander Hall (Alexandrovskii zal) and Saint Andre
Hall (Andreyevskii zal), now made into one hall for meetings, the Hall of Saint
Catherine (Yekaterinskii Zal); two smaller halls and a long gallery of
paintings. All the halls were decorated differently, with materials including
marble, alabaster, rare wood, malachite, crystal, silver and of course, gold.
Some halls were overloaded with stucco decorations. The largest was the Hall of
Saint George, about 200 feet long, 70 feet wide and 60 feet high. Next was the
so-called Hall of the Supreme Soviet, serving for their meetings as previously
mentioned, made in 1932-1934 by combining the halls of Saint Andrew, the former
imperial throne room, and Alexander Hall. Stripped of most of its decorations,
the room can seat 2,500 delegates. The remaining halls have preserved their
sumptuousness and the sharp contrast is obvious when these glittering halls are
compared with the simplicity of the large chamber that seats the Supreme
Soviet. However, one thing is never lacking in Soviet establishments - the
statue of Lenin, and behind the tribune reserved for the presidium, in the
specially made niche stands Lenin in full size, sculpted by Merkurov, an honor
that tsars were seldom accorded. The Hall of Saint Vladimir is behind the Hall
of Saint George and connects on the opposite end to the Holy Vestibule
(Sviatiya Seni) and through it to the Old Terem Palace. Also joining the Hall
of Saint Vladimir is the little Golden Chamber ( Malaya Zolotaya Palata), one
of the oldest and best preserved corners of the Kremlin, which served as an
audience-chamber for the Russian Metropolitans until Ivan III gave it to his
wife; it has since been used for receptions.
Another important building that was designed by Ton and commissioned by
Nicholas I is the Armory Chamber, (Oruzheinaya Palata) built in 1849-1851 in
the Kremlin. It was built on the spot where the office of tsar's equerry and
the mansion of Boris Godunov had once stood; the mansion in which he lived
before he became tsar. Though Ton wanted the Chamber to be a part of an
architectural ensemble, where the new palace would be the central object, the
new building, intended to serve as museum, came out more sober and simpler,
with considerably less stucco molding. Soon after its completion; crowns,
thrones, jewelry, bibles, icons, vestments, chalices, silver, gold and enameled
utensils, china, crystal objects, saddles, carriages and hundreds of various
other items were moved in, in all a fabulous treasury that hardly any other
country could have heaped up in such quantity and variety. Indeed one cannot
but marvel at what Russian tsars and grand dukes were able to pile up and
preserve through centuries. Among the most curious items is the same staff,
made of ivory and encrusted with gold and silver, with which Ivan the Terrible
used to punish transgressors on the spot in fits of rage. It was with this
staff that he killed his son Fedor.
The Soviet government has preserved the museum and is keeping it open. Until
1974, with the exception of foreigners and the privileged, ordinary Soviet
citizens were not permitted to visit the museum independently. They had to come
as a group, usually organized by the trade union chapter at their place of
work.
During his long life Ton designed many buildings and several churches, but what
was more important was the imprint of his "Neo-Russian style, felt over a
good part of Russian architectural activity until the end of the century. For
many young architects he was an authority, and it was not surprising that his
influence spread throughout the country. Today many consider him one of the
most responsible for the deterioration of taste and retrogression in
architecture. Instead of originality, they achieved just the opposite, an odd
conglomeration of all sorts of styles, and this trend has continued with slight
variations until the present. One thing is certain; that contact with the
traditional Russian style had been broken by Peter's reforms and the strong
western prestige that followed hardly any force, not even dictators of Stalin's
magnitude could have changed the historic course on which the country had
embarked. Probably Nicholas, Ton, and those around them were not responsible
either, though they are generally blamed, and it could be that the old styles
had simply outlived themselves. Besides, industrialization left no time for the
development of original styles, and Western Europe earlier went through a
similar experience. It is true that the government had imposed certain
regulations for new public buildings, but the private sector was completely
free to do what they wanted, and yet decline in subtlety and sapidity was
wide-spread.
It is of interest to note that Russified foreigners continued to dominate
architectural tastes in Russia. They sometimes showed more concern for the
revival of the native style than the Russians themselves. In the absence of
great talents, some architects improvised or were satisfied with imitating the
West, while others were in search of some new Russian national style. The
results were mediocre in either case, and they fully reflected the independent
taste of each individual patron or architect that prevailed until the
revolution.
|
|
