Conclusion

The legacy of Soviet housing blocks can be perceived in two ways, firstly, through the success of accommodating thousands of residents, with local amenities (of schools, jobs and shops), the Soviets had solved one of the major problems that the Second World war implemented that was the mass housing crisis. Secondly, through the current perception of the state that these buildings are in, especially their uncertain future, as they are evidently not the new builds that were in the 70’s. The success of the housing block design was arguably a momentarily success, where it was a clear solution to an imminent problem, they had a cheap and fast production rate which was impressive at the time, however, it seems that after the first generation of these housing blocks the new goals were to add more apartments to house more citizens rather than improve the quality of the builds.

Reviewing the housing blocks ‘lifespan’, from the initial design and creation to their current state, it transitions from what was once a highly desired option for living spaces to neglected social housing blocks. Some of these Soviet remains stand in better condition than others, where some face the threat of ‘death’ (demolition). As these builds were initially owned by the state, once the regime collapsed privately owned apartments were reinstated, this created a loophole for the future of an entire building, as it is up to the residents to keep up with the maintenance and general upkeeping. The concept of privatising the apartments neglects the overall need to keep good maintenance, as the res-

idents and communities have changed over time, not all neighbours are willing to help each-other out as they once did before. Aside from the individual apartments the one shared space is the corridor, which overtime has become an isolated space for the residents and ‘unused’ it no longer encourages neighbours to interact with one another. Now that the blocks have outlived their

20–25-year lifespan, the design flaws are more evident than ever before, as they stand by new modern high-rise buildings they appear to be withered and constantly deteriorating more each year. The side-by-side comparison of the new and old apartment blocks reveal the unspoken tensions between them, raising questions of possible demolitions or heavy repairs to even out the ‘eye-sore’ aspect that they currently have.

Buildings such as the Soviet housing blocks will inevitably deteriorate and ‘die’, however, these buildings were part of a much larger scheme, the Soviet Union had much greater impact on smaller countries like Lithuania, they signify an oppressed period in their recent history. So, the unspoken history of people within these spaces needs to be recorded, to amplify the stories and their firsthand experiences of this specific period in time. In written history too, for future use of architects and designers, these standardised apartments did not offer uniqueness at first glance, but it did not stop people living their lives inside. In addition, it can be used as a guide for further progression of the apartment designs with the knowledge of the residents it can offer true insight to how buildings are used every day.

The Soviets implemented a very uniformed as well as practical society, from the microrayons that were prefabricated, and mass produced to then housing thousands of residents. Everything seemed to be controlled, with no place left for the citizens to express ‘non-uniformity’ especially outside their homes; overtime the citizens have showed the relationship they have had with these buildings, where they are personal and intimate. Years later, they can remember these buildings as being ‘beautiful’ for holding those linked memories. Which reflect on what a lifespan of a building can really be, through the relationship it has with the occupants rather than those who commissioned the buildings and what they deem to be successful or not. The voices of those who experience a building can reveal the true-life buildings have, through their attachment of security and memory.

The concept of building lifespans can not only be perceived by the condition they stand in after years and years, but they can also be perceived and understood by the memories that the residents hold. The Soviet era of housing blocks are assumed to contain the connotations of the socialist regime with its history in the walls and always reflect that period within the corridors. However, from the interviews of the residents that took part, they uncover joyful memories, they share their stories about happy events that were not restricted by the blocks and clear the assumptions of the life always being weighed down by the Soviet union. It signifies the matter of architecture being the background to everyday life, where life certainly is affected but not changed by the world outside their door. Furthermore, they indicated the power of memory and emotional investment that is attached to one’s home, regardless if they do not live

there anymore, good memories were still found when discussing these now Soviet remains.

The unspoken voices have shown that, regardless, of the history that these buildings are a part of, they can continue serving their intended purpose as homes. As seen in Gdansk, Soviet housing blocks have been ‘revived’ and are very popular amongst the citizens right now, through renovation, changing the aesthetics by adding colour, the microrayon has been transformed and the lifespan, ultimately ‘extended’. From unpacking that process, it is through time and generational perception, the new perspective adapts to these existing remains to becoming useful once again, without destroying significant parts of history. Buildings like the Soviet apartment blocks are adaptable in that aspect, as they are blank canvases to work on and can be added to. With greater developed technology and research, they can be ‘saved’ as the approach is thought out. The Soviet Union was an immense part of recent history for small countries like Lithuania, keeping these buildings that signify a very hard time is quite easy to justify as a reason to demolish, on the other hand, each apartment window can retell a unique story of the same time period that needs to be told.

Using those stories along with the memories of these spaces, we can resolve the existing issues of the buildings as they stand, they can also highlight the ‘beautiful’ moments that are in the architecture and how they could be preserved. In order to learn from previous architectural mistakes, we need to resolve them from the unheard voices that used the buildings, as they hold a true understanding between people and buildings.