Sarah Casaday - Proposal for the 2018 Linda & Turan Duda Travel Fellowship M.ARCH | May 2018
LIMINAL CITIES:
ARCHITECTURAL IDENTITY OF POST SOCIALIST EASTERN EUROPE “Memory is life. It is always carried by groups of living people, and therefore it is in permanent evolution. It is subject to the dialectics of remembering and forgetting, unaware of its successive deformations, open to all kinds of use and manipulation. Sometimes it remains latent for long periods, then suddenly revives. History is the always incomplete and problematic reconstruction of what is no longer there. Memory always belongs to our time and forms a lived bond with the eternal present; history is a representation of the past.” -Pierre Nora 1
INTRODUCTION Since the fall of communism roughly thirty years ago, Eastern Europe has undergone many transitions in cultural, economic and political spheres which have led to identity crises. The abrupt shift from planned socialist economies to market capitalism turned millions of lives upside down. In addition to the economic transformation, these countries transitioned from centuries of domination by authoritarian foreign entities to independence and the establishment of democratic political systems. This forced these newly autonomous nations to reckon with the past, and offered an opportunity to forge their own national identities through the built environment. Beginning in the early modern period, the distinction between East and West in Europe can be seen. Once one ventured beyond Berlin or Vienna, they entered a land of “other:” vaguely European, somewhat Asiatic, but distinctly heterogeneous from each. From that point forward, Eastern Europe has been set apart and arguably looked down upon by its western neighbors.2 Thus, Eastern European identities offer a compelling area of study for any scholar, but particularly for the architect. The identity crisis that Eastern European nations face manifests in the processes of architectural creation, destruction, preservation and banalization. These processes contribute to the contested nature of Eastern European national identities and the struggles between their past, present, and desired future. My research focuses on national identity creation through architecture in three pairs of post-socialist cities. These six cities are: Post-Soviet Kiev and Tbilisi, Post-Warsaw Pact Budapest and Warsaw, and PostYugoslav Belgrade and Skopje. In addition to their socialist pasts, all of these cities contain physical reminders of imperial pasts which left behind architectural legacies of foreign domination. These imperial and totalitarian regimes sought to employ architecture as a means to project power and identity. After the fall of these empires and regimes, their architecture lost its original function and now serves as unwelcome monuments to an undesirable past.3 The newly independent nations of Eastern Europe have had to structure their identities in reaction to their past, their own histories, and the influences of globalization. The search for identity manifests in many forms; one of the most discernible is the use of architecture and public space. Nations seek to shape their architectural identities through four processes: creation, destruction, preservation, and banalization. Under this framework, creation can be understood as new construction that is meant to support the formation of national identity. Destruction is the elimination of that which does not fit into the desired national narrative, which can be seen through the toppling of Soviet monuments as part of decommunization efforts. The act of preservation is the deliberate conservation of monuments or structures from the past.
Preservation can serve the purpose of remembrance or promotion (in the case of heritage preservation for tourism, often at the expense of local residents). Though the original function of the building is often not preserved, the building itself remains. Banalization refers to the sanitization of a structure’s past and the neutralization of its original meaning so as to make it unoriginal. Often, banalization occurs through the reappropriation of a building’s function as a product of the proliferation of neoliberal globalization.4 How do you forge a national identity for a new nation? In Eastern Europe we see nations attempting to answer this question. Today we see a retreat of liberal democracy across the world in a way we haven’t seen since the Interwar period. Populist, authoritarian regimes have come to power across Eastern Europe, including in Hungary, Poland, Russia and Turkey. The rise of these illiberal democracies around the world is, in part, a reaction to neoliberal globalization, liberal democracy, secularization, and immigration, all of which are perceived as threats to identity. The leaders of these movements have forced their own reinterpretations of history on their people and on the fabric of their cities. It is in times like these that remnants of the past get renamed, repurposed, or demolished to create a unilateral view of history. In recent years, we have seen the governments of Viktor Orbán of Hungary and Andrzej Duda of Poland attempt to form homogeneous national identities for their nations. Advancing Hungarian Christian and Polish Catholic identities respectively, their governments are anti-secular, anti-immigrant, and anti-democratic. We see the agenda of such leaders reflected in their nations’ architecture as they rewrite history through not only their speeches and laws, but also through monuments, museums, and other aspects of public space that further the cultural hegemony of the majority. This provokes the questions of who owns public space, who owns a nation’s architectural identity, and who owns history itself. In the past few years, the same questions have been brought to the forefront here in the United States in the aftermath of the events in Charleston and Charlottesville. These two horrific events prompted a national discussion about what belongs in our shared public spaces and whose history they should tell. Should these monuments remain in situ no matter the pain they cause, should they be torn down and destroyed, effectively erasing history, or should they be placed in museums and given their proper historical context? This question hits even closer to home with the protests in Chapel Hill over “Silent Sam” and the toppling of a Confederate monument in Durham. At the heart of these events is a battle for the soul of a nation. Will our words, symbols, and monuments serve those who idealize a homogeneous nation, or will they reflect the reality of a multicultural society? Furthermore, how can architecture depolarize society and help to promote an inclusive national identity in a world that is growing increasingly polarized and exclusive?
