Architectural Humanities II (K12AH2)
Avaz Twist Tower
Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina A Political Analysis through the Ideas of Marxism
Boyan Hristov 427624
Introduction In the past two decades Bosnia and Herzegovina has experienced more political and social turmoil than any other country in Europe. The break of Yugoslavia caused a major political shift and devastating war, all of which resulted in destruction of all previous systems, causing uncertainty for the future. Since then the country has been slowly recovering, taking a new political direction recently marked with iconic architecture. The Avaz Twist Tower was built in 2008 in Sarajevo, the country’s capital and since then has been viciously piercing the city’s skyline. The 176m skyscraper was designed by architect Faruk Kapidžić and acts as headquarters for one of the most famous and influential local newspaper companies Dnevni Avaz (from Bosnian: Daily Voice) owned by the controversial businessman and politician Fahrudin Radončić. The high-rise is one of the newest additions in Sarajevo’s built fabric, adding another layer of historical architecture along with structures dating back from Ottoman, AustroHungarian and Socialist times. As Sharon Zukin wrote, “We owe the clearest cultural map of structural change not to novelists or literary critics but to architects and designers“1. The tower marks the new post Yugoslavian times and aims to show the progress and modern capitalist direction the country has taken. However, similar to many Balkan countries that have recently faced a political transition, this new system is in favour of only a small group of privileged individuals who quickly managed to redeem power and establish themselves as the new ruling elite. For this reason I am strongly interested in exploring the building’s political, social and economic characteristics as well as identify the intentions behind its design and observe the resulting consequences that followed after its completion. The tower can clearly be seen as an advertising tool aggressively showing the power and dominance of the new Bosnian elite. Therefore, I believe the 19th century Marxist theory is relevant, having in mind Marx’s criticism of capitalism and in particular the hegemony of the bourgeoisie over the proletariat. At first it may appear that Marxist philosophy does not have an obvious connection with architecture, since he never wrote directly about the latter. However, as Engels famously said, Marx’s theory stems from ‘’three strands of European thought: (British) economics, (French) politics and (German) philosophy’’2. Often architecture itself is driven by these syntheses.
4
Fig.1 Picture from the devestating three-year siege of Sarajevo during the Bosnian war
Fig.2 Avaz Twist Tower seen from Sarajevo
5
Marxism Explained in Relation to Bosnia In 1848, Marx, together with Friedrich Engels, published The Communist Manifesto, a political pamphlet in which the faults of capitalism and the capitalist mode of production3 are exposed together with the historical and present conflict of classes. It is not without a reason that the work begins with the statement that “The history of all hitherto existing societies is the history of class struggle”4. What Marx and Engels say is that all changes that occur in society are the result of a mutual struggle of groups who share similar economic situations and aim to realise what is of their economic interest. Such struggles have been occurring in different forms from the beginning of civilisation; however, they are all struggles of an oppressed majority that is ruled by an oppressive minority – slave/freeman, serf/lord, etc. In modern capitalism, the merchant class, or the bourgeoisie, have risen from the Medieval feudal system after struggling against it and has become the main global power, shaping political institutions, cultures and society according to its interests. In their desire to expand their influence and increase profit by governing production the bourgeoisie exploits the working class that supplies production, or the proletariat. According to Marx, this abusive relationship of base and superstructure is not sustainable and therefore would eventually destroy itself – the proletariat would realise its own power and exploitation, resulting in a revolution against the elite. Similarly, in the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina and other Balkan countries which were part of the Eastern Bloc, a group of people who felt restricted in accumulating wealth during Socialist time managed to quickly do so (most of them by means of crime and affairs) after the new political paradigm shift, replacing one class dominance relationship with another. Now this new elite has hegemonial control over the political, judicial and economic systems of their countries, making it difficult for ordinary citizens to resist. However, since then no revolution has taken place yet. Marx explains this by introducing the concept of ideology, or false consciousness, as Engels called it. In his work The German Ideology Marx uses the metaphor of a camera obscura that inverts an object and therefore transforms the real image, fooling the eye: “The phantoms formed in the human brain are also, necessarily, sublimates of their material life-process, which is empirically verifiable and bound to material premises. Morality, religion, metaphysics, all the rest of ideology and their corresponding forms of consciousness, thus no longer retain the semblance of independence.”5 The superstructure has been using such tools in different forms to suppress the base from rising. As Engels argues, it is “the class which has the means of material production that controls the means of mental production”6. If religion was used in the past, today, in the age of globalisation and technological development, the mass media is serving the elite, manipulating public opinions. The Avaz Twist Tower in Sarajevo is the structure that accommodates this important power.
