The asceticism of Scandinavian countries' architecture is always softened by the surrounding nature. You will find many such examples in the magazine. Some claim that this direction emerged about a hundred years ago. However, if modern technologies are set aside, conceptually, the construction principles in this region have remained unchanged for centuries. This is not about cities, where there was a lot of borrowing from Central Europe, but about villages scattered across the rocky terrain and individual cottages.
I would highlight 5 main principles:
Connection with nature: buildings harmoniously blend into the surrounding landscape through the use of natural materials.
Functionality: every element of the building serves a specific practical purpose.
Simplicity: clean lines and minimalist design form the basis of the compositional structure.
Work with light and color: large windows and light tones are used to expand space.
Sustainability: buildings are designed to withstand harsh climatic conditions and minimize environmental impact.
Scandinavian architecture is well-suited for our region. And it’s not just about geographically similar Murmansk (although more of such architecture wouldn’t hurt there), but about any natural and especially protected locations. A good example is today’s project in New Zealand. It would also look wonderful in Oslo, Teriberka, and Dagestan.
PS While writing the text, I remembered an interesting movie about an artist who lived in such a house towards the end of his life. It’s called "Masterpiece" by Gaston Duprat. I recommend it.)