Browse

Journals By Subject

Life Sciences, Agriculture & Food
Chemistry
Medicine & Health
Materials Science
Mathematics & Physics
Electrical & Computer Science
Earth, Energy & Environment
Architecture & Civil Engineering
Education
Economics & Management
Humanities & Social Sciences
Multidisciplinary

Books

Publish Conference Abstract Books
Upcoming Conference Abstract Books
Published Conference Abstract Books
Publish Your Books
Upcoming Books
Published Books

Proceedings

Events

Events
Five Types of Conference Publications

Join

Join as Editorial Board Member
Become a Reviewer

Information

For Authors
For Reviewers
For Editors
For Conference Organizers
For Librarians
Article Processing Charges
Special Issue Guidelines
Editorial Process
Manuscript Transfers
Peer Review at SciencePG
Open Access
Copyright and License
Ethical Guidelines
Submit an Article
Research Article | | Peer-Reviewed

Architect Yakov Shteinberg - Life, Fate, Creativity of a Constructivist in the Conditions of Soviet Ukraine

Liudmyla Bachynska*
Published in International Journal of Architecture, Arts and Applications (Volume 11, Issue 2)
Received: 24 March 2025     Accepted: 10 April 2025     Published: 6 June 2025
Views:       Downloads:
Download PDF
Abstract

Constructivist architect Yakov Shteinberg is a significant figure in Ukrainian culture. Information about his activities and fate during the Soviet era was hushed up, despite the fact that he was recognized as the "First Architect of Ukraine", due to punishment during the struggle of the Soviet government "with cosmopolitans". The article proposes to consider three stages of the political and economic state of the state and their impact on the life and activities of the master in the conditions of the USSR. Such an assessment of the dependence of the life of society and an individual creative personality on the communist leadership of the country allows us to determine why and for what exactly in the Soviet Union a unique style of "constructivism" arose in the world, why it was banned by the authorities during its consolidation and how this affected the life of the creative intelligentsia on the example of the biography of Ya. A. Shteinberg. The purpose of the study is to identify the specifics of the scientific and creative activities of the constructivist architect at different stages of the existence of Soviet Ukraine and his outstanding role in the formation of Ukrainian architecture, despite the dependence on the political regime. The methods of the study are biographical, causal relationship between the orders of the governing bodies and the activities of the artist, comparative analysis between the stages of the professional activity of the specialist. To obtain the results, an important component of the research was the study of contemporary publications that testified to the events and the state of affairs in the state, and the personal articles of Yakov Shteinberg were of particular importance. The results of scientific research proved that the life of an individual in the conditions of totalitarianism, characteristic of the communist system of power, required the individual and society to completely submit to the political regime. The novelty of the proposed topic lies in the initial consideration of the biography of the artist and his activities through the study of the peculiarities of the political and economic conditions of life and activity of the country, determining the influence of these conditions on the cultural activities of the people in the field of architecture and urban planning and the formation of the personality of the constructivist architect Ya. A. Shteynberg.

Published in International Journal of Architecture, Arts and Applications (Volume 11, Issue 2)
DOI 10.11648/j.ijaaa.20251102.13
Page(s) 71-84
Creative Commons

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.

Copyright

Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Science Publishing Group
Previous article
Keywords

Constructivist Architecture, Soviet Power, Architect's Creativity, Design, Scientific and Teaching Activities, Fight Against Cosmopolitanism

