DOI10.25987/VSTU.2019.3.43.009 UDC7.036 : 747.012 : 72.036
L. V. Podolskaya1, 2
ROLE AND PLACE OF ORNAMENTS IN THE COMPOSITION OF FACADES AND INTERIORS OF PRIVATE RESIDENCES
USING THE EXAMPLE OF S. P. RYABUSHINSKIY’S MANSION
Moscow State Academy of Arts and Industry Named after S. G. Stroganov1
Russia, Moscow
Аrchitectural Bureau DE-CITY2
Russia, Moscow
1
PhD student of the Dept. of History of Arts, e-mail: [email protected], [email protected] 2
Interior and Equipment Designer
Statement of the problem. The role of a system of ornaments and decorations in the composition
of buildings is discussed using the example of S. P. Ryabushinskiy’s mansion.
Results. The ornamental system of the mansion is analyzed in detail whose location suggests that
construction links as well as spatial nods are of primary importance to the visual perception of the building. The significance of the decorations and its contribution to the architectural environment of the building is shown: a rhythmical connection of the mansion with the composition of the As-cension Cathedral as a starting as well as a reference point of the architectural ideal and associa-tion links with the Granate Palace using the play on architectural detail and spatial soluassocia-tions.
Conclusions. The ornamental system of S.P. Ryabushinskiy’s mansion does not only serve the
decorative function but it also provides a graphical indication of the main connections in the “core” of the building by emphasizing the major points of maximum strains in the structure and plays an organizing and constructing role as well.
Keywords: ornament, ornamental and decorative system, S.P. Ryabushinskiy’s mansion, F. Schechtel, interior,
architectural environment, Russian modernism.
Introduction. An image of a building is seen both through its plastic, construction solution and
its decorative system which tends to be the most easily perceived association scheme shaping a particular architectural entity. It is décor that lends a house a plastic definition and a system of comprehensive emphasis allowing for the most compositionally fascinating angles [6, 12, 15].
An ornamentally decorative system of the famous mansion owned by S. P. Ryabushinskiy designed by F. Schechtel is unique in the following way: while being independent and suffi-cient, it is also an essential part of the building composition serving as a sort of an external manifestation of functional links.
In order to prove that, it is necessary that a scheme of ornamental compositions is analyzed both from outside and inside the mansion.
1. Ornamental system of the mansion of S. P. Ryabushinskiy. What has to be noted is that
for F. Schechtel a rhythmic, “classic” ornament scheme is characteristic which is designed based on the principle of a certain (identical) repetitive motive (rapport) as well as an orna-ment designed as a white poem where repetitive motives are not identical but are nevertheless of a similar nature. This applies to a basic ornamental system associated with a façade compo-sition and planning (Fig. 1––4).
Fig. 1. Cellar plan
(source: http://places.arch-grafika.ru/news/2009-05-12-6)
Fig. 2. First floor plan
(source: http://places.arch-grafika.ru/news/2009-05-12-6) When it comes to the character of the ornament position in the facades (Fig. 5), it is also im-portant to point out two décor schemes where one, i.e. the basic one, belongs to the façade space organization principle. The other one, which is an essential part of the first one, is a sys-tem of decorative emphasis manifesting compositional links, i.e. the first one is connected
with the rhythmic position of architectural details while the second one exists inside the com-position owing itself to the first one.
Fig. 3. Second floor plan
(source: http://places.arch-grafika.ru/news/2009-05-12-6)
Fig. 4. Third floor (prayer room) plan
(source: http://places.arch-grafika.ru/news/2009-05-12-6) In the mansion of Ryabushinskiy some ornamentation underpins the entire approach to the architectural and decorative composition of the building as well as mediated opposition of various traditions, i. e. plastic (such as the front porch, the shape of the balconies, gates and stairways) and geometric (the main part of the building) ones [5, 10]. A play of shades owes itself to alternating external and buried composition elements with the interaction of the plas-tic high-maintenance doorway pattern (back and front porch) generating an extra rhythmic unit (Fig. 6).
