Нова фасада на Министерството за правда

мислам и нај искрено се надевам дека се во план зашто се ужас!!

Originally posted by Rus77 Originally posted by fichot Skopje was never (or since antiquity) a typical European city. Perhaps you know, it was under the Turks for more than 500 years which gave it quite the oriental look. European tendencies only began to (re)appear in the 1920s. The 30s brought the first modernist buildings, and it would surely continue to grow that way even w/o the commies or the quake. Here you have a finished, fully-functioning building, quite normal I'd say, not a masterpiece, but certainly not ugly. And then you spend several million euros to paint over a fake neoclassical facade. And this has happened (or will eventually happen) with dozens of other buildings (some of them, like the govt building, GTC, EVN, Metropol... significant examples of the city's architecture modern history). The post office you show admiration for will certainly be "baroque"-ized in some near future. And all this at the expense of hundreds of millions of euros in the near-poorest European country. Most of the architects ignore the PM's neoneoclassical wishes, so you have the last 12 or so facades/buildings done by a single asswipe of an architect who appears alone on contests. Can you imagine someone changing St. Basil's Cathedral into a Notre-dame look-a-like, simply based on personal taste?    Instead of chasing after long abandoned ideals and making the city look like a movie set/theme park, Skopje would look more European if it embraced the current trends. At the moment, sadly, it falls somewhere between Disneyland/Las Vegas and Ashgabat (btw, do you admire this town's recent "neoclassical" revival also?) Not only Macedonian Skopje but and other cities in the Balkan countries had the misfortune to be under the influence of the Ottoman Empire.... but visual and cultural Europeanization of these lands began a little earlier than the date of their liberation from the Ottoman rule. I've seen pictures of many Balkan cities after their Europeanization: and Belgrade, and Sarajevo and Sofia early 20th century, ....and Skopje as these cities possibly a smaller scale passed a strong Europeanization.

A picture worth a 1000 words. This is Macedonia square ~1875-1900.




Where is this strong European look you are suggesting Skopje developed along with other cities before being "freed" from the Turks. Belgrade was liberated early in the 19th century, and Sofia around 1878 i think. Most, if not all, of theirs classical architecture comes later. Sarajevo was liberated in 1918, but previously had ~40 years of Austro-Hungarian rule during which European looks and urban planning started.
Certainly, due to the world growing smaller (railroads, newspapers, emigration...) some European elements started to appear on the facades of buildings, but really a long-shot away from the standard Euro-look of the before mentioned cities. The city started to expand on the right side of the Vardar only after 1873 due to the proximity of the then built railroad station.   

Originally posted by Rus77 By the way i do not mind Modernist architecture, and I like modernism and brutalism, but in moderate doses or in combination with the classics, as for example in Belgrade, where the imperial architecture in large proportions, combined with elegant examples of modernism in smaller proportions, does the city a very stylish and interesting to the study. Alas, in the case of Skopje it is not so, after the earthquake, the city has retained very little of classical architecture by the way not its the best examples, and after an extensive renovation in the style of communism, finally turned into a gray, boring city without a "European look": as though Skopje not in Europe, and is the city of the New World. I think it's not fair, especially considering that before the earthquake it was not so.

Well now, cities develop differently, they aren't made on a factory line you know? So, some have more, some have less modern buildings in their centers.

Architecture, as an applied art, develops all the time and tries to follow the ideals of the present and offer ideas for the future.

Based on the looks of buildings one can "read" the city history. Sadly, sometimes, fine examples of architecture are torn down (eg: Singer building, NYC) so other, "duller" ones can take place, but we have to understand that money and politics have a major role in architecture as in lots of other arts too.
On other occasions, nature shows its cruel face and throws a small armageddon in your lap. So, when you have 80% of the city leveled down and 200K people with no roof over their heads, what do you do? Do you turn to building baroque palaces or to rationalist economy housing?

Style of communism? Seriously? As an architecture aficionado you should know better.

Gray? You seem to have seen older, pre-war, photos of Skopje. Check for photos from 1950-1980. The city certainly doesn't look gray and dull to me in those photos. Maybe it's "red propaganda". However, you should learn to make a difference between gray and neglected.
Btw, if the city was soooo beautiful before the quake, how come photo/video documentation is so scarce? 99% of the imagery is concentrated around the square and 1-2 main streets around it. I mean, if there were plenty of noteworthy buildings around, we should have had quite more documentary photos or tourist shots? Where did everything disappear... ok, some was lost in the quake, but surely Skopje had hundreds of thousands of tourists that were admiring its beauty back then (just like in Paris or London). But no photos... sadly.

