 |
| Novi Beograd, Serbia |
Introduction
The landscape of East European metropolis, or even
provincial cities, is dotted with grey towers. Upon entering the outskirts,
these apartment blocks are the first welcome, and they are the last sight
visitors will leave with. Regardless of their ideological legacy, they are
mesmerizing, by their symmetry, by the abundance of them, or just by the fact
that they rendered possible the housing of thousands of people. And although
the years have certainly left their marks on the concrete, they still stand,
through a change of regime or even a war. Despised by some, adored by others,
they certainly raise many questions as to the role they played in the socialist
countries. Today, 30 years after the fall of communism, it is legitimate to
wonder how they still fit in the society. In other words, how have apartment
blocks impacted the socialist and post-socialist cities?
 |
| Karnobat, Bulgaria |
There are many interesting angles to approach this
question. The one in this paper will look at the social side of this particular
way of housing, as the objective is to explore the impact on the people, and
the consequences it had in the East European societies, during the socialist
regime, and the years after, up to this day. In this sense, society here
includes all the actors of the communist scene: the political elite, the
intelligentsia, the workers; and the superficially erased social classes that
emerged during and after the transition years of the regime. It also includes
people in the margins, like the ones unable to work, or the Roma.
The hypothesis is that this type of housing affected
people in multiple ways. As most of the society was living in rural areas
before the beginning of the socialist regime, they had to adapt to a different,
urban life, although they still brought some traditions with them to the
cities. The regime was flawed, as it could not deliver enough or good quality
housing, in an equal distribution. However, living in the city was still a sign
of success for many, and a way to enjoy the modern life. When the communist
regime fell, it created effects of segregation in the housing itself, even
though this is what communism sought to avoid. It also meant that construction
projects initiated under the regime would never be completed. This all forms
the socialist architectural legacy that societies must live with today: the
concrete blocks, and their effects on people. Today, as they are still used to
house most of the residents of the cities, debates arise as to what to do with
them: destruction, renovation, reconversion, preservation…
 |
| Nis, Serbia |
Although the post-socialist architectural scene and
legacy was not extensively covered (this lack of interest is perhaps the
biggest challenge it faces today), there are still many scholar papers on the
subject, as well as journalistic articles, which will establish the
fundamentals of this text. But since it focuses on people, the ones that were
directly living in these blocks, elements of culture also give an insight: blogs,
books, movies, interviews, are the ways people translated how they were
affected by a life in blocks, thus these are important first-hand sources of
information as well.
The housing blocks and the impacts are shared by all
post-socialist societies, but this text will focus more on the cities of
Belgrade (Serbia) and Bucharest (Romania), as well as different cities in
Bulgaria, and with elements of Croatia, Russia and Ukraine.
 |
| Stara Zagora, Bulgaria |
Historical and
architectural background
Brutalist
architecture “is a style that
emerged in the 1950s and grew out of the early-20th century modernist
movement. Brutalist buildings
are characterised by their massive, monolithic and ‘blocky’ appearance with a
rigid geometric style and large-scale
use of poured concrete.
Brutalism became synonymous with the socially progressive housing
solutions that architects and town planners prioritised as modern
‘streets in the sky’ urbanism. With an ethos of ‘social utopianism’, together
with the influence of Constructivist architecture, it became
increasingly widespread across European communist countries such as the Soviet Union,
Bulgaria or Yugoslavia.”[1]
 |
| Genex Tower, Belgrade, Serbia |
In Eastern
Europe, several grandiose monuments embody this style, such as the Buzludzha in
Bulgaria or the Tjentiste war memorial in Bosnia and Herzegovina, or peculiar
designs, like the National library of Kosovo or the Genex Tower in Belgrade.
But it is mostly seen in the form of anonymous apartment blocks in the cities.
 |
| Stara Zagora, Bulgaria |
The
beginning of the communist regime was characterized by a massive industrialization,
forcing thousands to migrate to the cities. In Romania, between 1948 and 1989,
the proportion of dwellers in the cities rose from 23.4% to 53% (Gyongyi &
Laszlo, 2008). In Croatia, it rose from 41% to 51% between 1971 and 1981
(Spevec & Klempic Bogadi, 2009). In Bulgaria, by the mid-1960s, the urban population surpassed for the
first time the rural population, with 51.7% (Marcheva & Parusheva, 2010).