The building façade forms a single pulsing chain that is only seen while in motion. Neverthe-less there is no talking about the existing rhythm as a literal ornament system. Ornament in the modern period gains a spatial character. It is during this period that new relationships be-tween ornament and space emerge when the former no longer just belongs to the latter but is capable of existing beyond it breaking through into space [2––4, 25]. Ornament sometimes becomes a finite composition with an environment of its own (Fig. 6).
Fig. 6. Fragment of a mosaic panel depicting irises. Photo by M. Fedin
An example of these ornament transformations in the mansion of Ryabushinskiy could be fencing, balcony frames as well as window frames with their own composition which for the frames in particular is no longer part of the plane but that of the common rhythmic scheme. Typical spires in the enclosing gate can be found in the balcony frames as well. Curved plant tubes and stylized leaves and flowers, which serve as window crosses, are alike and form a continuous rhythmic composition. Thus despite various forms it contains, the building is seen as an entity and seems as if it was a living being. I. e. apart from the functional factors, the architectural details such as the arched windows, similarly-shaped rectangular balconies and the front driveway comply with a certain internal compositional rhythm that contributes to a basic ornamental scheme. Like a band, it circles the “main” cubic part of the house.
As was mentioned above, a system of strictly rhythmic ornaments in the building facades is part of the basic scheme. It includes a famous mosaic frieze with irises (see Fig. 6), ornamen-tal system inside each frame composition (balcony, fencing) as well as smaller ornamenornamen-tal compositions in the front door.
In terms of the interiors of the mansion of Ryabushinkiy, the ornament position is so complex that everything centers around the ornamental rhythm: from a door handle to massive portals above the windows and doors as well as furniture details and drapery [14, 18].
First of all, special attention should be paid to the abundance of ornamental motives on the floor, which can be encountered as early as at the entrance where “diverging” semi-circles resembling a trace of a little stone falling into water are located. Further mosaic arches are fixed with an ornament band resembling a classic Greek meander which is not exactly that (there is a degree of associative freedom). The existing parquet floor has a certain “fluidity” which might be due to that fact that the ornament pattern resembles a free wave movement. Wavy lines have a fairly free rhythm and are not rigidly connected with wall verticals as was the mosaic floor in the main hallway (Fig. 7).
Fig. 7. Main entrance (photo: www.mosantico.ru)
When it comes to the main traditional location of ornament, i.e. walls, it is possible to analyze only the first floor of the mansion of Ryabushinskiy and the hall walls where there is a stair-case for two floors as the original furnishing was not retained. On the first floor: the dining room originally had a decorative frieze at the ceiling (it was not retained); in the staircase hall
at the conditional boundary between the first and second floor there is a fresco-style frieze along the entire perimeter including the second floor hall. It should also be noted that orna-mental compositions in the doorways as well as the portals above them and the windows in-cluding stained-glass compositions and inner balcony framing facing the staircase [9, 11, 13]. One of the most fascinating surfaces in the mansion of Ryabushinskiy decorated with ments has to be the ceiling spaces. Most (and the most plastically distinguished) of the orna-mental system is connected with the flooring planes and beams it is connected with tectonical-ly. However, the ceiling décor is not identical throughout the house building: there are partic-ularly lavish areas such as, e.g., the guestroom ceiling (or what can also be referred to as the women’s part), the dining-room flooring displaying a clear tendency toward “texturing” of the ornamental system. Few in number but intensely expressive “nodes” of the decorative system can also be found in the distinct flooring beams of the front hall and the master study. These are commonly small self-sufficient motives found at the beam-wall joints. Decorative motives in their own right are rails of the famous wavy staircase with its lights.
Generally the ornament position scheme is such that it suggests an attention-arresting effect on the interiors and spatial “nodes” in the house. The decorative motives fix almost all the construction links in the building architecture metaphorically manifesting moments of “mus-cular” tension or relaxation of the building structure.
