On April 23, 1932 all independent architectural associations in the Soviet Union were dissolved, replaced by the All-Union of Soviet Architects. Danilo Udovički-Selb traces in fine detail the prologue and aftermath of this decision from 1928 up to the start of World War II. The decade's usual overviews state that modern architecture was outlawed while the Stalinization of Soviet architecture gained complete ascendancy. Classical eclecticism allegedly replaced the independent constructivist, rationalist, and formalist avant-garde groups that had energized the Soviet architectural scene during the 1920s. He argues, however, that this was not quite the case. There was no formal prohibition of modern architecture in the USSR. During the 1930s modernists were not completely silenced and carried on the architectural life of the Soviet Union, albeit in low profile and mostly below the radar. Eclectic classical historicism assumed pervasive prominence after the Second World War when the parvenu nomenklatura bureaucrats rejected modernism.

Artists like Wassily Kandinsky, Antoine Pevsner, Naum Gabo, and Marc Chagall, among others, were apprehensive about the new regime and emigrated in the 1920s, embarking on successful careers in the west. A critical mass of innovating designers and architects remained, managing to avoid the show trials of the 1930s and deportations to the Gulag. Some of those that survived the perilous decade include: Vladimir Tatlin, El Lissitzky, Alexander Rodchenko, Viktor Vesnin, Alexander Vesnin, Moisei Ginzburg, Konstantin Melnikov, Nikolai Miliutin, Il΄ia Golosov, and Panteleimon Golosov. Kazimir Malevich died of cancer midway through the period. Gustav Klutsis was executed on Stalin's direct orders. Nikolai Punin was arrested several times and eventually died in the Gulag. The talented Ivan Leonidov, vilified and humiliated throughout the years, was not awarded any significant commissions but outlived in obscurity many of his vicious critics. The doors were not shut on all the modernists; indeed, some became state architects and were even granted chauffeured cars. Moisei Ginzburg worked as a top architect in the People's Commissariat of Heavy Industry and also played an active role in the All-Union of Soviet Architects. Viktor Vesnin became the President of the Academy of Architecture and a deputy of the Supreme Soviet.

The architectural press kept abreast of developments abroad. Their editors took note that Iosif Stalin was particularly infatuated with American skyscrapers. Several modernists from Germany and France came to lecture and work in the USSR. Significantly, Le Corbusier garnered the commission for the important Centrosoiuz building. In 1933, the Congrès Internationaux d'Architecture Moderne considered Moscow as the venue for its fourth congress, but changed its mind on seeing a retrograde entry win the Palace of the Soviets competition. The Soviet press lionized Frank Lloyd Wright and he reciprocated in kind, although he had a feeble understanding of the realities of Soviet life under Stalin. Wright spoke and was warmly received at the First Congress of the Union of Soviet Architects in 1937. Pravda published a heavily-edited version of the speech that had him say the opposite of what he had actually said.

Architectural discourse about what “proletarian architecture” and “socialist architecture” could possibly mean continued throughout the 1930s. This fine-grained study presents the positions taken by the Party, official bureaucrats, and architects of various stripes. No surprise that their vague, ambiguous, and conflicting ideas made consensus elusive. All along buildings continued to be built. One group discussed in the present study consisted of projects conceived and/or started before 1932 and built afterwards entirely unchanged. Another group included buildings designed and built after 1932. The latter group makes the case for the present study's thesis, but the small illustrations and the lack of plans did not present the limited selection of these buildings at their very best. Nonetheless, this shortcoming does not subvert Danilo Udovički-Selb's invaluable insights and his thorough reexamination and reevaluation of the architectural discourse in the USSR during the 1930s. This study will be obligatory reading for everyone delving into this complex and dark period of Soviet architecture.