Originally posted by Rus77 As for the fake neoclassical facade. Better fake neoclassical facade than gray faceless architecture that perhaps that may exist in residential areas of the city, in quality the social housing, but not placed in the center of Skopje, where should be buildings as a showcase, a business card of the country. .... but not a cause of shame in front of tourists from other cities in the world, especially from such cities as for example Paris, Rome or St. Petersburg. Tourists will be disappointed when they saw a gray, faceless arhitecture. Need to be more far-sighted ....

Would you rather have a fake Picasso (or Rembrant perhaps) or a genuine work of art from an artist you can afford? I'd always choose the latter, because no matter how beautiful the fake appears, I'll always know that behind the frame it's just a cheap print ripped off from a calendar.

Every building has a face, albeit faces can be different. In fact, all this recent crap has made me appreciate modern architecture more than before.
Anyway, I couldn't care less for the tourist's opinion. Tourists present masses, and masses are vastly uneducated and often with poor taste. I mean look at them, just look at them. Instead of dressing in lush Victorian or Louis the XIV wardrobes they just put plain, dull, contemporary clothing. Instead of driving in baroque "Sleeping-beauty" styled carriages they choose factory-lined Fords and Volkswagens, often with a dull gray or silver color.
Far-sighted you say? How about Bilbao, the city has a pretty old town but it didn't have significant tourist numbers until it built the super-modern Guggenheim museum after which the numbers sky-rocketed.

Originally posted by Rus77 As regards costs, on the reconstruction of facades and new classical buildings to such things must not feel sorry for the moneys. Europeanization of the Balkan countries after of their liberation from the Ottoman Empire, also took place when these countries were poor. Money spent on the reconstruction of facades pay off thanks to tourists who are "new classical" Skopje will be much more interesting. The main thing that the architects who build these new buildings and new classical facades, should be more professional in their work: the construction or reconstruction of classical buildings, facades or sculptures.

How about some public rest-rooms for those tourists? I'd like that, think it means a lot, and for locals also. We are in middle of Koce's (the mayor) second mandate and there's still no sight of these simple and cheap utilities. We also lack bicycle tracks and better public transport. Better infrastructure around both the city and the country itself.
But, surely, we have money to erase history and build Potemkin villages.
As much as i admire the accomplishments of the capitals of various empires, i'am aware that many of those riches were built on tons of blood and deaths, slavery and genocide of its and other peoples.

Maybe if we implement slavery (although we're not far from it) we'll be able to achieve even grander results?

Gray and damaged objects can be refreshed and made acceptable-looking (even for the highly developed tourist tastes) for far less than millions of euros. Not to mention that these objects are being "prettyfied" only on their fronts. God forbid a tourist wandering in the backyards, the whole scam will fall down. Also, some very significant pre-war buildings still stay almost ruined and in great need of renovation (check some of them around the Park, and in Debar-Maalo) but sadly they aren't. And yes... centuries old churches and monasteries await an eventual foreign donation (from the evil EU :P) so they can be renovated.    

Cities should look toward creating better lives for its occupants, not for tourists who come and go after 2 days. Btw, why would a tourist come to see cheap copies of Paris, London, Vienna and the likes when he can go and see the originals. Ok, they see copies of them in Vegas.

Originally posted by Rus77 With regard to such buildings as GOVT, GTC, EVN, Metropol ... I'm sorry but there is nothing special, especially the GTC ... they are too simple and slightly provincial for center the nation's capital. Modernism and Brutalism can also be majestic, as for example: building BANCO CENTRAL DE VENEZUELA CARACAS, EDIFICIO Contraloría de Bogotá, Banco Hipotecario Buenos Aires. So in my opinion in the case of Skopje new neoclassical facades for these buildings ( GOVT, GTC, EVN, Metropol ): clearly better.

Well sometimes less is more. And surely Skopje's modern buildings are closer to to the ones you numbered than the new plaster facades are to the Louvre or the Hermitage. Btw, you don't think the examples you show are gray and dull? Think you're being quite selective, along "it's always the others who have it better kind of thing". I also wasn't aware those South American countries were communist as we were. Well, you learn something new every day.

