2011-2016

The aim of the project together with possible changes to the aim during the course of the project

The aim of the project "Soviet design: Modernism from the Baltic states and the Nordic countries--an official anomaly within socialist realist aesthetics during the cold war" was to map and investigate the reforming role of industrial design in Soviet society during the cold war with a focus on a handful of non-Russian countries and their influence on the Soviet Union. The project began with a mapping of some Baltic and Nordic countries, as well as East Germany. These countries were chosen to represent a range of levels of dependence on Soviet power: Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania (as occupied Soviet republics), Eastern Germany (which remained strongly influenced by the USSR after it became the German Democratic Republic, the GDR) and the relatively independent Finland and Sweden in the capitalist world. As the project progressed, its geographical focus narrowed to the relationship between Russia (i.e., Moscow) and Sweden.

In the USSR, relatively significant resources were invested in industrial design (in Russian-language discourse called tekhnicheskaia estetika - "technological aesthetics"). It was apparently thought that design involved problems that reflected important social functions.

Through investigating two leading Russian-language design journals put out by Moscow, "Tekhnicheskaia estetika" (Technological Aesthetics) and "Dekorativnoe iskusstvo SSSR" (Decorative Arts in the USSR), the project was able to pinpoint some phenomena which influenced the Moscow leaders' views on news about technical innovations and new trends in design, fashion and architecture, from after Stalin to the fall of the Berlin Wall.

The three most important findings of the project

1. In the West, the Nordic countries were frequently thought of at the time as the model for the rationally designed welfare state. Within the socialist bloc, this role was partly filled by the Baltic Soviet republics and the GDR, albeit with certain modifications to the concept. In the Soviet Union, these countries were considered to represent the kind of attractively well-organized societies worth emulating and learning from when endeavouring to shift society towards a more humane form in the post-Stalin era. From a design point of view, these efforts included learning from the more advanced technology these countries had access to, in order to update outdated Stalinist style and thereby come into line with lifestyle trends in the world at large. In general, the concerns were to find more information about more democratically structured societies than one's own. Boiled down to its fundamental prerequisites, the aim was to redefine the relationship between the individual and her surroundings, in a way which would have a real impact on daily life. Concern for the individual was intended to be expressed in the built environment both for production workers and for the general workforce (in offices, schools, large-scale kitchens, bakeries and in the home).

2. In the 1960s, institutes for "technological aesthetics" (approx. industrial design) were established in major industrial areas across the Soviet empire. These institutes had better access to information (including from the West) than in society at large, which meant they could develop into relatively broad-minded enclaves (considering the constraints of censorship) within the centrally planned command production system. The investigation conducted shows that direct contact between the institutes was not encouraged by Moscow, despite the fact that this probably inhibited innovation. Apparently control was prioritized over creativity and innovation. Nevertheless, since those who worked with design developed similar views, embryonic informal networks could appear.

3. The Soviet Union sought more knowledge about the countries which were the focus of the present project. This was partly done by way of officially sanctioned collaboration. The project leader learned from informal conversations with participants in the events the subject of this project that the Soviet representatives privately acknowledged that they had things to learn from the smaller Soviet republics and socialist satellites. However, Moscow's official position remained that it was the example which others should follow. Studies of attitudes and structures from the Soviet era may provide insights about how Russia works even today.

All findings from the project are supported by concrete examples documented in pictures and written material.

New research questions generated by the project:

It seems certain that exchanges and contacts between the design worlds of the countries chosen by the project took place, but this small project has barely scratched the surface of this area of research. One big problem is that the role of design and the designer in industry is largely unknown in all the countries concerned.

In the case of Sweden, the role of the designer in Swedish society and its production systems has been the subject of no or very little research. At present, there are only short and more or less random presentations, and structural surveys are almost entirely absent. For example, Sweden has superior ergonomic design, even viewed from an international perspective. What effects does this have on industrial production and its processes? On an individual level, not even our most famous designers and their practices have been studied, something which would be a necessary first step.

