Korean Job Discussion Forums

[ddeubel]

I have puzzled over this for years. Communism is inherently ugly, just concrete architecture, destruction of nature, pure function. That is unless you go below ground and then you see their beautiful subway stations. Why??????



Mayakovsky station - Moscow

[img]http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0Je5mWdtlFEikUA_BGjzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NDgyNWN0BHNlYwNwcm9m/SIG=12820mioq[/img]
Kyiv - Universitat

[img]http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0Je5xaNt1FEOxABB0ujzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NDgyNWN0BHNlYwNwcm9m/SIG=128ohbu1k[/img]

Lukyianskaya station - Kyiv



Yonggwang Station - Pyongyang

[img]
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0Je5xcEtlFEJHkAvhejzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NDgyNWN0BHNlYwNwcm9m/SIG=12bb9tg50[/img]

Also, if you ever think that the escalators at some Seoul stations (like Gwangwahmun) are loooooong and deep. Try those in Kyiv. Takes over 5 min. of constant climbing to get to ground level. This is just one of 3 sets of special German made escalators in Kyiv's Universitat station. (yes, the Ukranians don't like the Germans but they will use whatever does the job -- black Mercedes SUVs and their escalators/elevators).

[/img]

[ajgeddes]

Well, I once read that one of the reasons they were built so beautifully was because someday they might have had to be used as nuclear war shelter. Makes sense seeing as most were built during those times as well. So, if the people are all going to be stuck underground, it may as well look nice.

[davai!]

Moscow just celebrated the 70th anniversary of the Metro, so I recently heard some bg info on this...

Apparently Stalin wanted to build a subway to allieviate the horrendous traffic of the existing public transport system so he sent some guys to check out NY's and London's.
They reported to him that it seemed that these cities only did what was the bare minimum to get their underground networks going and Stalin took the chance to one up the west and built the Moscow Metro on a grand scale. Also, there is less bedrock here (unlike NY) so it was easier to tunnel wider.
You probably couldn't pull the same thing off today, you know, with those pesky problems like paying workers and making sure they don't die, etc.

Still Moscow's pride and joy, it really is an amazing system. 9 million riders a day, more than NY and London combined. Sadly it was designed to accomodate 6 million, so it gets really crowded, but it is really much faster than driving here. Miss your train? Another will be along in about 65 seconds. Monthly pass? About 24 bucks! Watch out for the closing doors, though. They don't mess around on that one.

The stations are indeed beautiful. ( Nice pics, however, the Mayakovskaya station has been remodeled since that pic was taken) And, yes, they are extremely deep to double as bomb shelters- in the tunnels you can see the giant doors that can close the stations off. The newer, more periphery stations are not so deep, nor are the tunnels. Just last month, some construction workers were hammering metal rods into the ground to support another glorious billboard and one punched through the tunnel underneath and actually hit a passing train. Thankfully, no one was killed.

The metros in the other formerly Soviet cities were modeled after Moscow's, and have alot of the same designs. That escalator in Kiev is a trip. In Petersburg, the platform itself has massive doors that open with the trains'.

The trains themselves are roomy, but they say that they are almost all ready to fall apart. They just keep fixing them up and the fleet here has got to be 40-50 years old. I did get to ride on a new one and it was nice, but didn't have that feel to it.





It would be interesting to see the ones in Pyongyang...

[Hollywoodaction]

Simple. They are beautiful because they were meant to be showpieces. The same can be said of airports in non-communist nations (Charles de Gaulle, Incheon International Airport, Lester B. Pearson, etc).

[ddeubel]

Thanks for the comments. Yes, Moscow's system is amazing and I would just ride it at times (off peak hours) for the experience and see some new stations.......

I guess you are right, it is/was all about showing off. But they've managed to maintain them, no mould, no paint flaking -- each are still in pretty pristine shape. Unlike Seoul where some stations could use a good hosing down and actually stink like high heaven.

I just find it interesting, the fact that such an "ugly" ideology, had such beauty underground.......i guess all the beauty of communism was "underground" in a sense. Beauty not in the practical , every day but in doing what wasn't thought possible -- in essence, beauty as defiance............

I wonder if there ever was a history done of the people who made these subways???? Must have been terribly dangerous in those times . I once read a book about the workers who built the bridges in New York, late 1800s, early 1900s. Very interesting and a very large casualty rate, was almost as dangerous as going to war!

DD

PS. Yeah, if you take the escalator in Kyiv, Universitat station, bring something to eat.

[Hotpants]

One of the posters has the right answer: Communist subways are/were designed as showpieces of supposedly superior engineering and craftsmanship.

In Pyongyang, you can only travel between 2 stations if you are a tourist. They are the 2 stations which have been well designed - propaganda for saying the state of the infrastructure is 1st class.

How many subway stops have great exteriors? Surely, being underground, we typically don't get to see the outside, do we?

[JacktheCat]

[Don Gately]

is this along the same lines of "At least under Stalin the trains ran on time"?

[Hotpants]

paris? Are you refering to those entrance ways in art nouveau style? That's just a small part! I'm referring to the whole tunnel section! (kidding)

Well, it doesn't really bother me what subway stations look like. I just prefer my stations to be clear of asbestos, platform pizza, rats and pickpockets...... This is getting to be a silly topic in Korea of all places....