PROPOSITION I propose to study the liminal national identities of six post-socialist cities in Eastern Europe through an analysis of their architecture and urban fabric. Belgrade, Budapest, Kiev, Skopje, Tbilisi and Warsaw have all undergone transitions from authoritarian communist regimes to varying degrees of capitalist democracies in the past three decades.
As I visit these cities, I will seek out examples of recent changes to their urban fabric which have been used as tools for identity creation. These changes can be seen through the decommunization of Kiev since 2014, attempts at confronting the lasting effects of the Holocaust in Budapest and Warsaw, the search for an exclusive, homogeneous national identity in Skopje, and through attempts at branding their nation as modern through the glamorous work of starchitects in Belgrade and Tbilisi. In each of these cites, I will visit several examples of these changes, choosing at least one site or building to sketch, photograph, and analyze. I plan to meet with architects, historians, and activists familiar with the history and architecture of these cities in addition to visiting archives and museums. While I will focus primarily on the six cities mentioned above, in order to better contextualize my research, I also plan to visit Berlin, Istanbul, Moscow and Vienna, four former imperial capitals that had enormous impact on the architectural identities of Eastern European cities. Upon return, I will create a digital project to host my photography, sketches, and written analyses of these cities as well as giving a lecture to the College of Design. In addition, I plan to prepare a publication on my research for a peer-reviewed journal. This proposal is the culmination of almost a year of independent research on this topic in addition to several semesters of related academic coursework. In the fall of 2016, both Professor Kristen Schaffer’s History of American City Planning seminar and Professor Robin Abrams and George Hallowell’s Experiencing Cities course provided me with a foundation for analyzing cities and urban environments. Professor Kristen Schaffer’s Architectural and Urban Histories seminar in the spring of 2017 continued this study on a deeper level. In the fall of 2017, Professor Burak Erdim’s Methods of Interpretation seminar was instrumental in creating this proposal through encouraging me to explore the methodologies I have used as a framework for my research. Specifically, Peter Burke’s History and Social Theory, Benedict Anderson’s “Imagined Communities” and Eric Hobsbawm’s “Invented Traditions.” This course also provided me with the opportunity to perform research and develop a bibliography specifically in preparation for this proposal. This semester, Professor Erdim’s Global Modernisms seminar has prompted me to consider how architecture has been affected by globalization in the postwar era, while forming a social and historical consciousness through which to engage and challenge current models of global citizenship and design practice. I have long term aspirations to work at home and abroad in both architectural practice and academia. As part of the first generation of graduates from the newly established Graduate Concentration in the History + Theory of Architecture in the College of Design, I believe that the opportunity to pursue this research would allow me to broaden my knowledge while deepening my understanding of the questions of architecture, urbanism, and the built environment. All this in mind, my ambition for this project is to enrich myself as an architect through the study of these nations and their cities, cultures, and histories, in order to better understand the global issues that architecture can attempt to address. The following page outlines my proposed travel itinerary and budget, with explanations of activities and sites to explore in each city. 1
Pierre Nora in Eric Hobsbawm’s The Age of Empire 1875-1914, xix. Larry Wolff, Inventing Eastern Europe: The Map of Civilization on the Mind of the Enlightenment. Małgorzata Omilanowska, “Post-Totalitarian and Post-Colonial Experiences: The Palace of Culture and Science and Defilad Square in Warsaw,” 121. 4 Lydia Coudroy de Lille & Milena Guest, “Towards Banalization? Trans-Forming the Legacies of the Post-Socialist City.” 2
3