With the proposed definition of design here as materialised rhetoric and ideology, fundamental for shaping identity, design should be viewed as a vital field of research. However, both the general history of design and in-depth study is currently absent from higher education in Sweden. Bearing in mind the multifaceted practice which is characteristic of design, nothing less than a multi-disciplinary approach is necessary to make the research meaningful, with contributions from the humanities, the social sciences and technology disciplines, with historical perspectives taken into account.

The international basis of the project:

Thanks to conference participation and research trips financed by the project, a relevant network has been formed, which has resulted in invitations to publications, lectures, workshops and conferences in England, Germany, the Baltic countries, Russia and the USA.
Project leader's wider activities relevant to the research:
Moderator of a film festival arranged by KTH Environmental Humanities Laboratory, lecturing to specialists who work in eastern Europe and Russia at the Stockholm School of Economics, writing for the popular blog "Världen österut/The World goes East".
The two most significant publications stemming from the project and a comment on these:

1: * Tillberg, M: (2014): "Martin Kelm: DDR, Moskau und die Designszene innerhalb des Ostblocks", in "Gutes Design - Martin Kelm und die Designförderung der DDR". Dresden, Verlag Thelem, pp. 218-233 ISBN: 978-3-945363-11-9.

This article is based upon individual, personal interviews carried out by the author with the directors of the state-governed design institutes of the USSR and GDR. Their institutes were closely aligned with the political leadership and located in central Berlin and Moscow respectively.

In the hierarchical system behind the Iron Curtain, power was concentrated in very few hands. Yuri Borisovich Soloviev (1920-2013) was the person who led the discourse on organisation and production design within the whole of the socialist bloc, by virtue of being both the founding director of VNIITE (Soviet Federal Research Institute for Technological Aesthetics) and the creator and publisher of the journal Technological Aesthetics,. And Martin Kelm (born 1930) was director of the institutes which controlled state design in the GDR from 1962 until1990, more or less the whole Berlin Wall era. This article offers a unique first glimpse into the relationship between these two powerful leaders. This gives us access to new and hitherto unknown perspectives on the centrally sanctioned views about innovations in technology and design held by the political powers during the cold war: the GDR was the model country but the Soviet Union had the prerogative of interpretation.

2: * Tillberg, M: A book project in progress about "ICSID Moscow'75", an international world congress organised by ICSID (International Council of Societies of Industrial Design) in Moscow in 1975. The book is based on personal interviews with participants in the congress from Sweden and Russia and with local people who were involved in creating both the content and the organization of the congress. It is also based on conference reports from design journals in Swedish and Russian, and on archival material on and from ICSID. By juxtaposing these multifarious sources from the two political blocs, differences and similarities clearly emerge. The diverse world views represented by the delegates are illustrated with pictures and citations which clarify the context.

Publication strategy of the project:

The texts which have been published in English and German will be revised and made available on Diva and JStor. The non-academic texts are already all available online.

Publications

Chapters in books and Exhibition Catalogues:

* Tillberg, M. (2013) „„Farbe als Erfahrung. Experiment und Anwendung in Kunst und Wissenschaft an der Moskauer GAChN und am Leningrader GINChUK“, in Form und Wirkung. Phänomenologische und empirische Kunstwissenschaft in der Sowjetunion der 1920er Jahre. hrsg. Aage Hansen-Löve Brigitte Obermeyr, Georg Witte, München Fink Verlag. pp. 209-221.
* Tillberg, M: (2014) "Die technische Ästhetik und die unerschöpfliche Mensch-Maschine als sowjetisches Designprodukt der 1960er bis 1970er Jahre", in Helden am Ende. Erschöpfungszustände in der Kunst des Sozialismus. eds. Monica Rüthers and Alexandra Köhring, Campus-Verlag: Frankfurt/M, New York. pp. 157-181.
* Tillberg, M: (2014)  "Martin Kelm: DDR, Moskau und die Designszene innerhalb des Ostblocks", in Gutes Design – Martin Kelm und die Designförderung der DDR, eds.  Christian Wölfel, Sylvia Wölfel & Jens Krzywinski. ISBN: 978-3-945363-11-9. Dresden, Verlag Thelem, sid. 218-233.
* Tillberg, M: (2015) ”I will make machines that fly under water'”: Electro-kinetic art/design in Latvia in 1970-80", in Visionary Structures. From Johansons to Johansons, ed. Ieva Astahovska. Riga: Latvian Centre for Contemporary Art & Bozar. 2015, pp. 68-81 + flera bilder i bokens bilddel + many more illustrations in picture part of the catalogue (in Latvian and English). Handlar om kinetisk konst från 1970-talet som var okänd till och med i hemlandet Lettland. Dessutom strukturerades artikeln så att den kinetiska konsten placerades i en dittills okänd kontext i gränslandet till design och teknikexperiment inom det militärindustriella komplexet. Artikeln beställdes från Latvian Center for Contemporary Art, inför den katalog som publicerades i samband med Lettlands ordförandeskap i EU 2015. The article is about a group of kinetik artists active in the 1970s unknown even in their home country Latvia. The article constructs a context which includes design and technological experimentation as part of the military industrial complex. The text was commissioned by the Latvian Center for Contemporary Art for an exhibition catalogue introducing Latvian culture for Latvias Presidency of the EU.