Apart from a few striking examples, modern architecture hasn't been around long enough to earn its deserved appreciation. The normal world only recently started acknowledging this and began recognizing some objects as cultural/historical landmarks. We, sadly, instead of progressing toward this, in just a few years we pushed back a few hundred years and started implementing styles and urban planning from long-gone eras.

Originally posted by Rus77 As for : "changing St. Basil's Cathedral into a Notre-dame look-a-like" .... strange comparison .... St. Basil's Cathedral is no worse than Notre Dame ... why reconstruct the magnificent cathedral, which beautiful absolutely for everyone.

Yeah.. but it's not European-like.. Notre-Dame is far more European looking, not to mention St. Peter's in the Vatican.

Originally posted by Rus77 As for Disneyland:.....Construction of buildings in the classical style is the recent trend in the world. And especially this trend progresses in developed countries with cities where and so many brilliant examples of classical architecture: for example the US, UK, Germany. So the idea that new buildings in the classical style will be Disneyland so luckily for the world was a myth. Explore this site: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1022349 The building in Las Vegas and especially Ashgabat is the last stage of kitsch. Or do you think those who support the idea of building in the classical style, always tasteless. I already wrote, that the new buildings in Skopje, in the classical style, reconstruction of facades and sculptures, built unfortunately clearly with error, but the idea of ​​reincarnation a gray and faceless city in classic European city is well and should be continued for the benefit of the citizens, but architects should be more professional in their work.

Classical being the recent trend? Really, please enlighten me. You pick one thread among thousands of others, all of them concerning THE ACTUAL trends.
Not long ago I was looking through the portfolios of the biggest architecture studios in the world. Among hundreds of projects I only found less than a half-dozen classically influenced buildings, and most of them were an expansion of older buildings. I'm not an architect but for leisure I often check some established architecture sites and internet portals. I don't remember seeing posts about anything that even resembles neoclassical. Also, why aren't they taking notice of Skopje's grandeur, at least not in a positive manner? Oh, well, as it's said - there's no such thing as bad publicity.
Досвидања.

Edited by fichot - 27-Mar-2015 at 12:26

Originally posted by fichot A picture worth a 1000 words.

A picture worth a 1000 words. This is Skopje ~1910-1920.

Originally posted by fichot Where is this strong European look you are suggesting Skopje developed along with other cities before being "freed" from the Turks.

Seems I wrote that in Skopje, this process was in more modest scale.

Originally posted by fichot Based on the looks of buildings one can "read" the city history.

Yes you are right, on architecture, you can read the history of the city ... but some "dark" periods of history, which unfortunately are displayed in the architecture of the city, it is better to erase, destroy like a bad dream, which costs forget.
This applies not only to Skopje ... In my country, in which miraculously survived the magnificent St. Petersburg, full of unfortunate cities, especially near the Urals, Siberia, where were destroyed historical centers of these cities with numerous examples of "classical" or "classic russian" architecture for the construction of endless gray blocks even in the central regions of these cities. And the scale of this curse became especially noticeable during the economic crisis of the late 80s - prior to the 2005th year, caused by the collapse of the communist crisis. Economic devastation industrial cities combined depressive faceless architecture has pushed people into alcoholism, suicide and emigration in Moscow, St. Petersburg and even abroad to get out of this depressive environment built by the Communists. Believe me people from many Siberian and the Urals cities hates their dreary cities where want or to drink or escape from there forever. Fortunately, as in the case of Skopje since 2005-ies in these cities also began the restoration, reconstruction of facades or construction of new "classic" buildings for example ... such the same changes are taking place in a depressive city Yorshk-Ola, although as and in all Eastern Europe, the construction of new "classic" buildings in Yorshk Ola occurs with violation of proportions and with elements of kitsch. But even so, it is better than depressive, communist bloc, which the architects of a later era 1950-1980-ies of communism, decided to build even in historical centers, thus disfiguring the cities and destroying monuments of architecture.
So what are some "dark" periods of history should be erased without regret.

Originally posted by fichot Gray? You seem to have seen older, pre-war, photos of Skopje. Check for photos from 1950-1980.

And I saw a photo of Skopje 1950-1980-ies ... you are wrong, it looks gray and dull ... as a person who lives in country where there is the city of St. Petersburg, I easily see the difference between a beauty and not beauty.