6
Fig.3 Carl Marx (left) and Friedrich Engels (right)
Fig.4 The exploitive pyramid of capitalism
7
The Meaning behind the Skyscraper/Politics in Architecture A building that serves a role of great importance for capitalism: to distribute a false consciousness in order to keep the majority passive should therefore possess a striking appearance and visually show power and dominance over everything else in the surrounding context. The typology of the skyscraper is more than appropriate for such function, having a long history as the symbol for capitalist progress and hegemony. In addition, a link with Marxism can be made with the idea of commodity fetishism, as mentioned in Marx’s work Das Kapital. There he argues that people perceive life and economics through a fixation of money or commodities, this way ignoring the truth behind a capitalist society: one class exploiting another. Similarly in architecture a luxurious and modern structure can be seen as a physical commodity hiding the intentions behind its design.7 However, an analysis of this typology should be sought on deeper level. In his book Skyscraper: The Politics and Power of Building New York City in the Twentieth Century, Benjamin Flowers explores the concept of high rise structures through two main aspects – the first one being the role of ideology in shaping the production and reception of the skyscraper (meaning in what way is the building used by those who commissioned and financed it in order to legitimize their political, social and economic interests) and the second one, following from the first, the way wealth and power operate to reorganise the urban landscape8. Flowers examines famous skyscrapers such as the Empire State Building and reveals them as a material expression of social conditions and personal relationship9, a description which I believe is more than relevant for Bosnia’s highest building.
8
Fig.6 Builders on site of Empire State Building
Fig.6 Avaz Twist Tower seen from street level
Fig.7 Fahrudin Radoncic - the owner of Dnevni Avaz
Avaz Twist Tower Following Flowers’ method of analysis, it is important to become familiarised with the individuals responsible for the realisation of Avaz Twist Tower as well as the ideas and desires they were influenced by in particular context to Sarajevo and Bosnia as a whole. It is worth mentioning that the most important figure behind this project is not the architect but the client himself. In this case the role of the architect is not to express himself, nor to contribute for society’s greater good – he appears as nothing more than a practical tool serving the elite. The client Fahrudin Radončić10 on the other hand had a clear intention for the project: to materialise his power on a large urban scale by creating an iconic structure. This way, Radončić is injecting his influence directly in the urban fabric, reminding the public of his media and political dominance. Having in mind he possesses great power both in the political and broadcasting scene, he has the privilege of using both for his own interests, becoming practically immune to issues with the law (by being part of the government) and people uprising (by controlling the public opinion). Therefore it is understandable that Radončić would seek a building such as Avaz Twist Tower not only to advertise his media but also to convince Bosnians that it is a truthful and reliable source of information. The completion of the skyscraper has led to the inevitable reshaping of the urban environment. Being the highest building on the Balkans the structure is visible from every street in the city and even beyond. For example, it is the first thing one sees while approaching the capital from the airport. Passengers using bus or rail means of transport notice the tower as well, since it is situated in close proximity to both main stations. The skyscraper’s impressive height and strategic location have made it possible to be one of the first objects observed by tourists or newcomers on the horizon, instantly becoming a symbol of Sarajevo along with architecture that has valuable historical meaning. Nevertheless, neither the 176m height, nor the contemporary style of the building fits with the surrounding urban context in any way. It is a perfect example for architecture that is excessively influenced by investors focusing solely on private interests while completely neglecting the historical, social and aesthetic principles of a city. 9
As Flowers said, a skyscraper is located in the city, epitomizing the restless activity of the [American] marketplace11. With Avaz Twist Tower that is not the case – the building is situated in the middle of a poor residential neighbourhood, creating a striking contrast between different social classes. For this reason, as part of the bourgeoisie, Radončić deliberately aims to blind the public from this fact (again trying to create false consciousness, denying the existence of such severe social division): by covering the whole area around the tower with banners that show glamorous skylines from New York City or Chicago he is creating a false oasis of wealth and progress. This idea of fooling the masses can be explored even further in experiencing the building. Many tourists and local residents perceive the high rise as an attraction, as it offers the public a luxurious café with 360 degree panoramic view of Sarajevo on its top floor. A high speed open glazed lift takes visitors on a short journey from the enclosed lobby space to the highest point, with a view of the city suddenly opening up halfway through. Seemingly a beautiful experience, it is perhaps sought intentionally in order to prevent people from thinking about what is happening in between. They would associate the skyscraper with the astonishing view, leaving with an optimistic opinion about Radončić and his media. The vertical promenade and panorama are a great marketing example of an intentional manipulation of human emotions. In addition, a connection to Marx’s idea of commodity fetishism can again be made, understanding the journey as a product that the public buys and therefore perceives the owner through this product, neglecting the truth about him. However, there are people who do not fall into this intentional trap. Many local urbanists and architects see Avaz Twist Tower as a thorn in Sarajevo’s skyline12, criticising its lack of architectural value and inappropriate form, style and positioning. The contemporary twisted shape (suspiciously reminding of other similar designs such as Malmö’s Turning Torso) has little or no relation to neither of the surrounding buildings, all rich of historical context. Despite offering a grandiose panoramic view, its overly-dominant height aggressively stands above everything else and does not fit with the city’s mainly low-rise structures. In addition, the skyscraper’s repetitive reflective blue glass façade in the attempt to create a modern aesthetic looks rather low-cost, resembling generic post-modern office buildings and although situated strategically near the train and coach stations, the contrast it creates with the shabby houses next to it is horrifying. According to journalist Dražen Huterer the skyscraper does not even have a building permission, hence is illegally built13. Although the desired effect of standing out is more than successful, every aspect of Avaz Twist Tower seems out of place, disrespectable towards its backgrounds and even architecturally arrogant.