2. Architectural environment of the building: a constructive role of the ornamental sys-tem. The ornamental system of the mansion of Ryabushinskiy serves not only the decorative
function but is also a graphic indication of the main links in the building “skeleton” emphasi-zing the major moments of the constructive role of the ornamental system.
The ornamental system of the mansion of Ryabushinksiy can be divided into two parts: the basic system central to the general rhythmic feeling of the architectural composition as well as the particular one which seems to be inside the basic one. The particular system is crucial to the building composition.
The main motives of the basic ornamental system are architectural parts of the building: win-dows, balconies, porch and floor framing as they are also essential to the architectural compo-sition. Therefore large blocks of the rhythmic building scheme can be employed in order to identify the way the house is connected with the existing architectural environment as well as the mass is internally connected with the interior space. Owing to the distinct geometric vol-ume of the building, a system of curves and embeddings is clearly seen that corresponds with the basic cube. The “pulsing” rhythm of the architectural details that “breathes life” into the volume and connects it with the surroundings [1, 23].
The repetitively shaped main volume of the building but a significantly small cube of the front porch generates a certain resonance between the whole and its part. Simultaneously, being remote from the façade plane, it allows one to mentally step aside towards the Ascen-sion Cathedral across the road while bringing together the manAscen-sion of Ryabushnksiy and one of the main buildings in its architectural space (Fig. 8).
In a sense the Ascension Cathedral can be considered a dominant starting point that F. Schechtel relied on while designing Ryabushinkiy’s house. Proportional ratios between the main parts of the buildings and some details are distinct: e.g., the cube shape is basic for the mansion as well as the cathedral. Their height (without the dome and glass pyramid) is almost identical. The proportional ratios and correspondence of the shape of the lower windows of the cathedral and the first floor of the house also suggest their inner similarity. Therefore the existing mutual rhythmic connection between the building of the Ascension Cathedral and the mansion of S.P. Ryabushinskiy allows the new building of the private mansion to easily “fit in” into the existing urban construction fabric.
Fig. 8. Facades of the mansion of S. Ryabusinskiy and the Ascension Cathedral. Photo by L. V. Podolskaya
A similar connection is also found in the neighbouring construction group dating back to the 17th century, i. e. the Granatny Court. As it overlooks a different, non-front façade of Ryabu-shinskiy’s house (even though for the modern architecture this division is rather conditional), the mutual connection is at the level of architectural details: the correspondence of the window shape (narrow ones with arches at the end) that are placed in the stairway diagonal leading into the third floor, into the prayer room as well as the balcony by association resembling balconies
characteristic of the ancient Russian architecture [17, 19]. It would be of interest to compare the balcony image from the façade overlooking Spiridonovka. The former has something universal in its image which we associate with the “blown by the winds of time” ruins of the ancient Greek cathedrals with a low-hanging web of the “net” of the framing and is naturally viewed along with the thin column rows of the classicism portico of the Ascension Cathedral. The lat-ter, which is somewhat heavy with a lavishly crude shape, the balcony opposite the Granatny Court follows the national architectural tradition. Therefore there is not only a rhythmic connec-tion of architectural parts of the whole but also the entirety of the associative layers.
Simultaneously, a basic ornamental system determines not only the way a building is con-nected with the surroundings but is also indicative of an internal struggle of what seems to be an inert wall mass with the dynamics of the surroundings. Two remote porches of the house have a power, a viscous density of the walls which only in places cracks under the impact of spatial movements. The shape and character of the holes “washed out” in the thickness of the walls are proportional to the washing out of the “fabric” of the house itself: the front porch of the house is more remote from the main volume, i.e. mass resistance is much more intense, the contrast between the wall and openings is smaller, the mass dominates the space. The an-gular porch is almost part of the house. Its openings are considerably smaller and the massive porch columns have more distinct resistance plastics making a visual impression of “swelled muscles” of the pillar columns. There is a whole different story with the balconies: the “an-cient” one above the front porch is very open with the “hanging” framing taking central stage in its structure as if remains of the former expressive glory of the façade. What is referred to as an ancient Russian balcony across the road is so solid, dense and clings to the main part of the building so tightly that it seems about to merge with it, which is triumph of tangible cor-porality, incredible clarity of the bearing and auxiliary elements [20, 21, 22].