Originally posted by fichot Btw, if the city was soooo beautiful before the quake

I can not understand your sarcastic tone in relation to the scale of beauty or beauty of your hometown Skopje before the earthquake 1963 year. You think your city before the earthquake in 1963 was not beautiful?

Originally posted by fichot Would you rather have a fake Picasso (or Rembrant perhaps) or a genuine work of art from an artist you can afford? I'd always choose the latter, because no matter how beautiful the fake appears, I'll always know that behind the frame it's just a cheap print ripped off from a calendar.

It is foolish to compare a worldwide famous paintings, which are of value to the whole world with the reconstruction of the facade of the building, which has no value nor for the world, nor for Skopje at all, especially when you consider that this impersonality is located in the center of Skopje. I can hardly imagine that such a dull building was located in the center of St. Petersburg or Moscow, and we - the inhabitants are worried about the destruction a faceless buildings, which disfigures the city center.

Originally posted by fichot Anyway, I couldn't care less for the tourist's opinion. Tourists present masses, and masses are vastly uneducated and often with poor taste. I mean look at them, just look at them. (even for the highly developed tourist tastes)

Don't be an so arrogant in their assessments of tourists, especially when you consider that they can bring a profit for your city ... far is not very richest.

Originally posted by fichot How about some public rest-rooms for those tourists? I'd like that, think it means a lot, and for locals also. We are in middle of Koce's (the mayor) second mandate and there's still no sight of these simple and cheap utilities. We also lack bicycle tracks and better public transport. Better infrastructure around both the city and the country itself.

As for your comments on the city's infrastructure ... then you are absolutely right and I agree with you. The exact same problem, and in the cities of Russia, Eastern Europe and many where yet in the World. Macedonia not alone in this problem.

Originally posted by fichot Not to mention that these objects are being "prettyfied" only on their fronts.

As for the reconstruction of the facade with only one front ... it's not very good.

Originally posted by fichot cheap copies of Paris, London, Vienna

Built in Skopje, absolutely, not a copy of the buildings of Paris, London, Vienna. Fortunately, it does not a Las Vegas. But again, these buildings were built in Skopje with gross violations of proportions. You can fix this, but it needs more professional architects that's just knew how to build the "classic" architecture without errors.

Originally posted by fichot And surely Skopje's modern buildings are closer to to the ones you numbered than

You're wrong building GOVT, GTC, EVN, Metropol in no not close to those samples from Latin America, whose cities are famous for their brilliant examples of modernism and brutalism.

Originally posted by fichot Apart from a few striking examples, modern architecture hasn't been around long enough to earn its deserved appreciation. We, sadly, instead of progressing toward this, in just a few years we pushed back a few hundred years and started implementing styles and urban planning from long-gone eras.

Modern architecture must evolve etc ... and this is normal. But this does not prevent the revival of Classic architecture that osbenno may be useful in the future for the revival historical centers of Russian cities, Eastern Europe, Germany, who have lost too many large, beautiful specimens Classic architecture, for one reason or another.

Originally posted by fichot Far-sighted you say? How about Bilbao, the city has a pretty old town but it didn't have significant tourist numbers until it built the super-modern Guggenheim museum after which the numbers sky-rocketed.

As for the beautiful city of Bilbao ... over there were few tourists because it is a provincial city in spite of the imperial architecture of the city center, ie, were little advertising. And construction a magnificent, modern building the Guggenheim Museum became just such good advertising that lacked the city.
Seems I gave the example of Belgrade, where in the center of the right mix proportions of the "classic" and "modern" architecture. European cities are known its rich and long history in the world, which reflected in the splendor of her architecture .... But in those cities of Europe, who have been unlucky preserve its architecture as Rome, Prague and St. Petersburg, is important that in the historic centers of such cities, although a little, but prevailed "classical" architecture combined with good examples of modern architecture. Otherwise, by the standards of Europe, a city with a small amount of "classical" architecture Destined to be eternal provinciality in the shadow of imperial beautiful cities like Paris, Vienna, etc.
A striking example: (In some cases, may even be very bad for example) the capitals Podgorica, Tirana and Pristina are particularly strange phenomenon for Europe... sometimes seeing pictures of these capitals, it is difficult to believe that this is Europe.

Originally posted by fichot Yeah.. but it's not European-like.. Notre-Dame is far more European looking, not to mention St. Peter's in the Vatican.

European "classical" architecture happens different. For example Turkey or the countries of the Caucasus as part of Europe have their own style of "classical" architecture, or their variation European "classical" architecture. And they are no worse than the Western European samples.