Housing was
intertwined with the communist ideology. It was a way to erase the social classes
of the past by providing everyone with the same living conditions, regardless
of their background. The former bourgeoisie members was forced out of their
residence, as depicted in the novel The
Girl They Left Behind by Roxanne Veletzos, where a Romanian wealthy family must surrender its house to the
communist party. Housing was also a
way to convert peasants into urban workers, the foundation of a communist
society. Thus housing was a tool, but also a responsibility that the state
held, in order to accommodate all the newcomers to the cities. For example, the
Yugoslav Constitution tells that the apartment is a right and must be granted
to all citizens.
 |
| Nis, Serbia |
As the
population of urban citizen increased rapidly, the state had to provide them
with housing as quickly as possible, and as cheaply as possible, because the
resources were concentrated within the industrialization of the countries. The
first solution from the Stalin era was the komunalka. It consisted of either
new blocs, or old mansions reconverted, where several families each had their
room but shared the kitchen and bathroom (if there was any). This arrangement
is depicted in books and movies concerning this period. This cramped way of
living provided a fast solution to the growing number of new dwellers.
In the
1950s, Nikita Krushchev introduced a new housing project, the apartment blocks,
known as khrushchyovka (Soviet Union), panelka (Balkans) or panelak
(Czechoslovakia). This was an improvement, as now the principle one family –
one dwelling was applied.
 |
| Stara Zagora, Bulgaria |
Although
there are some exceptions in the way the state managed the housing (especially
in Yugoslavia, which experimented an ideological separation from the Soviet
Union and permitted companies to build private apartments on the side, or in Bulgaria,
where the owning of private rural lands was tolerated for some), in most cases,
the flats belonged to the state. The designing and building were ultimately
decided by the state, and providing and distributing flats was the
responsibility of the state (with some delegations of course). People did not
decide in which block they would move.
 |
| Budapest, Hungary |
Adjusting to the
city life
The first and perhaps most obvious impact this new
kind of housing had on people was that they had to adapt to a different life.
Before the end of the Second World War, the Eastern European countries mostly
had a rural population. In Bulgaria, only 24% of the population lived in cities
at this time (Marcheva & Parusheva, 2010). Their way of living was deeply
rooted in rural traditions. Coming to the cities was more of a necessary move instilled
by the state and the hope for a better life, rather than a motivated choice. It
was certainly a shock to suddenly have to share a much-reduced living space
with strangers. In komunalka especially, everything was scheduled, from the
time in the kitchen to the time in the bathroom, and the common space and furniture
were divided between the tenants, which marked a strong differentiation from
the rural houses. In interviews, books and movies, this housing was shown as
despised.
 |
| Stara Zagora, Bulgaria |
The panelka housing was a certain improvement, because
it was a way of regaining a little privacy. In the way people organized their
living space, a leaning toward the traditional rural life and a reject of the
imposed socialist living, where individuality was supposed to be inexistent,
can be seen. It is shown for example in the way dwellers would use the living
room as a bedroom, the kitchen as the meeting space, and the balcony as the
cooking space. The window shelves and the balcony were an expression of
individuality in their decoration. The common areas in between block (despite
few, because the space was maximized in order to house more people) would serve
as gossip space with benches or as gardens where tenants would grow their
fruits and vegetables, in a defensive traditionalism manner. Croatian author
Slavenka Drakulic describes this as the rural habits that found their way to
the cities.
 |
| Garden in Stara Zagora, Bulgaria |
Housing problems
Apartment
blocks were built quickly and cheaply, in the industrialized method of
prefabricated material. A feature people remember about them is their bad
quality and lack of comfort. It took some time before there was a heating
system, phone lines, hot water, paved streets connecting them.
 |
| Mud street in Stara Zagora, Bulgaria |
Although the apartment blocks were supposed to be the
solution to accommodate all the people moving to the city, the state was soon
faced with a housing shortage. The population in the cities grew faster than
the construction could provide for. This fact became a prominent proof that
socialism could not deliver on its promises regarding accommodation and
services. The new apartment blocks also lacked commodities nearby (grocery
stores, drugstores).