1. Introduction
When considering this topic, we must first find out why and how constructivism appeared, a prominent representative of which was the Soviet architect Ya. A. Shteinberg. Constructivism as a phenomenon was born in a newly created country under the economic and political conditions developed in the theoretical works of the apologists of Marxism-Leninism. In essence, the formation of the newly minted state according to the slogan “who was nothing, will become everything” - the main idea expressed in the International - a kind of anthem of the international labor movement - was a kind of artificially created social experiment, thanks to which the poor masses of the population were declared hegemons, their dictatorship was envisaged in relation to the layers that had wealth. That is, the opposite was adopted, which, according to social history, happened in any economic formation, where those in power were recognized as authoritative, influencing public life and setting the direction of further social development. It was these richest segments of the population that determined the planning of cities, the nomenclature of public buildings, what and how the architectural ensemble would be, its stylistic and compositional orientations, etc., which corresponded to the consciousness of the social elite and influenced cultural development, including architecture and urban planning
[1]
. Poor strata formed buildings on theoutskirts of cities, spontaneously created from improvised materials, forming urban slums and ghettos. Thus, the victory of the lower classes as a result of the October Revolution of the Russian Empire and the status of the workers as hegemons required architecture to demonstrate a new consciousness of the so-called people's power through architectural forms, a new architectural language, the sources of formation of which had not been in the architectural heritage until that time. Architectural searches in Russia and Ukraine after October 1917 were represented by a variety of architectural trends - eclecticism, classicism, appeal to folk forms, simplification, symbolization of form, engineering and industrial vernacular
[2]
. It was the latter that proved to be the most apt quotation. Industrial architecture is a working-class environment, close in spirit to those who occupied the upper echelons of society, who became representatives of power, on whom the future fate of the people and the country depended
[3]
. Did constructivism become a reflection of a new social meaning? Did constructivist language coincide with action programs in the formation of a new type of state? Most likely - no! Recalling the certain chaos of all kinds of decisions and searches in the areas of economy and politics in the first years of Soviet power and the post-war crisis after the First World War, in conditions of civil war and periodic manifestations of famine, it can be argued that the newly formed government was engaged in working out new directions in the political and economic sphere. The authorities were not yet ready to reflect the ideology of a new type of state through visual means, they were not mature enough to make these decisions. So this contributed to the spread of constructivism as a bright, concisely expressed and loudly proclaiming the new life of a new style of a new ruling class. Various competitions increasingly revealed the role of function, designed using industrial themes. Can we assume that this trend was also characteristic of European states? No! Because European practice solved the problem of organizing the function in architecture for workers in order to get rid of urban slums formed by industrial zones, but did not take into account the ideological and figurative tasks of a separate state. “Perfection of proportions of lapidary architectural form, complete absence of decoration, rationalism in solving functional problems and truthful attitude to structures and building materials - this is the “symbol of faith” with which the founders and preachers of functionalism came forward”, - wrote A.V. Bunin
[4]
(P. 151). Can Soviet constructivism be compared with the American trend of using ideas of mechanization in architectural images of the late 19th and early 20th centuries? Also no! Because the architecture of the reflected scientific and technological progress
[5]
. And in Soviet Russia and Ukraine, constructivism was an expression of the people's working spirit of the victorious society. In some objects of the post-constructivist period, the new symbolism concerned the materialization in architectural forms of any symbols of the new power, rather than specifically technical achievements. The 1932 international competition for projects for the reconstruction of Moscow provided examples of various directions of functionalist-constructivist solutions with the undeniable logic of new thinking, which gradually gave rise to a consciousness of dissatisfaction in the power structures. It is well known that representatives of the political elite made devastating statements during the discussion of the new revolutionary style, that publications were prepared in the press that supposedly voiced popular criticism of the “boxy” constructivist architecture, and that they condemned specialists who devoted their activities to reflecting the spirit of the new era in the architectural forms of buildings for the new hegemon. In 1937, the authorities openly and aggressively opposed the innovations in the amateur activities of constructivists, proclaiming a direction in the architecture of the state that was building socialism towards “the creative use of progressive classical, mainly domestic heritage”
[6]
(P. 13). So what was the further fate of the Soviet constructivists?
2. Relevance
So, this article is dedicated to the work of an outstanding Ukrainian architect, who, together with the events of 1917, embarked on the path of loyalty to the revolutionary style and remainedcover all aspects of professional activity. It is not for nothing that he was considered the number 1 architect in Ukraine
[7]
. The study of his work showed that Ya. A. Shteinberg was an exceptional figure in terms of the versatility of his work, and in his creative searches he was distinguished by combinatorics and variability of design solutions. In his professional practice, the architect went through certain stages throughout his life, together with the state, which, in the conditions of the political and economic situation of Soviet Russia and Ukraine, influenced his creativity and fate. This article proposes a parallel analysis of the events in the country that was building socialism and the attitude of the political regime towards the architectural elite. The biography of the brilliant architect and devoted constructivist Yakov Shteinberg is an example of the difficult trials that befell the Ukrainian intelligentsia under Soviet conditions.
Throughout Soviet history, under the leadership of the communist regime, attempts were made to silence the facts of political repression, torture, and executions of representatives of the Ukrainian cultural elite, trying to accuse them of manifestations of nationalism. With the advent of our country's Independence from the dictates of Moscow, there was a need to highlight the creative contribution of Ukrainian specialists, show their role in creating the achievements of Ukrainian heritage, and note the specifics of their activities compared to the cohort of Russian architects.
Thus, the purpose of this study is to identify the specifics of the scientific and creative activities of the Ukrainian master, architect-constructivist Ya. A. Shteinberg at different socio-historical stages of the development of Soviet Ukraine, to establish his role in the formation of Ukrainian architecture and the facts of his biography that arose due to the variability of the state policy of the communist system of power. The task of scientific research is to study the architect's biography; his creative contribution to the formation of Ukrainian architecture; the dependence of professional activity on decrees and laws adopted by the state; the parallelism of state reformism and the specialist's creativity as a response to the authorities' requests, on the one hand, and loyalty to the chosen path in the profession, on the other. The object of research is the work of the constructivist architect Ya. A. Shteinberg. The subject of scientific research is the influence of the peculiarities of life in the USSR on the fate and creative activity of the master.
3. Literature Review
Predecessors in the study of the life and work of Yakov Shteinberg: this is primarily a brief description of the artist's biography with a definition of the main works, carried out by a team of employees of the V. G. Zabolotny State Library
[8]
; separate publications - an article by G. Lebedev in the journal “Construction and Architecture”
[9]
, collective anniversary publications of the Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering of the KNUCA
[10]
, where Ya. A. Shteinberg worked until 1978, by Kashevarova N., the author of a study of German documents on Kyiv life during World War II
[11]
, the memoirs of his son Alexander Shteinberg about the life of the family in Kyiv and about his father
[12]
, articles on individual works of Yakov Aronovich
[13, 14]
and my author's publications as the last 41st graduate student of the master about my Teacher. These separate publications are not a full-fledged study of the life and work of Yakov Aronovich, but they provide an opportunity to create the first comprehensive attempt on the topic ”The State and the Artist in Soviet Times - Life Together and the Reflection of the State's Vital Activity in the Artist's Biography”. Of great importance for revealing the personality's activities are the author's publications of the architect-constructivist Yakov Shteinberg from the early period of his activity
[15-17]
, in the 1960s-1970s
[18-20]
and in connection with promising searches
[20-23]
.
4. Materials and Research Methods
Materials for studying the stages of development of Ukrainian culture in the field of architecture and urban planning were various political and economic documents, resolutions and orders of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Ukraine (CPSU) and the Council of Ministers of the USSR during the Soviet regime and the communist party leadership system. The results of analytical work on these documents and comparative analysis of the content of the documents were the work on substantiating the logical sequence of stages of political and economic development of the Soviet state and Ukraine in its composition and the dependence of cultural activity on orders from Moscow, wich formulated by the main governing body - the Communist Party, on the politics and economy of our country. The results of this study were published in several articles by the author in 2010-2020. Here is a link to one of them
[1]
.
In connection with the need to analyze the creative biography of the constructivist architect Yakov Shteinberg as a representative of Ukrainian culture, there were used materials from publications of different years about his work, a critical assessment of the design results, and the author's alleged “miscalculations” that were caused by the artist's independent thinking and decisions and did not correspond to the ideological guidelines of the political regime of that time. To assess the degree of dependence of the architect's creativity on the political and economic situation in the country, methods of biographical, causal connection between the requirements of the political regime and the activities and life of the architect were used, as well as comparative studies in the historical analysis of the stages of economic and political development of the state and the periods of Yakov Steinberg's activity and his design response to government orders on architecture and urban planning.
5. Results
As a result of the author's analytical work on collecting materials and studying the biography of the constructivist architect Yakov Shteinberg, his design, scientific and professional and social activities, the following were established: the influence of the stages of the country's economic and political development, that determined by the communist system of government, onto the life and work of the master; the uniqueness of his creative personality; his outstanding role in shaping the culture of Ukraine in the architectural field during the Soviet era from the beginning of its formation almost to the end of the existence of the state with total state ownership.
