Lietuvos tarpukario interjerai, 1918-1940

LTMonografijoje apžvelgiami tarpukario Lietuvos (1918-1940 m.) visuomeniniai ir gyvenamieji interjerai, sukurti tiek profesionalių architektų, dailininkų, dekoratorių, tiek įrengti mėgėjiškai. Pirmąkart Lietuvos menotyroje pamėginta išsamiau atspindėti tarpukario laikotarpiui būdingas tapatumo reprezentacijas interjere. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Tarpukario interjerai; Modernizmas; Art Deco; Lithuania; Interwar Interiors; Modernism; Art Deco.

ENThis book, for the first time in Lithuanian art studies, has sought to more thoroughly examine characteristic interwar representations of identity in interior design. The search for cultural identity in interior design in interwar Lithuania followed diverse paths. Conservatively minded people felt most at home with the national catholic type of interior, where three factors represent one's identity: Catholicity, Lithuanianness, and statehood. The national idea of a Catholic identity was unpopular in the works of professional architects. Secular spaces designed in amateur fashion show a folk interpretation of the idea of Catholicity, one that is indirect, relying on principles of composition, harmony and decoration taken from the interiors of rural wooden churches. The ideas that were modernising life led people to distance themselves from confessional identity as well as social and cultural stereotypes. Architectural innovations were put forward: universalism, regionalism, federalism, frugality; desires for a cleaner, healthier and more comfortable life. These new aspirations were promoted in interwar literature, educational articles, propaganda materials and advertising. Interwar photographs of social gatherings and sporting events show evidence of tacit propaganda in the press that sought to replace religious rites with a cult of sport, politics and theatre, and to consolidate the ideology of Modernism. The synthesis of theatrical forms and everyday life which was typical of the time changed the very nature of interior design: influenced by the new ideology, interiors and their decoration became similar to scenery art - where an interior space signifies the mood of what is happening, strengthening it through specially arranged lighting. Furnishings were rationally planned out in advance, as inexpensive as possible, quickly arranged and rearranged, comfortable, easily cared for and universal. [...].The forms and mixed stylistics of interior decoration, furniture and light fixtures are historically determined, directly shaped by the dominant sociocultural context in a place. In Lithuania, ostentation, solidity and representation were identified with the neostyles, and first of all with Neo-Baroque. Theoretically, Modernist forms should have reduced costs and lent unity to the decoration of a space, though in reality they mostly turned up in signature, singular, individually created things and were expensive. Besides, for most of the country's inhabitants, Modernist forms were aesthetically unattractive and incomprehensible, while people in Lithuania liked the newly created, stylistically synthesized impressive volumes and previously unseen silhouettes, which struck them as something new and as cultural progress. It was only thanks to professional artists and architects that innovations of this sort found their way into diverse interiors. An interior of the newly created style was authentic and singular, having much in common with the principles of the Arts and Crafts Movement. Ideas for Lithuanian ethnic interiors were sought in homes in rural areas, where traditions had long been kept, in small interwar Lithuanian towns and villages, among Peasants and farm workers. This ethnic movement is unique for its elements of primitively copied Neo-Gothic, Neo-Baroque and Neoclassicism, by which peasants in their domestic life naively imitated the lifestyle of society's elite. This amateur paraphrasing of the dominant architectural styles is one of the most original of stylistic movements, both in artistic and national identity terms. The National Style, given official state status and designed professionally, was typical not only for ethnic Lithuanians, but for all inhabitants in all the country's territory.The National Style in Lithuania shared similarities with elements of the Russian Style: a return to medieval times with the use of folk art, textile patterns and wood carvings. The difference Was that in independent Lithuania, of all the styles of the past, Baroque was chosen, and under the influence of the East-West Synthesis, the aesthetically most attractive bits of Orientalism were included in the Lithuanian National Style. Orientalism was viewed as toe innovative part of the National Style, something not mentioned in other authors' works, toe use of which was in terms of culturology planned theoretically in advance. [...] Comparing the notions of nationality in the interiors of the minorities living in Lithuania and ethnic Lithuanians reveals several common features. First: Lithuanians, Lithuanian Jews and Lithuanian Russians all loved Baroque. For Lithuanians, Baroque was associated with church architecture, while for Jews it called to mind the design of the aron kodesh ("holy ark") in synagogues and Russians were reminded of the Winter Palace in Saint Petersburg and other residences of the czars. All three ethnic groups saw Baroque as a representative style with links to European culture. Second: most of Lithuania's inhabitants shared an attraction to Orientalism, to elements of culture and art from the East. Of all the creative ideas, the one that grew closest to the hearts of the different nationalities was the East-West Synthesis. This movement in architectural representation was both emotionally and aesthetically well-suited. It was thus was widely employed at various artistic levels iu the creation of National Style interiors. Interwar interiors show that the nationalities living side by side in interwar Lithuania did not avoid cultural synthesis. Their different notions of national identity all developed and evolved in the common cosmopolitan direction of Modernism. [...]. [From the publication]