This situation in turn created unenviable outcomes. Up
to 4 generations could live in the same and already small flat, since the
children had nowhere to go. They stayed with their parents and new spouse, had
children there, while the grandmother, needing help, would also reside with
them. This caused more subdivisions inside the apartment, and reduced even more
the already limited privacy and living space.
 |
| Belgrade, Serbia |
The housing shortage made it very difficult to get a
flat. In Belgrade or Sofia, for example, waiting lists were supposedly based on
a need basis (newcomers, family with a lot of children), but in fact, the
distribution was far from equal, despite the socialist ideology. The political
elite would get bigger and more comfortable flats. Workers in construction
would get flats faster. Doctors, or people who knew the housing committee would
bypass the waiting list. Couple would have a fake divorce, because single
mothers got flats faster. Bribery was ever present in the socialist societies.
With all the shortages, and in this case housing, it was a way to provide for
one’s needs.
Theses situations are exploited again in the
literature and cinematographic scene of this period. It illustrates the
disgraces of socialist societies, which did not provide quality for everyone,
and did not do it equally despite it being the basis of the ideology.
 |
| Stara Zagora, Bulgaria |
Social
achievement
In spite of these negative effects, the apartment
blocks were associated with success within the society. Living in the cities
meant an upgrade from the rural life in terms of modern equipment (phone line,
hot water) and activities (cinema, theatre). The propaganda of a modern and
happy life in the city, combined with the desire to improve one’s living
conditions, was based on true assumptions. And while people kept a link with
their rural life (visiting relatives), they were still enjoying the commodities
of the city, if only by force of habit.
Living cramped in blocks also created a sense of
community. Organisations of tenants still exist to this day. People remember
how there was always someone to help. Socialist societies for the most part
certainly achieved this absence of individualism in the form of apartment
blocks.
 |
| Nis, Serbia |
Consequences of
the fall of socialism
Socialist cities of Eastern Europe were the theatre of
multiple architectural projects. The development of the suburbs of Zagreb, the
complete construction of the New Belgrade utopian district, the establishment
of Bulgaria’s first socialist city, Dimitrovgrad, are all symbols of how the
socialist ideology sought to plan and dictate the way people lived. Perhaps the
most famous example is Ceausescu’s Bucharest. Old buildings of the
pre-communist past were destroyed in order to make room for more blocks. They
were showcased on the side of the boulevards, leading to the giant Palace of
Parliament. The modernity, the symmetry and the abundance of the blocks outline
the apparent success of socialism in its egalitarian ideology and project of
industrialization. The ambitious project of a new kind of city in Shumen,
Bulgaria, with underground roads, was stopped, as were many other projects, in
1989. The funds were cut and now many unfinished structures are scattered among
the cities.
 |
| Stara Zagora, Bulgaria |
The fall of the regime in 1989, in the midst of all
the changes it created, led to the privatization of the flats. Tenants could
buy their flat from the state for a symbolic price, which cleared it from the
responsibility of housing. In Romania today almost 95% of the flats are now privately
owned (Gyongyi & Laszlo, 2008). This phenomenon had the consequence of
finally permitting a choice in regard of where to live. As the economic
situation of the transition set a growing differentiation in the incomes of the
different social classes that emerged (managers, professionals, technicians, administrative
workers, skilled workers, unskilled workers), segregation began to form. In
Bucharest as in other cities, a division between richer and poorer
neighbourhood can be outlined. The block chosen and the flat could now
represent the family’s status. People with higher income could move to a
bigger, more confortable flat in a district that would become known as wealthy.