6. Discussion
Figure 1. Photographs from the archive of Ya. A. Shteinberg: a - portrait of Ya. A. Shteinberg; b - Yakiv Aronovich with his daughter Irina and son Oleksandr, 1960. Publication by: Shteinberg A. “My Path”, 2016; c - in Viktor Nekrasov’s apartment in Kyiv Passage on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the graduation from the Kyiv Institute of Architecture and Design, May 12, 1956, from left to right: architect, artist L. V. Sinkevich, Z. N. Nekrasova, professor Ya. A. Shteinberg, sitting: L. I. Grauzhys, architect, writer V. P. Nekrasov, professor, specialist in structural mechanics P. M. Varvak, architects Y. Yu. Karakis and E. M. Sinkevich. From the family archive of L. V. Sinkevich. Publication by: Viktor Nekrasov. Writer's memorial site nеkrassov-viktor.com/friends/sinkevichi.
Figure 2. Examples of projects and built objects in the constructivist style of the 1920s - early 1930s, in the creation of which the architect Ya. A. Shteinberg participated: a- the building of Derzprom on Dzerzhinsky Square (Svobody Square), arch. S. Serafimov, S. Kravets, M. Felger, working drawings by arch. Ya. Shteinberg, Kharkiv, 1928
[27]
, b - the competition project of the Government Center in Kyiv in 1934-1936 on the territory of the Mikhailovsky Monastery, arch. Ya. A. Shteinberg, 2nd round, 2nd place
[28]
; formation of the project of the Central Committee of the CPSU on Dzerzhinsky Square (Svobody Square) in Kharkiv: c - the project of the Provincial Zemstvo building, two-story part, arch. V. V. Velichko, 1900, three-story, architect A. B. Minkus, 1914
[29]
; d - the constructed building according to the second version of the reconstruction project, architect Ya. A. Shteinberg, 1925-1932
[30]
; e - the area in front of the building during the occupation of Kharkiv before its destruction in 1942
[31]
; f - the new building of the Regional Committee of the CPSU instead of the destroyed one, architects V. M. Orekhov, V. P. Kostenko and others, 1951-1954
[32]
; g - the project of the builders' club, architects Ya. A. Shteinberg, I. I. Malozyomov, G. F. Milinis, Kharkiv, 1928
[33]
; h - the project of the KhCI (Kharkiv Construction Institute), architects Ya. A. Shteinberg, R. M. Fridman, I. Zaslavsky, Shatilovka, city Kharkiv, 1930
[34]
; i - Mining Institute at 14 Nauky Ave., architect Ya. A. Shteinberg, Kharkiv, 1931, reconstruction of the building by architect N. M. Podgorny, 1952
[35]
.
Yakov Aronovich Shteinberg was born on April 13, 1896 in Kyiv into a large family of a photographer, where there were four daughters and three sons, Yakov was the youngest. The family lived in Podol on Mezhyhirska Street
[12]
. Ya. Shteinberg, his family, friends and former students - see Figure 1. His working life coincided with the birth of the Soviet state, which in its historical, political and economic development went through certain stages that determined the directions in the socio-cultural sphere and architecture and urban planning
[1]
, and, undoubtedly, the peculiarities of the Soviet period influenced the life and fate of the master. During his creative life from 1916 to 1985, Yakov Aronovich, along with the country's progress with a new path, went through several significant periods in its history, which reflected the search for directions of state formation, an other economic system, an other type of government and a new structure of society, as well as new methods of demonstration of ideology in architectural forms and styles. The sequence of alternation of historical stages reflected the initial process of groping for paths almost blindly by trial and error to further improvement, approval, strengthening until the clarification of directions. These are such stages as a pause in the development of the economy in the period after October 1917 to 1920 and the first - in the 1920s-1930s - the search for new directions in the economy, the formation of a party system of government and its ideology, which would take into account the needs of the people, the proclamation of programs of a new direction of management and, accordingly, their reflection in architecture and urban planning, which was reflected in the variety of styles, the birth of functionalism and constructivism, a new nomenclature of public buildings and the departure from quarter-scale development. In 1932-1937, during the transitional period, there was a struggle against previous manifestations of revolutionaryism in architecture, in the political regime - strengthening the role of the leader, which was manifested in figurative and ideological tasks, in the imposition of historicism in architecture as an ideological means of glorifying power, and the second stage, from 1937 to 1953, the construction of socialism was proclaimed, single-party leadership of the country was established on the basis of the cult of the leader, in architecture in the post-war years this contributed to the flourishing of the pseudo-empire, in addition, experience was accumulated in the production of industrial constructive elements. In the third stage, from 1954, after the approval of the Resolution of the Central Committee of the CPSU (Communist Party of Soviet Ukraine) and the Council of Ministers of the USSR “On Combating Excesses in Architecture and Construction”
[24]
and until 1985, housing construction was oriented towards standardization and industrialization to eliminate urgent needs that arose as a result of the mass destruction of cities during World War II
[25]
.
The architect`s life ended on February 11, 1982, two months before his 85th birthday, and a few years later, Secretary General M. S. Gorbachev began the revival of private property following the example of capitalist countries, in addition to the existing total state property, characteristic of the USSR. Throughout his professional life, Shteinberg worked in various areas - design, teaching, science, professional administration, and even invention, which met the demands of the time according to party-state programs and tasks that were mandatory for implementation, while remaining faithful to the rational-constructivist style that was chosen by him at the early stage of the creation of the Soviet state.
So, Yakov Aronovich's working life began with work as an assistant to the chief engineer on the construction of the Infantry Military School in Kyiv in 1916-1919 and with his studies at the Kyiv Art School at the Academy of Arts, which he graduated in 1917. According to his son's recollections, he wanted to continue his studies in Petrograd (S-Petersburg, Russia), but in 1918 the architectural faculty of the Kyiv Art Institute was opened, where Yakov Shteinberg entered to the class of V. M. Rykov. In 1925 he graduated, having completed his diploma work on the topic of the Derzhprom (State Industry Building) project in Kharkov. He was awarded a gold medal, and the project was sent to a competition. According to the jury's decision, the project took 6th place, which was very prestigious to be in the team of such masters as Serafimov, Shchusev and Fomin
[12]
. It is known that in parallel, Ya. A. Shteinberg studied at the Kyiv Polytechnic Institute until 1924, but did not develop a thesis
[8]
. In 1923-1927 he gave lectures on drawings at the Kyiv Ratmansky School, the Kyiv Pedagogical Institute and the Kharkiv Art College. In 1925-1928 the architect worked on the construction of Derzhprom in Kharkiv, first as a volunteer (Figure 2, a), then as a full-time specialist, developing working drawings. Thus, from the very beginning of his professional career, Shteinberg took on tasks in various directions, quickly advanced in his career, and gained recognition. Thanks to his efficiency, perseverance in work, and interest in the profession, he gained authority. In 1928-1929, he was a member of the city bureau of the Builders' Union, headed the Ukrainian branch of the Organization of Modern Architects (OMA) and the Society of Contemporary Architects of Ukraine (SCAU). Yakov Shteinberg's personality began to take shape as a bright representative of the new, revolutionary spirit of the constructivist style. At this first stage of the historical progress of the Soviet state from 1920 to 1937, when the authorities were looking for ways of further development, when constructivism was born, which later transformed into post-constructivism, Yakov Aronovich was already a prominent figure in the architectural community. He designed a lot, both personally and in teams, and the projects were significant in terms of topic and scope. A total of 31 projects were developed (according to information collected by the author of the article), including 6 competitive and 6 unrealized. Among the completed projects are the builders' club in Kharkiv (together with I. Malozyomov and I. Milinis) (Figure 2, e), the Donetsk Mining Institute, the Kharkiv Mining Institute (in collaboration with R. Fridman, I. Zaslavsky) (Figure 2, h), the sugar factory at the “Vesely Podil” station, the Donetsk Coal-Technical Institute, the Kharkiv Coal-Chemical Plant and the Tractor Thresher Plant, the building of industry, the Kharkiv Construction Institute (Figure 2, g), the so-called “capital reconstruction” of two buildings - a two- and three-story building of the mayor's office of the province (Figure 2, c) for the construction of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine (Bolsheviks) in Kharkiv (Figure 2, d, e, f). In fact, a new large complex with the assembly halls was created, the structural framework of existing buildings was used for the first and second floors. The true size of this complex is clearly visible in an aerial photograph taken by the German military after the bombing of the city. For this project, significant for the state, Yakov Aronovich began to be called the “First Architect of Ukraine”
[26]
. Also built were: the unique sanatorium “Ukraine” (now “Moscow”) in Gagra, the mansion of Kosior S. in Kharkiv
[10]
, residential buildings - in Gagra, in Kharkiv - for the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine, at Pushkinskyi Vyezd, 7 and 8 (together with R. Fridman and O. Nerovetsky), a house for “Indubud” (Institute of Industrial Construction), in Kyiv - the house “Soviet Architect” (co-authored with O. Smyk, P. Kostyrkо, S. Tatarenko). The role of an architect of this level attracted the attention of representatives of the Soviet authorities to him, made him dependent on the decisions of the leadership. In 1935-1936, Ya. A. Shteinberg was commissioned to design a village and four residential estates for party functionaries in Mezhyhirya in the Kyiv region. N. Kashevarova, a researcher of the activities of the German operational headquarters in the east during World War II, cites materials from a report in which the Germans, for propaganda purposes, compare the architecture of these estates with the poor housing of Kyiv residents
[11]
. Based on the photos of the estates from the report, we can conclude that the post-constructivist direction of architecture was appropriate for the time, which combined the conciseness of constructivism and a certain decorativeness of facades, characteristic of historicism, which corresponded to the ideology of the state at that time.
Among the competitive projects, the most significant was the project of the State Ukrainian Theater of Mass Musical Performance for Kharkiv, executed by the team of architects of the Ukrbudobednaia Association (Ukrainian Construction Association): Shteinberg Ya. and 6 more co-authors. According to Smolenska S.
[36]
, 144 projects were presented at the international competition, 100 of which were sent from abroad. The jury awarded the first prize to three nominees, among which was the project of Kharkiv residents under the motto “1931”. “The competition showed that...... the Ukrainian architectural school has reached the world level. Its young representatives demonstrated high professionalism, innovative thinking, and avant-garde developments”
[36]