Originally posted by fichot Classical being the recent trend?

Yes ... Construction of a new "Classical architecture" is the recent trend of the last few years ... and has a tendency to rapid revival, fortunately .... especially in countries such as the US, UK and Germany. But it does not interfere not prevent to develop     modern architecture and give the world new beatiful samples of modern architecture.

Originally posted by fichot Also, why aren't they taking notice of Skopje's grandeur, at least not in a positive manner?

They are like and me criticize the  unprofessionalism Architects in the performance of its work on construction for new classical buildings and it's fair enough. But the idea for the Construction of a new classical buildings welcomed all over the world, provided a qualitative performance. But in the case of Skopje, the new "classic" of the building and fasades even with gross violations in the proportions, better than the "grey", faceless buildings.

Originally posted by fichot Досвидања.

All the best.


Edited by Rus77 - 28-Mar-2015 at 00:54

Originally posted by Staro Skopje The aforementioned picture was taken in the late 1920s or early 1930s (the Officers' House visible in the background was built in 1929, and the building of the National Bank, which wasn't constructed at the time of taking the photo was built in 1931)

Perhaps a little earlier, maybe not ...
One word not so long ago since the liberation from the Ottoman Empire and slightly before dissemination of modernism.

Old fashioned Serbian Baroque style for me is not the right choice for Skopje. This architectural style makes our capital to become provincial city, not the capital of the Republic of Macedonia. On the other hand, Skopje after 1963 had a real possibility, and on some level this was achieved, to become interested area for the biggest names in modern architecture, professionals like Kenzo Tange. We have to stress this difference. The Macedonian capital today is again oriented to provincial architecture made by authoritarian politicians and architects without experience.

BOJAN,  please name some examples of 'old fashion Serbian baroque' buildings in Skopje?
Can you please , compare them to, lets say 'real attempts' of building a 'national baroque style' buildings in Belgrade, from the same period?
As far as I know, buildings from that period, like the Officers Home building and the Bank, were built by the most outstanding architects that studied in Vienna at the time?
If so, wouldn't it be a precious asset to have such example of architecture from that time, confirming the European influences on the Macedonian ground, or am I wrong again?

Јас за мене ќе кажам дека оваа комбинација на бои мене ми се свиѓа,и јас самиот пред 2 години пробав сам да ја искомбинирам(со мешање на оксидни бои од по 150 денари за да заштедам 70 евра на тие што се комјутерски изработени )
вака испадна кај мене,но искрено ја посакував да ја добијам баш оваа боја од министерството.

еее,дали таа одговара за јавна фасада е друго прашање,за што признавам сум лаик


SAM_4351[/IMG]

Edited by gjoko - 28-Mar-2015 at 21:24

Originally posted by fichot Прашањето треба да биде: дали одговара за институција од таков калибар. Ти изгледа си штедел на боја. Ама убаи цвеќињава, со што музика ги раниш?

со појачалово што сам го направив(заштедив ) на времето кога имав повеќе елан и време

Навистина многу глупо направија со реновирање само на предниот дел на објеките, а од другата страна стара фасада

Сеуште не верувам на своите очи колку глупаво изгледа идејата.

ФОТО ВЕСТ: Зградата на Министерство за правда – едно лице, друга опачина

По речиси две и пол години од почетокот на градежните работи, објектот на Министерството за правда [»мапа] има нов изглед – едно лице, друга опачина. Целосно непознато за досегашната архитектонска пракса во светот, предната страна од зградата на улица Димитрие Чуповски, број 9 доби нова неокласицистичка фасада налик на останатите зданија од „Скопје 2014“, додека задната страна го испочитува оригиналното архитектонско решение. Новата фасада од предната страна е со црвена боја, со бели антички столбови и прозорци, додека од задната страна на објектот е изведено единствено бојадисување на старата фасада. На неокласицистичката фасада од предната страна е поставен и ликот на римската божица на правдата и праведноста Јустиција.













За овој зафат во духот на „Скопје 2014“ беа потрошени над 3,3 милиони евра, ако се земат во предвид објавените договори на веб – страницата на Бирото за јавни набавки. Градежните активности ги вршеа италијанската компанија „Ламоне Мореда“ и „Неимар инженеринг“, додека стручниот надзор над работите го реализираше Градежниот институт „Македонија“.

http://www.build.mk/?p=43872