But homelessness and social exclusion also became part of the cities’ hierarchy,
with people receiving low income or none unable to afford housing, and no
longer being provided for by the state.
 |
| Bucharest, Romania |
The privatization also raised individualism, which can
be seen in the way communal areas, like the staircases, are viewed. They technically belong to everybody,
but no one feels complied to take care of them. This adds to poor maintenance
from the socialist period and brings problems as to the future of the blocks
and their much-needed maintenance.
 |
| Razgrad, Bulgaria |
Legacies and
outcomes
Today, apartment blocks remain the principal way of
living in the cities. In Bucharest, more than 70% of the urban population
resides in them (Gyongyi & Laszlo, 2008). It still represents a challenge
in the society. Some years after the transition, the flats are now much more
expensive, which results in people with low income having trouble to get one.
Staying with the family in small flats is common again, albeit now for a
different reason.
The urban planners had to maximize the space, and this
layout is no longer adequate to today’s society, which rely more on the freedom
provided by cars. There is very limited parking space. Some of it is still
used, like 30 years ago, for gardening or as a playground. This brings the questioning
of what will happen to these planned socialist cities.
 |
| Stara Zagora, Bulgaria |
The apartment blocks represent a concrete legacy of
the socialist era. Some despise them for that reason, and other wish to
preserve their historical weight. Various outcomes await them. In Moscow,
entire neighbourhoods are set to be destroyed and replaced with new and modern
housing. Some blocks, especially the old komunalka in the city centres, are
reconverted in more modern flats, offices or hotels.
Examples from Bulgaria, Croatia, Romania, Serbia, and
Ukraine show that most panelka blocks are still used, and while they are in
precarious conditions, lack of funds prevent them from renovation, although
some programs are created for this purpose. This demonstrate that there is
still a feeling of community in the blocks, and a shared sense of pride from
living in them, particularly because of their historical value, and the fact
that they permit to live rather cheaply in the cities. This is a tangible
legacy of socialism in today’s societies.
 |
| Belgrade, Serbia |
Most socialist buildings, like blocks on the outskirts
of the cities or old factories, are abandoned because they were of no use after
the fall of the regime. Some people are frustrated because they are in a way
stuck with the skeletal structures. The tower in the city centre of Shumen
remains unfinished and dominates the city, reminding both the socialist project,
and the crisis following its fall.
Brutalist architecture is attracting more and more
attention, and actions are taken to promote and preserve it. Several
associations, like the National Historical Monuments Registry or the Community
Association Bureau for Art and Urban Research (BACU), are working toward this.
Some buildings gain a protected status, like the Chisinau State Circus in
Moldova. While this concerns primarily famous buildings, it also applies to
anonymous blocks. Museum exposition and photography projects are spreading
knowledge about them.
 |
| Stara Zagora, Bulgaria |
Conclusion
Apartment blocks were in a way the materialisation of
the socialist ideology, and the illustration of its failure. They housed the
society and were supposed to eliminate the differences between the people. But
it proved not to work. People did not completely comply and brought rural
traditions with them. Furthermore, the socialist system failed, as it could not
provide living space for everyone, and did not follow the equal distribution it
yet promoted. Even thought they represented a social achievement, they were
still heavily flawed, in the construction, and in the inefficacy they
unfortunately stand for. The fall of the regime led to massive privatization,
which brought changes in the cities’ landscape: segregation, and worse, social
exclusion. The blocks’ role in cities today is still important, as they
represent the social position of the dwellers, and they still promote an
inherited sense of community. Their future raises debates and the solutions
appear to be either demolition, reconversion, attempts at renovation, or
preservation and promotion. To some, they are a shadow of the socialist past,
to others, a legacy of an architectural period posing for a past ideology.