The finishing touch of the general rhythmic motive of the existing architectural composition is put with a play of shades in the curves and holes of the wall surface emerging due to a re-mote roof and a multi-layer ledge above it. A play of shades generates an extra juicy emphasis in the overall dynamics and brings a whole host of semitones into the game. The window ap-ertures have a similar effect on the internal structure of the house creating the second row of rhythmic organization of the building being part of the façade plane. It is softer but is also more “detailed”, which allows it to serve as an intermediate link from the basic ornamental scheme to the particular one. Apart from the general shape, the window apertures have an in-ternal cross graphics which is part of the already particular system and serves to manifest and emphasize the compositional nodes (Fig. 9, 10).
Fig. 9. Window crosses. Photo by L. V. Podolskaya
Fig. 10. Row of the windows of the main façade of the first floor (the photo of the washing in the 20th century)
Overall, what is referred to as a particular ornamental system manifests a tectonic structure not only in the building interior but also plays a certain role in the external image of the struc-ture. This is most graphic in the composition of the window apertures, balcony framing, porch rails and floor framing. Metaphorically speaking, these fine “veins” “stitch” the “falling apart” wall fabric while also fixing the most strained spots. E. g., the window apertures of the first floor are mostly vertically bent taking on an almost arch shape, which is associated with re-sistance to the powerful pressure of the upper floors (Fig. 10).
Conversely, the window crosses in the second floor of the building are more free due to the graphics resembling blooming trees, the upper part of the house seems “in bloom” when the fabric is “blooming” trying to rejuvenate and break into blossom. The pressure of the flooring and the wall mass is hardly felt, the vertical seems to be setting free from the horizontal grip
reaching out for light. The flower petals “part” the window apertures seeking to merge into the blooming irises in the mosaic frieze.
The picturesque mosaic-style frieze (see Fig. 6) needs a special mention as it is largely part of the general ornamental system of the building and it thus has the internal definition, self-sufficiency characteristic of easel and monumental arts. The picturesque band almost along the entirety of the building is one of the highlights of the house which lends it uniqueness and edge. The compositional role the frieze plays is that it emphasizes the boundaries of the main part of the building, fixes the vertical structure of the house setting it apart from its natural environment where the sky colour blends with the blue shimmering of the mosaic. The frieze horizontal repeats itself in the form of a narrow matt band in the mansion façade overlooking the court as well as in the wide ledge over the roof itself. Due to distinctly emphasized hori-zontals, the architectural composition acquires definition and tectonic credibility.
3. Ornament in the interior of the mansion of S. P. Ryabushinkiy. The compositional role
of the ornamental system of the mansion of Ryabushinkiy is not limited to manifestation and emphasis of the internal structure of the building in its exterior: a significant role is played by the décor in the interior as well. The same systems as in the building façade can conditionally be identified in the interior ornament, i.e. the general and particular ones. The general or-namental scheme in the interior is the principle of the distribution of the ornament in the mansion space and its presence in each individual room. The particular ornamental scheme looks at the character of individual decorative nodes manifesting the compositional features of the architecture. In practice the analysis of the compositional role of the ornamental schemes is the same as for the external image of the building except the face that the interi-or contains some decinteri-orative compositions that serve not only the decinteri-orative function but are also constructive elements with a particular functional load. They are the rails of the front staircase or the inner balcony framing (Fig. 11, 12).
At the entrance of the mansion of Ryabushinksiy one is struck by the abundance and variety of decorative motives that do not normally retain their practical function and blend into the house structure. Considering the general principles of the distribution of the ornament in the house by determining its rhythmic system, it is a lot easier to move on to its individual elements.