. There were other competitive projects - a tobacco factory (1st prize), the House of Councils in Stalino, now Donetsk (co-authored with Tatarenko S.), the river station and the Verkhovna Rada in Kyiv, the Government Center in Kyiv, 2nd place (Figure 2, b). Among the unrealized projects are the reconstruction of the Opera House in Kyiv, the Opera and Ballet Theater in Stalino, the power station in Sloviansk, and the residential buildings of the “Promin” massif. Not only the number of completed projects, not only the significance of the objects, but also the breadth of coverage and variety of topics is impressive. Yakov Aronovich worked in all areas of the architectural industry, designing industrial buildings, public buildings of various functional purposes, and housing. At this stage, Shteinberg began to write scientific articles. The key moment in the end of this period and the beginning of the second was the First All-Union Congress of Architects. Yakov Aronovich at that time already had the title of professor, was a member of the Board of the Union of Soviet Architects of the Ukrainian SSR (Soviet Socialist Republic) and the USSR and represented Ukrainian architects at the congress. So in the issue of the journal “Architecture of the USSR” for 1937, No. 7-8, dedicated to this solemn event, Ya. A. Shteinberg had two publications.
The second stage of development of Soviet architecture from 1937 to 1953 took place under the influence of state ideology, which by means of architecture and the synthesis of arts forced architects to glorify the communist system of government, life in a country that was building socialism and was winning international competition over other advanced countries. The main guidelines in urban planning were the construction of residential quarters with service establishments, and in architecture - the style of historicism (pseudoclassicism in the pre-war period and pseudo-empire in the post-war period, the country celebrated the victory with such architectural and artistic means). Ya. A. Shteinberg continued to work in all his chosen directions, but from 1942 to 1944 he was in the Kyrgyz SSR. Before the war, he also taught at higher educational institutions - the Kharkiv Construction Institute, the Kyiv Art Institute, and the Kharkiv Institute of Municipal Engineers. In addition, he held positions in design institutions - head of the design workshop of Tsyvilprombud (Institute of civil engineering), head of the design workshop of the People's Commissariat of Health of the Ukrainian SSR, and an architectural design consultant at Dipromistо (State Institute of Urban Design). Regarding the author's works, during this time we managed to find references only to the projects of a residential building at the “Ukraine” sanatorium in Gagra, a competitive project for a pharmaceutical plant in Dnipropetrovsk (now Dnipro), and the working drawings developed by him for this project. Scientific publications amounted to 13 articles - about the work of architects, author's inventions regarding tools for architects, about the structure and economy of residential buildings (a topic to which the master devoted the second half of his creative life) and even about the preparation of an architect's scientific dissertation. It is known that Yakov Aronovich was a good supervisor of graduate students and an excellent methodologist, without yet having his own dissertation.
During his stay in Kyrgyzstan, the architect headed the design bureau of Plant No. 60 in the city Frunze, served as chairman of the board of the Union of Soviet Architects of the Kyrgyz SSR, developed the designs of the power plant and residential building for Plant No. 60, and published 1 article in a local magazine.
After the war, Yakov Aronovich returned to Ukraine and plunged into the whirlwind of professional life at the usual pace for a master. The following positions awaited him: teaching as the head of the department of architectural design at the Kyiv Institute of Civil Engineers and then at the Kyiv Institute of Civil Engineering (KICE); as the head of the department of residential and civil structures of the Department of Architecture under the Council of Ministers of the Ukrainian SSR in Kyiv. He received the title of Corresponding Member of the Academy of Architecture of Ukraine (AAU) and held positions at the academy as head of the postgraduate department, then head of the sector of the Institute of Construction Engineering, and later head of the Institute of Architecture of Structures. The master returned to the Board of the Union of Soviet Architects of the Ukrainian SSR and the USSR.
Since 1945, Ya. A. Shteinberg has worked extensively in the field of typical design. Under his leadership, a number of residential building projects for the complex development of neighborhoods were completed, including the 1-480 series. In 1946-1948, the architect worked on the restoration of the Zaborovsky Gate in Kyiv, which is part of the national museum complex “Sophia of Kyiv” and an architectural monument of national importance. He was appointed head of the restoration work and carried out preliminary studies of the structure. “In fact, this was the first scientific restoration of a landmark of Ukrainian Baroque”, writes L. Stromelyuk
[13]
. The architect completed all the work with his characteristic scrupulousness. He was fascinated by this work, and in the documents he prepared, there are descriptions of an artistic nature: “Rafael Zaborovsky's Gate is a fantastic architectural fragment of its era...... The surfaces of the gate are completely covered with lush stucco ornamentation, which grows freely and greedily fills all corners of the variously shaped gaps between the cornices, thrust, archivolts, pilasters and other architectural details”
[13]
. “The gate, in its basic composition and ornamental filling, is strictly symmetrical... And this is the symmetry of a living organism. Its ornament, although repeated, is made on the spot with slight deviations... (which) give to the ornamental decor life and proximity to the rich Ukrainian nature”
[37]
.
Again, various orders fell into his field of activity - projects for a polyclinic, a collective farm experimental house near Kyiv, there were several unrealized works - a cinema, a mud bath in Gagra, a multi-storey residential building in ceramics, typical housing, as well as a competitive preliminary design for the planning and buildings of Khreshchatyk in Kyiv
[38]. 
In 1949, in a team with Vilensky I., Aguf M. and others, Yakov Aronovich worked on the planning and buildings of the “Budivelnik” settlement in Dnipropetrovsk - a Jewish town with one- and two-story houses with modest facades, but fantastic window framing, where the Soviet symbol “hammer and sickle” was among the flowers
[39].
This time also includes a difficult period in the master's life, caused by the struggle of the authorities “with bourgeois cosmopolitanism”
[40]
. This led to the further silencing of the role of artists in the life of the Soviet state. Following the decisions of the All-Union and Ukrainian Congresses of Architects in 1937, which determined the directions of further orientation of architects: in artistic and figurative solutions of architectural objects - on the “creatively meaningful classical heritage”, which corresponded to the ideology of the communist government, and in housing design - on its economy (and the second contradicted the first) - Yakov Aronovich chose the path of searching for new types of residential buildings with an economic structure. Until the end of his life, he remained faithful to this direction in both theoretical research and experimental design. Despite the reasonableness of the choice and its compliance with the urgent needs of the state, Ya. A. Shteinberg was accused of belonging to bourgeois cosmopolitanism. The reason for implementing the plan to combat cosmopolitans of Jewish nationality in the person of Shteinberg was three of his articles. In 1940, the journal “Architecture of Soviet Ukraine” published an article by the master, which contained proposals for 12 variants of double sections of unusual layout with a set of apartments with different numbers of rooms, with a width of the building over 15 m (which was not achieved even in the 1960s) and meticulous calculations of a comparative analysis of solutions (Figure 3)
[15]
. Later that year, a certain S. Tsarev
[41]
published a critical response to this article, essentially with minor remarks. In 1941, the same magazine published an article “Towards the Completion of the Planning of the Dzerzhinsky Square in Kharkiv” in which, as always, the master, very carefully and respectfully towards each author of the Maidan objects with a diplomatically presented architectural characteristic, analyzed the process of creating an ensemble of an administrative and political center in the first Soviet capital in a unified constructivist style. He emphasized the majesty of the significance of this object and expressed himself emotionally in just two sentences: “Advanced construction techniques, modern building materials, revolutionary architectural thought, which enthusiastically rejected the architectural heritage of past centuries - all this created a new face of Soviet Kharkov...... This is the beginning of the struggle for the creation of a Soviet socialist style in architecture”
 [16]
. The results were a few small recommendations for completing the ensemble, where in the sparse conclusions the author conveyed his own concern about the adjustments of the constructivist style with pseudo-classical details. So how could he dare to go against the decisions of the 1937 congresses?
Already in 1947, he in co-authorship with S. Grabovsky, was published an article in the “Bulletin of the Academy of Architecture of the Ukrainian SSR” to commemorate the 30th anniversary of Soviet power, entitled “Architecture of Soviet Ukraine” and containing a review of the achievements of that time. The authors, in accordance with Soviet tradition, paid tribute to the Communist Party - the governing body - and its programs for the restoration of the state after the war and the role of architects. The following text was built on a comparison of the stages of the pre-revolutionary period and Soviet achievements. It stated: “The revolution in architecture began with the denial of old creative ideas”
[17]
. “Soviet architects solved the historically unprecedented task set by the Soviet state and society” to create architectural structures “that, in their internal content and form, would correspond to the new social and state system”
[17]
. Three more small paragraphs mentioned “the most striking example of constructivist architecture”, “an example of the enormous scale of Soviet urban construction of that time” - Dzerzhinsky Square in Kharkiv. Although below there were comments that constructivism “however did not please the eye of the viewer. It is not surprising why the workers defined the artistic qualities of housing construction of the constructivist period with the term “boxy” architecture”. The subsequent text noted that “constructivism, alien to the ideals of the Soviet people, could not become the basis for the development of great Soviet architecture”, it was characterized as “leftist perversions”. Despite the critical assessment of constructivist practice, positive mentions of Dzerzhinsky Square 10 years after the party outlined the path to “reinterpretation of the classical heritage” were enough to rank the master among bourgeois cosmopolitans. At the end of the large analytical article, statements were used about the victory of socialism, the nationality of art, the unwavering implementation of “historical decisions of the Bolshevik Party in matters of ideological work”, about the tireless work of Soviet architects “on the creation of Ukrainian Soviet architecture as a great art of socialist realism, in which the grand ideas of communism, the ideas of Marx - Engels - Lenin - Stalin, are embodied”
[17]
. But that didn't save the situation.
Figure 3. Experimental searches for new types of economic sections, Ya. A. Shteinberg, 1940: a - section of 8 one-room apartments - type 1; b - section of 8 one-room and 4 two-room apartments - type 4; c - section of 12 one-room and 4 two-room apartments - type 12; d - 4-storey development of a quarter with an area of 6.5 hectares with children’s institutions and shops on the first floor; e - 4-storey development of a quarter with an area of 4.2 hectares with children’s institutions and shops on the first floor. Publication by:
[15]
.
To prepare the decision to punish Ya. A. Shteinberg, who at that time held the position of head of the department of architectural design at the KICE, being a corresponding member of the Academy of Architecture of Ukraine, headed the Institute of Architecture of Structures at the Academy, in 1949 a devastating editorial was published in the “Bulletin of the Academy of Architecture of Ukraine” without indicated authorship under the title “Uprooting the remnants of cosmopolitanism from architectural science and criticism”, which referred to constructivism as “mad American-reactionary nationalism”
[40]
. “There were arrests and dismissals of major scientists, art workers, and journalists. Heads flew, and the punishers paid no attention to ranks or merits”
[12]. 
Ya. A. Shteinberg was presented as one of the active defenders of con-structivism, the method of which was pseudoscience, the shortcomings in the work of the Institute of Architecture of Structures headed by him were explained by his ad-herence to constructivism, he was accused of the lack of “due attention to architecture as an art, national in form, socialist in content”
[40]
. Yakov Aronovich was stripped of all honorary titles and positions. He was not dismissed from his teaching position, as was done with they did with other colleagues, but he was forced to publicly repent for the mistakes he made in design and scientific publications before the student and teaching staff of the KICE. Professor V. V. Chepelyk, a student of the Faculty of Architecture in the early 1950s, in a personal conversation with the author of the article, recalled how Yakov Aronovich, standing on the stage of the assembly hall, talked about a certain Professor Shteinberg and his crimes. The fact that in the 1930s, acting on the instructions of government officials, he designed estates for party functionaries did not save the master from accusations. The upheavals of that time left an imprint on Yakov Aronovich's entire subsequent life. He never allowed any critical remarks towards the decisions of the authorities.
Strange are both the Soviet authorities' accusations of architects in bourgeois cosmopolitanism and the unquestionable orders to create an urban environment based on a rethinking of the classical heritage that was characteristic of the Russian Empire. Even in the pre-war period, Walter Gropius wrote: “The unity of modern architectural features, which stems from world connections and world technology, transcends the natural boundaries associated with the national and personal, and leads to a single style...”
[42]
. This statement speaks of functionalism, inert to systems of government, which were intended to solve social, functional, and sanitary-hygienic problems in European cities, rather than aesthetic and ideological tasks in shaping the urban environment of a particular state. Z. Gideon, reviewing the work programs of the International Congress of Architects in 1928-1957, recalled that during the meetings, purely functional issues were considered regarding housing for people with a living wage, the functions of the city, its connection with the environment, public services, transport, post-war reconstruction, etc.
[43]
. So it is European functionalism that can be defined as a cosmopolitan trend, and not the product of a unique revolutionary-ideological style, which was Soviet constructivism. Likewise, with regard to the classical heritage - the October Revolution, based on a new social and state ideology, destroyed the signs of Russian-imperial style formation, church heritage, raised workers and peasants to the top, and gave rise to a revolutionary spirit in the state, which was reflected in the corresponding architectural and artistic images of constructivism. So why was it necessary to abandon revolutionary achievements, betray the revolutionary rise of the people, and punish representatives of the culture of new generations with progressive consciousness?
The third period of development of architecture in Ukraine together with the state began thanks to the efforts of M. S. Khrushchev to implement social programs
[25]
and extend them to construction, introducing industrial methods of housing construction based on typification in design to provide for the population that lost their homes during World War II. And again the academics' heads flew. After the order in 1956 to liquidate the Academy of Architecture of Ukraine (AAU), established in Ukraine in 1944 “for the purpose of developing and flourishing architecture and art, uniting all types of monumental arts...”
[24]
, and in essence with the aim of promoting pseudo-empire form-making using plastic arts in accordance with the ideology of the communist authorities of that time, a new scientific institution was established - the Academy of Construction and Architecture (AC&A). Its role was to carry out new orders and programs of state leadership, which not only crossed out the architectural heritage of the previous period, but also severely punished architects who had made a significant contribution to the formation of the architectural environment of cities at that previous stage. Yakov Aronovich Shteinberg, who became interested in housing design in the 1930s and lost the opportunity to work as part of the academy due to persecution for his adherence to constructivism, dedicated his work to his favorite theme of housing.
From 1954 to 1982, until the last days of his life, Yakov Aronovich wrote 40 articles on typical design of residential buildings and its promising types. The materials he published, as always, represent a carefully worked out contribution of a scientist to the scientific heritage with carefully substantiated data. In the treasures of his “paper architecture”, the first articles are devoted to the problems of housing economy, reducing its cost, technical and economic assessment, searching for new types of sectional houses, ways to improve their planning, improving hygienic qualities, proportions of premises, ensuring regulatory insolation, aeration, and appearance (Figure 4). The master worked on the systematic formation of the structure of the dwelling and sought new methods of typification (Figure 4, c, d). Since 1970, Yakov Shteinberg has been engaged in invention in the structuring of residential buildings, trying to find and found new, not yet existing, types of housing (Figure 5). Each of his articles of this period, written together with his wife, was accompanied by illustrations made by himself in a typically constructivist manner - in graphics on a black background, which manifested the taste of an architect-artist, who was the master by education
[19-23]
. The author had the opportunity to see these wonderful works while communicating with her scientific supervisor. Unfortunately, for unknown reasons, the editorial staff of the journal “Construction and Architecture”, which published these articles, replaced the color of the illustrations in Shteinberg's articles with red or blue.
Regarding the “service” list of Yakov Aronovich - as a result of the “punishments” of the disobedient constructivist, he lost the opportunity to continue working in the AAU, only in 1958 was he reinstated as a corresponding member in the already renewed AС&A, in 1960-1963 Ya. A. Shteinberg worked as the head of the sector and deputy director of the KyivZNDIEP (Kyiv Zonal Research Institute of Experimental Design), and in the NDIAB (Research Institute of Architecture and Construction) as the deputy director for scientific work. Regarding teaching activities, in 1952, after “educational work”, he worked as the “acting” head of the Department of Architectural Design at the KICE, and from 1956 to 1978 - as a professor. In 1954-1958, several public facilities were designed. In 1956, Ya. A. Shteinberg, a remarkable methodologist-scientist who had many students, candidates of architecture trained by him, essentially creating a school of scientists, defended his candidate's thesis on the topic “Economic characteristics of the main planning techniques in the typical design of residential buildings and section”. In 1975, he completed work on his doctoral dissertation, which was to be defended in Moscow, which was already difficult to do due to his health. In February 1982, the master suddenly passed away.
Figure 4. Scientific research by Ya. A. Shteinberg in the field of improving typical sectional housing in the 1970s: a - examples of apartments of different room sizes, designed on the basis of a square
[19]
; b - examples of single-section houses formed on the basis of residential blocks of the same type
[20]
; c - individual examples of ordinary typical sections, designed on the basis of an unchanging central core and such that allow creating stepped ends of houses and a complex composition of development
[19, 21]
; d - model of the structure of a cruciform section with an unchanging central utility core
[19]
; e - scheme of the nomenclature of cruciform sections
[19]
.
Figure 5. Scientific and experimental searches for non-standard types of housing in the projects of Ya. A. Shteinberg in the 1960s and 1970s: project of a multi-storey sectional-corridor building
[18]
- a - plans of the sectional and above-corridor floors, b - plans of the corridor and below-corridor floors, 1964; experimental project of a multi-storey building
[22]
- c - fragments of the corridor and non-corridor floors, 1978; proposal for a 4-apartment section, - d - fragments of the sectional and corridor floors, 1978; e, f and g - projects of gallery buildings on 4, 9-12 and 8 floors, 1977
[22]
.
7. Conclusions
1. Ya. A. Shteinberg went through three main periods in his life with the state, which differed in political, economic and cultural directions: the first is the period of search and formation; the second is a high level of ideology of the communist system of government as the main guideline in the life of the state; the third is increased attention to social aspects and programs of promising development in economic activity.
2. Yakov Aronovich's professional activity depended on the stages of the historical political, economic and socio-cultural development of our country: the first - professional education and an incredible desire to realize one's own potential in design, as well as some attempts in teaching practice and professional administration; the second - an attempt to achieve greater results in all chosen areas, but obstacles arose in the form of war and the fictional political “struggle with cosmopolitanism”; the third - there was a decrease in the publicity of the master due to the reduction of honorary positions and public work, but the “paper architectural work” - experimental design, development of unique design proposals for the formation of new types of housing - increased significantly in volume.
3. Despite historical events regarding some changes in the system of government and the corresponding orders “from above” on the directions of action in architecture, which depended on the decisions of the leadership on the main tasks in the political and economic sphere, Yakiv Aronovich remained true to himself at all stages - in the rational-functional approach to solving planning problems, the spirit of constructivism in shaping, the constructivist interpretation of design materials, the conciseness of architectural objects and the brightness of the combination of space + volume cube (or square of plan), which were the priority techniques in the master's design. Thanks to time and extensive design practice, he has developed his own unique architectural language. “It is generally accepted that the material of architectural expression includes spaces and masses, united by various patterns of their arrangement into architectural forms"
[44]
.
4. A master in any field - in design, teaching, professional administration, invention, science - always devoted himself completely, honestly, with his characteristic scrupulousness to his work, accompanying his decisions with careful calculations that confirmed his design or scientific proposals. He was a talented, holistic person with unprecedentedly high demands on himself, and in any adversity he was collected, tempered, and set on creative search.
The figure of the master and his role in the formation of Ukrainian architecture certainly deserves respect and recognition from descendants!
Abbreviations