Nevertheless, they will most likely stay in the landscape for some time. Old
habits tend to linger. It was the case for newcomers in the cities, and it
might be the same for the generation that grew up in apartment blocks.
 |
| Belgrade, Serbia |
This subject is inexhaustible and there are many other
and more specific study cases that shed the light on the social consequences of
the legacy of the socialist type of housing. One of them is the exclusion of
minority ethnic groups, for instance, the Roma. The housing system is such that
they find themselves confined in specific neighbourhoods, in a vicious circle
where the flats in an area are the only one they can afford. The Ferentari
district in Bucharest illustrates such a case. While some programs are set to
help the Roma residents, it will certainly be hard to overcome years of legacy
in the form of housing.
 |
| Brasov, Romania |
 |
| Blagoevgrad, Bulgaria |
Bibliography
Interview with Ljiljana Radeta, former resident of
Belgrade
Books
DRAKULIC, Slavenka. How We Survived Communism and Even Laughed. VBZ, 2013
VELETZOS, Roxanne. The
Girl They Left Behind. Atria Paperback, 2018.
Articles and blogs
AYRES, Sabra. On the Ground: In St. Petersburg, a stalwart of the 1917 revolution lives on: The communal apartment. Los Angeles Times, August 2017. https://www.latimes.com/world/europe/la-fg-russia-communal-2017-htmlstory.html
BIRD, Michael & ODOBESCU, Vlad. Architects of the Extreme : How the planning of Communist blocks in Bucharest changed from a western vision of functional housing to a sabotage of the city. The Black Sea, September 2018. https://theblacksea.eu/stories/architects-of-the-extreme/
BYRNES, Mark. The Disappearing Mass Housing of the Soviet Union. Citylab, March 2017. https://www.citylab.com/equity/2017/03/the-disappearing-mass-housing-of-the-soviet-union/518868/
C. the Romanian. The Most Dangerous Places in Bucharest (to Stay Away From): Ferentari. Romania Experience, January 2019. https://www.romaniaexperience.com/the-most-dangerous-places-in-bucharest-to-stay-away-from-ferentari/
Day 23: Soviet Block Apartments. Intentionally International, June 2018. https://intentionallyinternational.com/2018/06/06/day-23-soviet-block-apartments/
DI ILIO,
Nicole & MESSORI, Erik. Life inside a
Kiev Khrushchyovka: Soviet architecture in Ukraine. Aljazeera, February
2019. https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/inpictures/life-kiev-khrushchyovka-soviet-architecture-ukraine-190220090918181.html
GIBSON, Eleanor. Socialist Modernism photography series by BACU aims to help preserve Eastern Bloc architecture. Dezeen, August 2016. https://www.dezeen.com/2016/08/18/socialist-modernism-photography-bacu-preserve-eastern-bloc-architecture/
GOUKASSIAN, Elena. The Intimate Past and Uncertain Future of Soviet Concrete Architecture. Hyperallergic, December 2017. https://hyperallergic.com/416835/the-intimate-past-and-uncertain-future-of-soviet-concrete-architecture/
GUZEVA,
Alexandra. 5 bizarre rules for Soviet-era
communal living. Russia Beyond, March 2018. https://www.rbth.com/history/327811-5-bizarre-rules-soviet-communal-living
HATHERLEY, Owen.
Moscow's suburbs may look monolithic, but
the stories they tell are not. The Guardian, June 2015. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/jun/12/moscows-suburbs-may-look-monolithic-but-the-stories-they-tell-are-not
Heritage Listing Announcement. Bacu, August 2019. http://bacu.ro/758-2/
Industrialised
Building Speech, 1954, by Nikita Khrushchev. Volume Project, March
2009. http://volumeproject.org/industrialised-building-speech-1954/
Life
for gypsy families in huts and Communist-era apartment blocks in Romania.