On closer examination, the original impression of decorative overload of the building interior is gone as not each premise is identically ornamented [16]. The house has its own “pulsation” where the guestroom, master’s study and staircase hall is more ornamented than the front hall or the study’s lounge. This is primarily due to a more secular nature of the first floor overall as well
as the functional features of the above premises. The staircase hall is the axis of the architectural composition of the house around which there are rooms “growing” like tree branches (Fig. 13).
Fig. 11. Inner balcony in the staircase hall
(photo by O. Maleev)
Fig. 12. Staircase (photo from the early 20th century)
Fig. 13. Plan of the 1st and 2nd floors of the building. The movement directions in space mimicking
the development of a tree trunk in the plan are marked in red
The second floor of the building is more private, chamber-like as it is less decoratively loa-ded; almost no interior furnishing was retained. It is also due to a varying degree of
decora-tiveness in the interior of the mansion of Ryabushinskiy that the internal composition of the building is easily “comprehensible” that is of interest not only in terms of functional solution but also as a symbol conveying certain ideas of the author and probably of the customer. The house has a three-level division in the vertical, which is manifested in the “movement” and richness of the ornament: from the first to the third floor there is a gradual reduction in the number of decorative motives as well as their emergence [7, 8]. If there is a lot of ornament in the first floor that “rips” the walls from the plane and it is “independent”, in the second and third floor the décor gradually “flows” along the surface becoming a picturesque painting (e. g., see the interior of the prayer room in the third floor) (Fig. 14).
Fig. 14. Interior of the prayer room.
Photo by L. V. Podolskaya
Along with the vertical there is also a horizontal rhythmic organization that was mentioned above (“pulsation” of the décor) resulting in the spiral movement in the house gravitating to-wards the front staircase. The character of the ornament position allows the movement system of the house to be identified as well as the laws of the development of architectural composi-tion to be determined with individual nodes emphasizing the structure.
Hence the system of the flooring beams on the ceiling surface in the front, staircase hall as well as the master’s study as well as their dark colouring add to the emphasis of the building structure with a focus on the structure of the auxiliary and bearing parts. These are decorative elements that lend definition. They can be small spirals at the joints of beams with the bearing
wall in the front hall or this is putting the whole ceiling into an extraordinary “flowing” dark mahogany frame as in the master’s study (Fig. 15, 16).
Fig. 16. Fragment of the dining-room ceiling
(photo from the early 20th century)
Fig. 15. Guestroom. Photo by O. Maleev
Something similar takes place in the dining room: first, the ceiling here has a slightly curved dome with peculiar “ribs” that the flooring beams transformed into. This allows the general emphasis of the interior furnishing to be shifted to the unusual ceiling solution. “Rigidity ribs” of the ceiling are crossed with longitudinal ornamental weighs to allow the effect of a “bare structure” to be mediated and lends the surface an extra edge (Fig. 17).
Nevertheless a genuinely upscale ceiling solution can only be found in the guestroom or in the so-called women’s part: abundance of the relief and a picturesque insertion is mind-blowing. The entire ceiling surface starts “vibrating” stopping the gaze from fixing on anything in par-ticular. The panel in a cartouche-like frame ruins the entirety of the plane generating the illu-sion of shooting into the sky. The structure is completely hidden with not much left of it ex-cept long relief plant tubes that “hold” the ceiling stopping it from completely “floating” as they act as the “rigidity ribs” as in the dining room. This has to be the only room in the house where the ornamental scheme is not designed to manifest the structure but rather to hide it. Nevertheless the vertical plane is rigidly fixed not by the decor but the angles and boundaries between the vertical and horizontal are marked by fine wooden strips (Fig. 18).