USSR

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

KNUСA

Kyiv National University of Construction and Architecture

CPSU

Communist Party of Soviet Ukraine

OMA

Organization of Modern Architects

SСAU

Society of Contemporary Architects of Ukraine

Derzhprom

State Industry Building

KhCI

Kharkiv Construction Institute

Indubud

Institute of Industrial Construction

Ukrbudobednaia Association

Ukrainian Construction Association

SSR

Soviet Socialist Republic

KIСE

Kyiv Institute of Civil Engineering

AAU

Academy of Architecture of Ukraine

AC&A

Academy of Construction and Architecture

KyivZNDIEP

Kyiv Zonal Research Institute of Experimental Design

NDIAB

Research Institute of Architecture and Construction

OAtaAP

Department of Fundamentals of Architecture and Architectural Design

DonAВA

Donbas Academy of Construction and Architecture

MArhI

Moscow Architectural Institute

GAP

Chief Architect of the Project

Derzhbud Ukraine

State Construction Agensy of Ukraine
Acknowledgments
Among the modest team who devoted their scientific research to the activities of Ya. A. Shteinberg, it is first of all worth thanking his son, who in his diaries of family life in Ukraine and memories of his stay in the USA mentions his father - his character, attitude to notorious or joyful events, his patience and modesty, his achievements
[12]
. These memories are the most valuable gift of fate for those who wish to appreciate the master's contribution to Ukrainian cultural heritage. Many thanks to the employees of the architectural library of the KNUСA, who have and preserve the archives of Ukrainian periodicals from the 1920s-1980s with articles by Yakov Aronovich and about the master's activities, which help determine his role in the formation of Soviet architecture in Ukraine. Also, great respect to those who collect materials on his projects, who analyze the artist's legacy in the archives, study his biography
[8]
, design and scientific developments
[9, 11, 13]
.
Author Contributions
Liudmyla Bachynska is the sole author. The author read and approved the final manuscript.
Funding
This work is not supported by any external funding.
Data Availability Statement
No data was used.
Conflicts of Interest
The author declares no conflicts of interest.
References
[1] Bachynska, L. G. Evolution of architecture and urban planning of Ukraine from the end of the 19th to the beginning of the 21st centuries: causes and trends. In International Scientific and Practical Conference «World Science»; 2017, 10(26), Vol. 1, Ajman: United Arab Emirates, October 2017; pp. 43-48.

https://ws-conference.com/

[2] Bachynska, L. G. Architecture and urban planning of Ukraine in the transitional periods of the economic and political state of the 20th century. In World Science, 2017, 11(27), Vol. 1, pp. 15-20, Warsaw: RS Global, Poland.
[3] Yasievych, V. E. Architecture of Ukraine at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. Kyiv: Budivelnik, Ukraine, 1988, 184 p.

http://www.alyoshin.ru/Files/publika/yasievich/yasievichukr.htlm

[4] Bunyn, A. V., Savarenskaya, T. F. History of urban planning art: In 2 vols. T. 2: Urban planning of the 20th century in the countries of the capitalist world. Moscow: Stroyizdat, RF, 1979, 411 p.
[5] Ginzburg, M. Ya. Style and epoch. Problems of modern architecture. Moscow: Gosizdat, 1924, Soviet Russia, 238 p.
[6] Architecture of Soviet Ukraine for 40 years. Kyiv: State Publishing House of Literature on Construction and Architecture of the Ukrainian SSR, Ukraine SSR, 1957, 288 p.
[7] Zharov, A. The birth of the opera theater in the city of Stalino. In Donetsk: history, events, facts. - 15.11.2012.