Picture gallery, The Telegraph. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/worldnews/9900333/Life-for-gypsy-families-in-huts-and-Communist-era-apartment-blocks-in-Romania.html
Life in the High-Rise: My Brutalist Holiday in Belgrade’s Genex Tower. The Bohemian Blog, November 2017. http://www.thebohemianblog.com/2017/11/brutalist-genex-tower.html
MALLONEE,
Laura. Ugly or Beautiful? The Housing Blocks
Communism Left Behind. Wired, June 2019. https://www.wired.com/story/communist-housing-blocks-gallery/
Novi Beograd: The Modernist Architecture of a Yugoslav Utopia. The Bohemian Blog, October 2017. http://www.thebohemianblog.com/2017/10/novi-beograd-modernist-architecture.html
RUMORA,
Roko. A Utopia of Yugoslav Architecture
at MoMA. Hyperallergic, September 2018. https://hyperallergic.com/458084/a-utopia-of-yugoslav-architecture-at-moma/
SEAMAN,
Natasha. Yugoslavia’s Complicated
Modernism. Hyperallergic, October 2018. https://hyperallergic.com/464670/toward-a-concrete-utopia-architecture-in-yugoslavia-1948-1980-museum-of-modern-art/
Skeletons of Utopia: The Story of Shumen’s Central City Square. The Bohemian Blog, June 2019. http://www.thebohemianblog.com/2019/06/shumen-central-city-square.html
TEODORESCU, Dominic. Ferentari: Bucharest’s Post-Socialist Ghetto. ProtoCity, November 2013. http://theprotocity.com/ferentari-bucharests-post-socialist-ghetto/
ZHANG,
Michael. Portraits of 10 Different Lives
in 10 Identical Units of a Communist-Era Apartment. PetaPixel, January
2016. https://petapixel.com/2016/01/26/portraits-of-10-different-lives-in-10-identical-units-of-a-communist-era-apartment/
Academic papers
ALFIREVIĆ,
Đorđe & SIMONOVIĆ
ALFIREVIĆ, Sanja. Urban
Housing Experiments in Yugoslavia 1948-1970. Spatium, December 2015. DOI: 10.2298/SPAT1534001A
ALFIREVIĆ,
Đorđe & SIMONOVIĆ
ALFIREVIĆ, Sanja. The
Socialist Apartment in Yugoslavia - Paradigm or Tendency [Socijalistički stan u
Jugoslaviji - paradigma ili tendencija]. Spatium, December 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/SPAT1840008A
GYONGYI,
Pasztor & LASZLO, Peter. Urban
Housing Problem in Romania: The Legacy of Communist Block of Flats. Studia
Universitatis Babes-Bolyai Sociologia, October 2008. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/310465929_Urban_Housing_Problem_in_Romania_The_Legacy_of_Communist_Block_of_Flats
HERFERT, Günter, NEUGEBAUER, Carola Silvia & SMIGIEL, Christian. Living in Residential Satisfaction? Insights from Large-Scale Housing Estates in Central and Eastern Europe. Leibniz-Institute for Regional Geography, March 2012. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9663.2012.00727.x
MARCHEVA, Iliyana & PARUSHEVA, Dobrinka. Housing in Socialist Bulgaria: Appropriating Tradition. Home Cultures, 2010, DOI 10.2752/175174210X1266343752621
MARCHEVA, Iliyana & ZLATKOVA Meglena. Tinkering with Daily Life: People, State and Social(ist) Housing in Bulgaria. Études balkaniques, 2010
MARCINCZAK,
Szymon, GENTILE, Michael, RUFAT, Samuel
& LIVIU Chelcea. Urban geographies of hesitant transition:
tracing socio-economic segregation in post-Ceauşescu Bucharest. International
Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 2013. DOI:10.1111/1468-2427.12073
MARINKOVIC, Aleksandra, VASILEVSKA,
Ljiljana & VRANIC, Petar. The effects of changes to the post-socialist
urban planning framework onpublic open
spaces in multi-story housing areas: A view from Nis, Serbia. Elsevier Ltd, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2013.10.004
PROKOPLJEVIC,
Jelena. Do
not throw concrete blocks! Social and Public Housing in New Belgrade and their
Representations in Popular Culture.
Fusion Journal. http://www.fusion-journal.com/issue/006-fusion-the-rise-and-fall-of-social-housing-future-directions/do-not-throw-concrete-blocks-social-and-public-housing-in-new-belgrade-and-their-representations-in-popular-culture/
TEMPLER, Bill. An experiment in living socialism: Bulgaria then and now. Political Affairs, October 2013.
Commentaires
Enregistrer un commentaire