Fig. 17. Dining room (fireplace and frieze were not retained). Photo from the early 20th century
Fig. 18. Ceiling in the guestroom. Photo by O. Maleev
It should be noted that the compositional role of the ornament is only associated with the character of the ceiling plane solution as well as the front staircase which is actually part of the structure. In this case plastic staircase rails are purely functional. All the other fragments of the ornamental scheme (floor and door ornament, window frames, door portals) as well as the objects with their own image (lamps, lights, column chapiter, stained glass) play a func-tional role while being “guides” in the mansion emphasizing their direction in the interior, its nature. Being a self-sufficient sign system, they contribute to the image of the mansion. Ho-wever, they ultimately form symbolic schemes that require a separate analysis [24].
Conclusions. The detailed analysis of the ornamental and decorative system of the mansion
of S. P. Ryabushinskiy conducted in the paper shows a totally unique approach to the organi-zation of the composition and interior of the building in particular and the architectural envi-ronment overall using ornament that starts playing the organizing and constructive role in this context emphasizing the main compositional nodes in a way “putting together” the building and encapsulating it into the existing fabric of urban construction. Ornament sort of acquires a spatial character. It is not only part of a building but it is also capable of existing outside it breaking into space and “capturing” it.
The ornamental system of the mansion divided into two décor schemes: a basic and particular one running through the entire space from the façade to the building interior. The general or-namental scheme includes the principle of the ornament organization, its distribution in space. The second particular scheme exists inside the first one and is a system of decorative elements identifying the compositional nodes, compositional features of the architecture. This kind of analysis appears to be paramount and most instrumental in understanding a building composi-tion and its essence as intended by the architect. The principle of such an analysis are dis-cussed using the example of the mansion of S. P. Ryabushinskiy.
References
1. Aks I. Sovremennaya Moskva. Arkhitekturno-kriticheskie ocherki [Contemporary Moscow. Architectural-critical essays]. Saint-Petersburg, 1904. 43 p.
2. Antonova E. A. Novyi natsional'nyi stil' v russkom moderne [New national style in Russian art Nouveau].
Izvestiya Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta, 2012, no. 3 (67), pp. 81––85.
3. Borisova E. A., Sternin G. Yu. Russkii modern [Russian modern]. Moscow, Sovetskii khudozhnik Publ., 1990. 359 p.
4. Borodina S., Bulgakova A. Eksperiment s normoi: stil' modern v arkhitekture i prikladnom iskusstve [Expe-riment with the norm: art Nouveau in architecture and applied art]. Mir iskusstv: vestnik Mezhdunarodnogo
instituta antikvariata, 2014, no. 3 (07), pp. 116––125.
5. Bykova E. N., Kirichenko O. M. Kontseptsii tvorcheskogo formoobrazovaniya v stile modern [Concepts of creative shaping in the art Nouveau style]. Vestnik Khar'kovskoi gosudarstvennoi akademii dizaina i iskusstv, 2014, no. 2, pp. 56––60.
6. Gerchuk Yu. Chto takoe ornament? [What is the pattern?]. Moscow, Galart Publ., 1998. 327 p.
7. Davydova I. I. Smyslovaya perspektiva i organizatsiya arkhitekturnogo prostranstva v kul'ture rannego moskovskogo moderna [Semantic perspective and organization of architectural space in the culture of early Moscow art Nouveau]. Vestnik slavyanskikh kul'tur, 2012, vol. 24, iss. 2, pp. 84––91
8. Davydova I. I. Simvol kak soteriologicheskaya kategoriya v russkoi porubezhnoi kul'ture moderna. Osobnyak
9. Dzhandzhugazova E. A. Arkhitekturnye sokrovishcha Moskvy: osobnyak Ryabushinskogo [Architectural trea-sures of Moscow: Ryabushinsky mansion]. Sovremennye problemy servisa i turizma, 2014, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 93––101. 10. Kirillov V. V. Arkhitektura russkogo moderna: Opyt formologicheskogo analiza [The architecture of Rus-sian modernism: the Experience formological analysis]. Moscow, Izd-vo MGU, 1979. 213 p.