https://infodon.org.ua/stalino/976

[8] Shteinberg Yakov Aronovich (1896-1982).

http://dnabb.org/modules.php?name=Pages&go=page&pid=378

[9] Lebedev, G. F. Architect-artist Yakov Aronovich Shteinberg. Construction and architecture, 1977, 5, 26-31.
[10] Sleptsov, O. S., Ivashko, Y. V., Ushakov, G. N., Yakovenko, M. K. Department of Fundamentals of Architecture and Architectural Design 55 years: evolution, personalities, achievements, present. In Architectural Bulletin of the KNUBA. Kyiv: KNUBA, 2020, 20-21, 10-40.

https://doi.org/10.32347/2519-8661.2019-20.193396c/10-40

[11] Kashevarova Natalia. Everyday life of the Soviet party nomenclature in the 1930s: Mezhyhirsk dachas according to the data of the Nazi occupiers. In Ukraine moderna. Ukrainian intellectual magazine. 2021, 27.04.2021.

https://uamoderna.com/shafka-dok/z-istorii-radyanskogo-povsyakdennya-drugoi-polovini-1930-x-rokiv-mezhigirski-dachi-partijnix-funkczioneriv-za-nimeczkimi-danimi-1943-r/

[12] Shteinberg, Alexander, Myshchenko, Elena. Take it easy or Chronicles of a bald architect. Rhapsody in the style of blues. Book 13. Strelbytsky Multimedia Publishing House, USA, 2015.

http: loveread.me/view_global.php?id=52254

[13] Stromilyuk, L. V. Restoration of the Zaborovsky Gate in 1946-1948 under the leadership of Ya. A. Shteinberg. In Monument-scientific studies: problems, practices, development prospects. Сollection of scientific works, Kyiv, Ukraine, 2020, 1, 218-231. web:

KNMC.org.ua

[14] Nikolsky, G. Building of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks).

https://constructivism-kharkiv.com/obiekty/56-13-45-budivlya-ck-kp-b-u

[15] Shteinberg, Ya. A. Profitable and economical housing. Architecture of Soviet Ukraine. Kyiv: 1940, Ukraine, 4, 37-43.
[16] Shteinberg, Ya. A. Before the completion of the planning of the Dzerzhinsky Square in Kharkiv. Architecture of Soviet Ukraine, Kyiv, 1941, Ukrainian SSR, 2, 5-10.
[17] Shteinberg, Ya. A., Grabovsky, S. Ya., (1947). Architecture of Soviet Ukraine. Bulletin of the Academy of Architecture of the Ukrainian SSR. Kyiv, 1947, Ukrainian SSR, 4, 5-29.
[18] Shteinberg, Ya. A. Multi-storey sectional-corridor residential houses. In Questions of mass housing construction, Kyiv: Budyvelnyk, 1964, Ukrainian SSR, 7, 5-24.
[19] Shteinberg, Ya. A., Kuznetsova, V. V. Residential houses with cross sections. Construction and architecture, Kyiv: Budyvelnyk, 1972, Ukrainian SSR, 5, 20-27.
[20] Shteinberg, Ya. A., Kuznetsova, V. V. Spatial solution and economics of a single-section residential building. Construction and architecture, Kyiv: Budyvelnyk, 1973, Ukrainian SSR, 1, 28-31.
[21] Shteinberg, Ya. A., Kuznetsova, V. V. The central composition of multi-apartment residential sections. Construction and architecture, Kyiv: Budyvelnyk, Ukrainian SSR, 1975, 1, 28-32.
[22] Shteinberg, Ya. A., Kuznetsova, V. V. Gallery houses of central composition. Housing construction, Moscow: Stroyizdat, RF, 1977, 5(233), 23-26.
[23] Shteinberg, Ya. A., Kuznetsova, V. V. Multi-storey residential houses of promising construction. Construction and architecture, Kyiv: Budyvelnyk, Ukrainian SSR, 1978, 7, 13-16.
[24] Resolution of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR "On the elimination of excesses in design and construction" Moscow, USSR, 1955, Pravda, November 10.
[25] Danylenko, V. Attempts at “socialization” of the Soviet economy during the years of Khrushchev’s “thaw” (1955-1965) In Ukraine of the 20th Century: Culture, Ideology, Politics, Kyiv, 2011, 16, 5-20.
[26] Zharov, A. The initial project of the Opera and Ballet Theater in Donetsk. In Donetsk: history, events, facts. Donetsk, Ukraine, 2013, 07.05.2013.

https://infodon.org.ua/stalino/6436-pervonachalnyy_proekt_teatra_opery_i_baleta_v_donecke

[27] Kharkiv Derzprom, which we do not know, 2018. Available from:

ukrinform.ua/rubric-tourism/2439617-harkivskij-derzprom-akogo-mi-ne-znaemo.html

[28] Kyiv, how it could have been: Lenin on the site of St. Michael's Cathedral, 2018. Available from:

facebook/kiev.klub/posts/2380725518623086/

[29] Superstructure of the building of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine (Bolsheviks) - article by Ya. A. Shteinberg. Available from:

constructivism-kharkiv.com/materialy/238-interwar-period-01-ua

[30] Construktivist project/ Shteinberg Yakov Aronovych. Available from:

theconstruktivistproject.com/ru/people/428/stejnberg-yacov-aronovich

[31] Save or demolish: what will happen to the Kharkiv House of Soviets? 2022. Available from:

2day.kh.ua/ua/Kharkov/zberehty-chy-znesty-shocho-bude-z-kharkivskym-budynkom-rad

[32] The kharkiv region state administration building Stock Photos and Images, 2024. Available from:

https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/the-kharkiv-region-state-administration-building.html?sortBy=relevant

[33] Deryabina, Olga. Purity of architectural solution. Builders' Club, 2024. Available from:

constructivism-kharkov.com/obiekty/15-04-45-palats-kulturi-budivelnikiv

[34] Is constructivism a movement, style, or method? Available from:

constructivism-kharkov/com/constructivism-ua

[35] Kharkiv National University of Radioelectronics, 2024. Available from:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kharkiv_National_University_of_Radioelectronics

[36] Smolenska, S. Kharkiv 1930: Ukrainian winners of a forgotten world-class competition, 2023, 84-92. Available from:

https://science.lpnu.ua/sites/default/files/journal-paper/2023/jul/30779/storinkizzbirnik182006i2-7.pdf

[37] Asadcheva, Tetyana. The Baroque Gate of St. Sophia of Kyiv Celebrates 275th Anniversary. Evening Kyiv, 2021. Available from:

https://vechirniy kyiv.ua/news/59721/

[38] Markovskyi, A. Transformation of paradigms contest for the development of Kyiv city center in the 1930-1940s. Architectural Studies, Lviv, 2019, 5(1), 45-52.
[39] Dnipro Evreisky: Walk 10. Upper and Lower settlements of the auto plant, cottage settlement Builder (2016-2017). My shtetl. Jewish towns of Ukraine. Dnipro. Available from:

https://myshtetl.org/dnepropetrovsk/dnepr9_rab.html

[40] Uprooting the remnants of cosmopolitanism from architectural science and criticism Bulletin of the Academy of Architecture of the Ukrainian SSR, 1949, 1, 3-5.
[41] Tsarev, S. S. More about profitable and economical housing. Architecture of Soviet Ukraine, 1940, Ukrainian SSR, 7, 16-19.
[42] Lensky M. The Degeneration of Modern Bourgeois Architecture and Educational Art. Bulletin of the Academy of Architecture of the Ukrainian SSR, 1941, Ukrainian SSR, 3, 35-46.
[43] Gideon, Siegfried. Space, time, architecture. Moscow: Stroyizdat, 1984, 455 р.
[44] Remizova, O. The structure of the architectural language. Architectural Studies, Lviv: 2015, 1(2), 81-86.
Cite This Article
Plain Text BibTeX RIS

