How can one interpret the space of Solovki, which is a combination of natural, cultural, political, economic layers? Being originally a pagan site for ancient rituals, which is testified by the stone labyrinths (the largest in Northern Europe) and other Neolithic monuments, the Solovki Islands became "the shelter at the world's edge" in the XV century for the monastic brethren, who made it one of the most powerful monasteries in Russia. The most significant names in the Russian history – Phillip Kolychev, Patriarch Nikon, Peter the Great and others – got the blessing of Solovki. Then this model of hermitage existence was succeeded in the beginning of the XX century by the GULAG prototype that was developed on Solovki to spread later on all over Russia.
Against this rich and controversial background, at present Solovki is a living space, including the village community of 900 people, a functioning monastery under Patriarch's authority, a federal museum-reserve, a fast-growing tourist infrastructure (last year Solovki was on the top-list of summer "resorts"), etc. Is it possible to structure this variety of Solovki spaces and organize communication between different cultural actors – both within the Solovki community and the stakeholders beyond Solovki at the national and international levels?
To start with, let's do a quick overview of the philosophy of the Solovki space, in particular, and philosophy of space, in general.
Solovki was opened up by the monks in the middle of the XV century. The Transfiguration Monastery became the Russian pilgrimage site, and Solovki – one of the "Russian Palestines". The toponymy of the archipelago was used to its most for reconstructing the images of the Holy Land. By the end of the XIX century, all the hills of the archipelago were matched with the Palestine hills that were associated with the main events of the New Testament – Transfiguration, Crucifixion and
Ascension. The triangle was marked by the Sekirnaya (Hatchet) Mount (Mount of Olives), crowned by the Ascension Hermitage, a chapel on the Mount Fabor on the Big Muksalma Island and the Calvary with the Golgotha-Crucifixion Hermitage on top on the Anzer Island. The basis of the triangle is highlighted by the Solovki Jerusalem – the Transfiguration Monastery. Approaching the Solovki Palestines by sea the pilgrims stop by St Andrew's Hermitage on the Big Zayatsky Island. Thus, the sacred map of Solovki reflects the main New Testament sites of Jerusalem. Historically Solovki is considered in the Russian Orthodox state as "the stronghold of the Orthodox religion", "the national sanctuary", "the place in which one can get insight into the origins of the Orthodox culture and Christian values", "one of the foundations of spiritual, cultural, historic and national self-identity".
Symbolic space can be approached from different perspectives. Sharif Shukurov, for instance, assumes that spiritual space is anthropologic and can be measured by thinking of a Symbolic space can be approached from different perspectives. Sharif Shukurov, for instance, assumes that spiritual space is anthropologic and can be measured by thinking of a person or a group of people. This may result in "heterogeneity of spiritual space". This heterogeneity naturally influences communication of different cultural actors, resulting in a dialogue or a conflict of interests.
Viacheslav Stoliarov, researcher specializing in Solovki issues, considers the space of Solovki as a result of one dominant aspect – "the Orthodox religion and Russian monastic culture". To his mind, the Monastery gets a higher priority to establish rules and limitations. The Solovki Islands were designed first of all for praying and immersing into the monastic culture and history of our much-suffering state».[1] Well, it's quite characteristic for Russia that has kept many Byzantium traditions to match the sacred and the governmental.
Vassily Matonin, philosopher and poet, who has lived on Solovki for many years, claims that "Solovki is in all senses a frontier – cultural, territorial, natural. Solovki is a solitary place (solo), the place that was designed for solitude… It's a marginal place… place of unstable balance of oppositional powers, place that unites different cultures. Any forced decisions are not appropriate here. The Idea of Solovki is the idea of transition (frontier), transfiguration, acquisition of a new quality… We should develop principles stipulating what is allowed and what is not on Solovki… Frontier is a place of dialogue… It's a place where different interests merge – that's where power comes from. It's a monastery, cemetery, and sacred site. Solovki is a special zone. It's not a purely Orthodox territory. It's a place of natural miracles, special romanticism…» [2]
Clearly, there's no unified attitude to the space of Solovki. In the communicational sphere of Solovki one can speak of a conflict between "pilgrims" who come to the island primarily to experience the heart of the Orthodox sacredness, and so-to-say "non-pilgrims" who may at the same time be religious and Orthodox, but not really church-goers, who may be non-Orthodox believers coming to Solovki to experience the place of power, etc. Can the Orthodox community have monopoly on defining the content in this space, or does it have to take into account the diversity of cultural actors? Is it possible to achieve a compromise here, if a compromise is ever part of the Russian culture?
An attempt of structuring of Solovki symbolic space
In terms of social theory, social practices are carried out in the space-time and are
represented in architecture. Architecture is an organizing instrument of the symbolic space. It "marks and what is more important, it measures the space". [3] Let's consider architectural markers of Solovki.