11. Kirichenko E. Arkhitekturnoe nasledie Fedora Shekhtelya v Moskve [Architectural heritage of Fyodor Shekhtel in Moscow]. Moscow, ID Rudentsovykh Publ., 2011. 316 p.
12. Kirichenko E. I. Inter'er russkogo moderna (1900––1910 gg.) [Interior of Russian art Nouveau (1900–– 1910)]. Dekorativnoe iskusstvo SSSR, 1971, no. 10, pp. 40––47.
13. Kirichenko E. I. Russkaya arkhitektura 1830––1910-kh godov [Russian architecture 1830––1910 of years]. Moscow, Iskusstvo Publ., 1978. 399 p.
14. Kirichenko E. I. F. O. Shekhtel'. Zhizn'. Obrazy. Idei [F. O. Shekhtel. Life. Images. Ideas]. Moscow, Pro-gress-Traditsiya Publ., 2011. 360 p.
15. Kosterina M. G. Stil' modern kak zavershayushchii etap razvitiya epokhi romantizma [Art Nouveau as the final stage of development of the era of romanticism]. Vestnik Altaiskoi gosudarstvennoi pedagogicheskoi
akademii, 2010, no. 4, pp. 16––19.
16. Kosterina M. G. [Aesthetic contradictions of art Nouveau at the turn of XIX––XX centuries]. Trudy
"Problemy gumanitarnogo znaniya v nauke i obrazovanii" [Proc. "Problems of humanitarian knowledge in
sci-ence and education"]. Problemy gumanitarnogo znaniya v nauke i obrazovanii]. Barnaul, 2010, pp. 178––184. 17. Kuz'min M. A. Modern v grazhdanskom stroitel'stve Moskvy kontsa XIX nachala XX vv. [Modern in the civil construction of Moscow late XIX early XX centuries.]. Vestnik slavyanskikh kul'tur, 2011, vol. XXII, iss. 4, pp. 30––34.
18. Man'kovskaya N. Estetika postmodernizma [Aesthetics of postmodernism]. Mocsow — Saint-Petersburg, Tsentr gumanitarnykh initsiativ Publ., 2016. 494 p.
19. Nashchokina M. V. Moskovskii modern. Izd. 3-e, peresm., ispr. i dop. [Moscow art Nouveau. 3еd.].
Saint-Petersburg, Kolo Publ., 2011. 822 p.
20. Nashchokina M. V. Tvorchestvo Frantsa Shekhtelya i evropeiskii modern: osobennosti tvorcheskoi in-dividual'nosti [Creativity of Franz Schechtel and European art Nouveau: features of creative individuality].
Aca-demia. Arkhitektura i stroitel'stvo, 2010, no. 1, pp. 31––40.
21. Roshchenya D. A. Modern v russkoi arkhitekture nachala XX v. [Modern in Russian architecture of the ear-ly XX century.]. Novyi istoricheskii vestnik, 2001, no. 3 (5), pp. 75––82.
22. Geidor T. I. F. O. Shekhtel' i problemy istorii russkoi arkhitektury kontsa XIX –– nachala XX veka: sb. nauch. tr. [Proc. F. O. "Shekhtel and problems of history of Russian architecture of the late XIX –– early XX century"]. Moscow, TsNIIPgradostroitel'stva Publ., 1988. 113 p.
23. Filicheva N. V. Modern (k voprosu o probleme stilya) [Modern (on the problem of style)].
Nauchno-tekhnicheskii vestnik Sankt-peterburgskogo gosudarstvennogo instituta tochnoi mekhaniki i optiki
(tekhnicheskogo universiteta), 2003, no. 8, pp. 194––208.
24. Shevelenko I. Modernizm kak arkhaizm: natsionalizm i poiski modernistskoi estetiki v Rossii [Modernism as archaism: nationalism and the search for modernist aesthetics in Russia]. Moscow, Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie Publ., 2017. 336 p.
25. Bonta J. Architecture and its Interpretation: a Study of Expressive Systems in Architecture. New York,