  • APA Style

    Bachynska, L. (2025). Architect Yakov Shteinberg - Life, Fate, Creativity of a Constructivist in the Conditions of Soviet Ukraine. International Journal of Architecture, Arts and Applications, 11(2), 71-84. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijaaa.20251102.13

    Copy | Download

    ACS Style

    Bachynska, L. Architect Yakov Shteinberg - Life, Fate, Creativity of a Constructivist in the Conditions of Soviet Ukraine. Int. J. Archit. Arts Appl. 2025, 11(2), 71-84. doi: 10.11648/j.ijaaa.20251102.13

    Copy | Download

    AMA Style

    Bachynska L. Architect Yakov Shteinberg - Life, Fate, Creativity of a Constructivist in the Conditions of Soviet Ukraine. Int J Archit Arts Appl. 2025;11(2):71-84. doi: 10.11648/j.ijaaa.20251102.13

    Copy | Download 

  • @article{10.11648/j.ijaaa.20251102.13,
  author = {Liudmyla Bachynska},
  title = {Architect Yakov Shteinberg - Life, Fate, Creativity of a Constructivist in the Conditions of Soviet Ukraine
},
  journal = {International Journal of Architecture, Arts and Applications},
  volume = {11},
  number = {2},
  pages = {71-84},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijaaa.20251102.13},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijaaa.20251102.13},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijaaa.20251102.13},
  abstract = {Constructivist architect Yakov Shteinberg is a significant figure in Ukrainian culture. Information about his activities and fate during the Soviet era was hushed up, despite the fact that he was recognized as the "First Architect of Ukraine", due to punishment during the struggle of the Soviet government "with cosmopolitans". The article proposes to consider three stages of the political and economic state of the state and their impact on the life and activities of the master in the conditions of the USSR. Such an assessment of the dependence of the life of society and an individual creative personality on the communist leadership of the country allows us to determine why and for what exactly in the Soviet Union a unique style of "constructivism" arose in the world, why it was banned by the authorities during its consolidation and how this affected the life of the creative intelligentsia on the example of the biography of Ya. A. Shteinberg. The purpose of the study is to identify the specifics of the scientific and creative activities of the constructivist architect at different stages of the existence of Soviet Ukraine and his outstanding role in the formation of Ukrainian architecture, despite the dependence on the political regime. The methods of the study are biographical, causal relationship between the orders of the governing bodies and the activities of the artist, comparative analysis between the stages of the professional activity of the specialist. To obtain the results, an important component of the research was the study of contemporary publications that testified to the events and the state of affairs in the state, and the personal articles of Yakov Shteinberg were of particular importance. The results of scientific research proved that the life of an individual in the conditions of totalitarianism, characteristic of the communist system of power, required the individual and society to completely submit to the political regime. The novelty of the proposed topic lies in the initial consideration of the biography of the artist and his activities through the study of the peculiarities of the political and economic conditions of life and activity of the country, determining the influence of these conditions on the cultural activities of the people in the field of architecture and urban planning and the formation of the personality of the constructivist architect Ya. A. Shteynberg.
},
 year = {2025}
}

    Copy | Download 

  • TY  - JOUR
T1  - Architect Yakov Shteinberg - Life, Fate, Creativity of a Constructivist in the Conditions of Soviet Ukraine

AU  - Liudmyla Bachynska
Y1  - 2025/06/06
PY  - 2025
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijaaa.20251102.13
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijaaa.20251102.13
T2  - International Journal of Architecture, Arts and Applications
JF  - International Journal of Architecture, Arts and Applications
JO  - International Journal of Architecture, Arts and Applications
SP  - 71
EP  - 84
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2472-1131
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijaaa.20251102.13
AB  - Constructivist architect Yakov Shteinberg is a significant figure in Ukrainian culture. Information about his activities and fate during the Soviet era was hushed up, despite the fact that he was recognized as the "First Architect of Ukraine", due to punishment during the struggle of the Soviet government "with cosmopolitans". The article proposes to consider three stages of the political and economic state of the state and their impact on the life and activities of the master in the conditions of the USSR. Such an assessment of the dependence of the life of society and an individual creative personality on the communist leadership of the country allows us to determine why and for what exactly in the Soviet Union a unique style of "constructivism" arose in the world, why it was banned by the authorities during its consolidation and how this affected the life of the creative intelligentsia on the example of the biography of Ya. A. Shteinberg. The purpose of the study is to identify the specifics of the scientific and creative activities of the constructivist architect at different stages of the existence of Soviet Ukraine and his outstanding role in the formation of Ukrainian architecture, despite the dependence on the political regime. The methods of the study are biographical, causal relationship between the orders of the governing bodies and the activities of the artist, comparative analysis between the stages of the professional activity of the specialist. To obtain the results, an important component of the research was the study of contemporary publications that testified to the events and the state of affairs in the state, and the personal articles of Yakov Shteinberg were of particular importance. The results of scientific research proved that the life of an individual in the conditions of totalitarianism, characteristic of the communist system of power, required the individual and society to completely submit to the political regime. The novelty of the proposed topic lies in the initial consideration of the biography of the artist and his activities through the study of the peculiarities of the political and economic conditions of life and activity of the country, determining the influence of these conditions on the cultural activities of the people in the field of architecture and urban planning and the formation of the personality of the constructivist architect Ya. A. Shteynberg.

VL  - 11
IS  - 2
ER  -

    Copy | Download

Author Information

  • Liudmyla Bachynska

    Department of Fundamentals of Architecture and Architectural Design, Kyiv National University of Construction and Architecture, Kyiv, Ukraine

    Biography: Liudmyla Bachynska - Professor of the Department of OAtaAP of the KNUCBA, Deputy Dean for Educational and Methodologi-cal Work, Corresponding Member of the AAU. In 1973, she grad-uated from the KICE with honors, in 1983 she defended her thesis for the degree of Candidate of Architecture, was awarded the hon-orary badge "Excellent Education of Ukraine". Part-time, she worked as a professor at Chernivtsi University (2011-2014). Every 5 years, she undergoes internships in scientific and educational organizations of Ukraine, Russia (1985), Germany (2004). She worked as GAP in design institutions in Kyiv. By order of the Derzhbud Ukraine, she was a co-author in the development of the Program for the Reconstruction of Typical Residential Buildings in Ukraine. She is the author of over 200 scientific papers in publica-tions in Ukraine, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Latvia, including a solo monograph, a textbook and participation in a col-lective monograph. She took part in exhibitions of artistic works.

    Research Fields: Architecture and urban planning as a systemic reflection of the de-velopment of society, the influence of political and economic condi-tions on the formation of the needs of the consumer - a person, soci-ety and the state - regarding the architectural and urban space, sys-tematic research in the field of architecture and urban planning, the influence of knowledge of socio-humanitarian sciences on the design of architectural and urban planning objects, the architectural and ur-ban planning industry as a part of cultural activity in the historical process of human development, the latest requirements for the struc-ture of architectural objects, reconstruction of typical and historically formed urban housing, the relationship between urban planning as-pects and the functional and visual-aesthetic solution of an individual building.

    Contact Email

    http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6942-5627

Download PDF

About Us

Science Publishing Group (SciencePG) is an Open Access publisher, with more than 300 online, peer-reviewed journals covering a wide range of academic disciplines.

Learn More About SciencePG

Products

Information

Important Link

Copyright © 2012 -- 2025 Science Publishing Group – All rights reserved.