Reports and  other academic work:
* Tillberg, M (2012) "Johan Huldt", svensk designer i Das Allgemeine Künstlerlexikon, K.G. Sauer Verlag, Leipzig, München.
*Tillberg, M (2012) "Åke Huldt", svensk designer i Das Allgemeine Künstlerlexikon, K.G. Sauer Verlag, Leipzig, München.
* Tillberg, M. (2012) "Official and Clandestine: The Russian Artists' Collective Dvizhenie", på konferensen  Nordik.X. Presentation/Representation/Repression organiserat av Nordisk kommitté för konsthistoria, Stockholm 4-27 oktober 2012. Abstract.
* Tillberg, M. (2016)  "Rum i rymden: Galina Balashova. Architect of the Soviet Space Program", Arkitektur. Vol. 1, p. 90. Recension.
*Tillberg, M. (2013) "Photos of Interaction: Man-Machine in the Journal Tekhnicheskaia estetika, 1960s-90s" på workshopen "Photography/Authenticity", organiserat av CEELBAS (The Centre for East European Language-Based Area Studies) University of Sheffield, Centre for Visual Studies. 16-17 maj 2013. Abstract.
* Tillberg, M: (2013) "Why is design 'Made in the USSR' invisible in design history". I Crafting the Future:10th European Academy of Design Conference April 17-19 in Gothenburg. 2013. Motivering: Problematiserar designhistoriska blinda fläckar, metod- och teori. Work in progress: under revidering för peer-review för Journal for Design History. Fulltext i conferenceproceedings: http://su.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:789282/FULLTEXT01.pdf
*Tillberg, M. (2014) "Design for Man and Mankind': VNIITE hosts ICSID' 75 Moscow, på workshop (De)constructing Utopia: Design in Eastern Europe from Thaw to Perestroika. Organiserat av Humanities Research Institute, University of  Sheffield 2-3 maj, 2014. Abstract.
Essays etc. of popular science nature:
* Tillberg, M: "A Megaphone for the 'Artist-Politician', Baltic Worlds. 2012 (3-4), pp. 83-84.
* Tillberg, M: "Utan perspektiv blir föremålen stumma", Svenska Dagbladet debatt. 23 sept, 2012.
* Tillberg, M: "Soviet Design 1950-1980", Baltic Worlds. - 2013 (1), pp. 28-29.
* Tillberg, M: Sovjetisk design 1950-1980 Blogginlägg på Världen österut 12 feb. 2012.
* Tillberg, M: "Design institute VNIITE closes its doors", Baltic Worlds. - 2013 (3), back cover.
* Tillberg, M: Designinstitutet VNIITE slår igen. Blogginlägg på Världen österut 1 okt. 2013.


Links:
http://www.rj.se/Forskningsnyheter/2015/Designinstitut-fristad-for-konstnarer-under-Sovjettiden/
http://www.su.se/profiles/mati5107-1.194404
Publikationer i DIVA-Swepub: Swepub