In connection with the adoption in 1976 by the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of the Law on the Protection and Use of Historical and Cultural Monuments, concerns were expressed at the congress about the fate of numerous monuments that are being destroyed in several regions of Kyrgyzstan.
The twelfth congress (1986) of Kyrgyz architects was particularly significant, taking place in an atmosphere of great scrutiny and demands, criticism and self-criticism, and an understanding of the need to work differently in light of the historical decisions of the XXVII Congress of the CPSU. In the reports and speeches of the architects, it was noted that a fundamentally new direction for the restructuring of the Union's public and creative work should be to shift the focus of organizational efforts directly to creative teams, to the primary organizations of the Union of Architects — where the problems of architecture in our cities and villages are practically solved.
By its twelfth congress, the Union of Architects of Kyrgyzstan had achieved significant creative accomplishments: certain provisions of the detailed planning project for the center of Frunze city had been implemented, and several unique buildings and complexes had been constructed in the capital and other cities of the republic. However, alongside these positive results, it was noted that many constructions were overloaded with architectural excesses, with a particularly noticeable trend among designers towards the use of expensive natural materials, leading to wastefulness and, in some cases, to architectural tastelessness.
The XXVII Congress of the CPSU pointed to the responsibility of creative unions for the political and spiritual development of society, the improvement of socialist democracy, and all its aspects and manifestations. In this regard, it was noted at the congress of architects of Kyrgyzstan that the previous leadership was poorly oriented towards the human factor. Individual issues were resolved within the leadership and were not brought to broad discussion, and there was practically no critical assessment of what was being done, nor any transparency.
Today, the activities of the Union focus on increasing overall activity and involving all its members in creative and public work; taking concrete measures to improve conditions for creativity, assessing the work of architects; providing practical assistance in protecting authors' rights and adhering to professional ethics and morals.
Creative discussions of projects, buildings, and theoretical problems arising from the practice of modern construction remain relevant; the competitive process will be improved, with regular reviews and competitions for the best projects and buildings being held.
The Union of Architects of Kyrgyzstan, uniting more than 200 members, is a vanguard in the cultural construction of the republic, a loyal assistant to the party in implementing promising programs for the further development of Soviet society, its culture, and the national economy. Its creation involved primarily representatives of the older generation. Significant contributions to the development of architecture and the establishment of the Union of Architects of the republic, in addition to those mentioned in the directory, were made by representatives of the older and middle generations: P. Vorobyov, S. Saakyan, V. Tychinsky, N. Baranovsky, A. Shprung, M. Abalyan, V. Gribova, A. Korzhempo, S. Kurbangaliyev, V. Kurbatov, R. Moskvin, B. Churlyaev, Yu. Gradov, A. Mechkovskaya, G. Oganesyan, and others.
A significant contribution to the architecture and development of the Union of Architects of the Kyrgyz SSR is currently being made by the working members of our Union.
Over nearly 50 years of its existence, the Union of Architects of Kyrgyzstan has grown from a weak organization into a leading force of the intelligentsia and exerts comprehensive influence on the cultural life of the republic. The main feature of modern architecture in Kyrgyzstan is that all architectural work is carried out under the direct influence and guidance of the Union of Architects, taking place amid rapid industrialization of construction and a general creative upsurge of architectural forces. This activity encompasses all major areas of architectural influence: urban planning, industrial architecture, housing, public buildings, architecture of rural settlements, management, architectural education, and competitions.