(1). The pagan (pre-historic) layer is represented predominantly by the Neolithic complexes on the Big Zayatsky Island, but the elements of the heathen landscapes are found everywhere on the archipelago.
(2). The above mentioned Jerusalem references define the zones of liturgical practices. The difficulty is that the most important of these zones – the territory of the Solovki Monastery – is located within the village. The village space is filled with both secular and worship life. Moreover, within the Solovki Kremlin walls the Monastery and the Museum co-exist, as well as a village bakery, located in the former monastery one, and others.
Besides, the monuments of the sacred value are recognized as the world's architectural masterpieces and on the UNESCO list from 1992. All the activities (religious or secular) within the Kremlin are regulated. Thus, we can assume that the Solovki Kremlin with the functioning churches (Transfiguration Cathedral, Annunciation Church, Dormitory Church, St Nicola's Church, St Phillip's Church), monastic living quarters and other religious edifices, as well as monastic guest-houses for pilgrims, are the zones localizing liturgical practices. Beyond the village there is the Ascension Hermitage and St Phillip's Hermitage.
(3). The next architectural layer is the result of the GULAG on Solovki (Solovki camp of special purpose, or SLON, – 1920-1937, Solovki prison of special purpose, or STON, – 1937-1939). It's difficult to separate the architecture of this period, as the gulag was located practically all over the above mentioned sacred zones. The gulag places should also be sorted out. Here they are generalized as "memorial places", "places of mourning", "placed of death", etc. These connotations are often applied to the whole space of the Solovki Islands, and they are called in this sense a "graveyard". I suggest we differentiate the punishment / execution / burial sites and other imprisonment places, on the one side, and the gulag household and technical facilities (warehouses, administrative buildings, hangar for hydroplanes, etc.). In the village a few gulag barracks still remain and are used for living and storage.
Undoubtedly, the gulag tragedy is indelible in the history of Solovki. But I assume that such memorial sites should be treated dually. Those who live in this memorial place (I repeat, there are about 900 inhabitants on Solovki) should probably treat it with some degree of oblivion, as it's impossible to live everyday life with a permanent sense of tragedy. For the local people, as well as those who frequent Solovki it's essential to have an optimistic view at the present and the future of the place.
(4). The village architecture (1940-80s) makes up the living environment for the residents and tourists. The village started developing in the 1950s, embracing the Monastery from the South and the North. The village architecture is mostly represented by two-storey wooden or brick barrack-looking houses. There are just a few private houses. The Florensky Street built in the 1980s is a series of cottages, standing out against other civic architecture.
(5). One can single out several industrial zones on the outskirts of the village, which appeared in the 1980s under realization of the Master Plan of the Village Modernization. The process of modernization was stopped by the perestroika, but the industrial zones remained.
Guided by the architectural markers, let's try to structure the communicational space of Solovki.
The sacred space, apperceived by the believers and pilgrims during their ritual-devotional journey, is localized in the zones of liturgical practices, preconditioned by the pro-Jerusalem realities. These are the zones in the symbolic space of Solovki that allow for monopolistic presence of the Orthodox believers. Here certain regulations should be applied regarding activities planned in these zones.
.
What is appropriate in one type of spatial zones should not be required or expected in others. In other spaces – so-to-say 'free' zones, including natural landscapes – diverse activities that meet interests of people with different standpoints may and should be carried out. Here conditions for dialogue of different cultural actors with different identities should be created.
Of course, the whole system of activities should be implemented to organize such a dialogue – conferences, symposiums, seminars, which take place (have taken till now – the editor’s note) on Solovki with varied success.
The historically dominating Monastery ensemble evidently requires alternative spaces for gathering the locals and visitors, especially taking into account that the population of Solovki grows immensely in the summer time (up to 20000 tourists). However, what makes one frequent Solovki or strive there is not only the functioning Monastery restoring a certain culture to some degree (though for many pilgrims this is probably the case), but the space itself - a multi-layered and intricate one – in which diverse people find their own things.
After Manuel Castells, "space is an expression of society, … not its reflection, not a photocopy, but it is the society itself».[4] The society is changing. Contradictions appear between its actors, who protect their own interests and values. The Solovki players reflect over the space in a different way and, thus, behave differently.
[1] V. Stolyarov. Images of the Sacred Land on the Solovki Islands // The Solovki Sea. The Literary Miscellany of History and Architecture. Arkhangelsk – Moscow: the Issue of Northern Navigation Association – Issue 2, 2003 – p. 99-112.
[2] Near the last coast: according to the material of NGPK project on Solovki // Edited by Professor Dudchenko. Moscow: The third Rome publishing house, 2003 – p. 154
[3] Sh. Shukurov. Modern Architecture and Symbolic Space <http://www.prometa.ru/report/scont.html>, [12. 02. 2004].
[4]M. Kastels. Informational Epoch. Economics, Society and Culture. Moscow: State Institution the Higher School of Economics, 2000 p. 384-399.
