Design Competition for the National Memorial for the Heavenly Hundred Heroes and Revolution of Dignity Museum in Kiev

Winning design: ©Kleihues + Kleihues Gesellschaft von Architekten

After an extended and rigorous competition process, the winner(s) of the National Memorial for the Heavenly Hundred Heroes and Revolution of Dignity Museum in Kiev have been selected. They are:

1^st Prize – Kleihues + Kleihues Gesellschaft von Architekten mbH, Berlin/Germany
2^nd Prize – Burø architects, Kiev/Ukraine
3^rd Prize – Lina Ghotmeh – Architecture, Paris/France

This was the second competition in the process to determine the designs for both the site and the museum complex itself. The purpose of the project was to honor the victims of the attempted suppression of the protests, which ultimately ended with the deposition of the pro-Russian premier, Viktor Yanukovych.

The competitors in the Museum competition were selected as a result of a RfQ/qualifications process. From the 12 invited participants in stage 1, six teams were shortlisted for stage two. In addition to the above-mentioned winners, they were:
• Guillermo Vázquez Consuegra Arquitecto SLP, Seville/Spain (round 3)
• Dominique Lyon Architectes Paris, France (round 2)
• Coop Himme(l)blau, Vienna/Austria (round 1)

It was understandable that none of the illustrations of the submitted entries indicated any kind of symbolism that one might construe as a revolutionary, symbolic reference to the events surrounding the Maiden revolution. Here we see a process with a primary focus on the visualization, organization, and functionality of a facility that could best serve to illustrate an event of a major historical event for the community. In this sense, it mirrors the non-representational styles from the exterior of numerous Holocaust museums, where only upon entering does one encounter the full force of the subject matter.

If there was any symbolism here, it was somehow reminiscent of Lina Ghotmeh’s recent winning design for the National Estonian Museum. In that case, the architecture of the museum was certainly apolitical, but a former Soviet military airstrip as the site of the Museum was a certain statement that Estonia was determined to no longer be a vassal to its neighbor. In the Ukrainian case, the architecture is also apolitical, but the site is certainly not.

As for the architectural expression of the finalists, the winning design by Kleihues + Kleihues could have been mistaken for Chipperfield—certainly not a bad act to follow. The others also exhibited variations on recent examples of modern museum architecture, as seen in a number of recent competitions. But based on the composition of the jury, there would be no chance for a traditional design on this one.

The competition jury was a good mix of Ukrainian and foreign professionals. The participating architectural jurors were:

• Julian Chaplynskyy, Architect (Lviv, Ukraine) *
• Guido Hager, Landscape Architect (Zurich, Switzerland)
• Prof. Rainer Mahlamäki, Architect (Helsinki, Finland)
• Maciej Miłobędzki, Architect, (Warsaw, Poland)
• Prof. Matthias Sauerbruch, Architect (Berlin, Germany)
• Olexander Svystunov, Architect (Kiev, Ukraine)
• Prof. Can Togay, Artist, Filmmaker, Writer (Berlin, Germany) *
• Dmytro Volyk, Architect (Dnipro, Ukraine)

Deputy Architectural Juror
• Volodymyr Shevchenko, Architect (Kiev, Ukraine)
*excused, not attending Stage 2

The coordination of the jury was administered by Benjamin Hosbach, Architect and Director [phase eins]. The extensive notes surrounding the discussion of the finalists, and approved by the jury chair, are included with the three prize winners.