10
Fig.8 The view from the top of the skyscraper
Fig.9-10 The banners outside the skyscraper and the view behind them
Fig.11-12 The striking contrast between wealthy and poor in downtown Sarajevo. A sight that is not a precedent in recent years
11
Conclusion After introducing the main aspects of Marxist thought I aimed to form relevance with the political situation in present day Bosnia and Herzegovina: a country that recently underwent a major paradigm shift in which a new bourgeoisie dominates over the proletariat. Understandably, being part of this elite Fahrudin Radončić seeks to realise his own economic interests. However, in order to prevent any public uprising Radončić uses today’s modern tool of manipulation, creating a false consciousness: the mass media. By realising an iconic superstructure his intention is to establish his dominance and persuade the people of his media’s and own reliability by means of their commodity fetish. Mesmerised by the tower’s exceptional height and astonishing view that it offers the majority of people in Sarajevo are unable to see the true intention behind its existence. However, although the building is seen by many as a symbol of economic and architectural progress, in reality it fails to meet this portrayal. Instead, it reveals the striking contrast between wealthy and poor, as well as lacks any communication with its surrounding context regarding shape, height, materiality and history. To conclude, I believe Avaz Twist Tower is saturated with political meaning, perhaps not all done intentionally by the architect or Radončić himself. It is in fact a perfect analogy of the current situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, relevant to the whole Balkan region. The building is a reflection of the oligarchical elite and the political reality of its country – if the tower stands by itself with no connection to the rest of the urban fabric, similarly the bourgeoisie is absorbed in their own interests oppressing and ignoring ordinary Bosnians. Nevertheless, in spite of all efforts to keep them from taking action, more people start to recognize the faults of the superstructure’s hegemony. The revolution that is needed in Eastern European societies relies deeply on the realisation of the people’s own voice and power. However, as Marx said, this takes time: “But the revolution is thoroughgoing. It is still traveling through purgatory. It does its work methodically. ... And when it has accomplished this second half of its preliminary work, [Europe] will leap from its seat and exult: Well burrowed, old mole!”14
12
Fig. 13 An illustration criticising the lack of consideration put into building Avaz Twist Tower and other new iconic structures in Sarajevo, trans. from Bosnian “Who do we build for? King Kong?“, Haris Bulič
13
Bibliography: 1. Flowers Benjamin “Skyscraper: The Politics and Power of Building New York City in the Twentieth Century”, University of Pennsylvania Press, (2009), pg. 9 2. Cunningham David & Goodbun Jon. “Marx, Architecture and Modernity”, The Journal of Architecture Vol. 11 (2006), pg. 4 3. Marx used the term mode of production to refer to the specific organization of economic production in a given society. A mode of production includes the means of production used by a given society, such as factories and other facilities, machines, and raw materials. 4. Marx Carl & Engels Friedrich, “The Communist Manifesto”, Yale University Press, (2006), pg. 74 5. Hale Jonathan, Building Ideas: An Introduction to Architectural Theory, (2008) pg.8, Available from Moodle 6. Marx Carl, The German Ideology (Marx/Engels Internet Archive (marxists.org) 1995, 1999) [Viewed 11th April 2015], Available from https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ 7. SparkNotes: Karl Marx (1818–1883): Themes, Arguments, and Ideas, [Viewed 11th April 2015], Available from http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/marx/themes.html 8. Flowers Benjamin “Skyscraper: The Politics and Power of Building New York City in the Twentieth Century”, University of Pennsylvania Press, (2009), pg. 6-7 9. Flowers Benjamin “Skyscraper: The Politics and Power of Building New York City in the Twentieth Century”, University of Pennsylvania Press, (2009), pg. 5 10. Anonymous: A famous media magnate and politician who has been active since the early 90’s. His figure is quite controversial as he is rumoured to have connections with the Balkan mafia and political hitmen 11. Flowers Benjamin “Skyscraper: The Politics and Power of Building New York City in the Twentieth Century”, University of Pennsylvania Press, (2009), pg.7 12. “303: Tristrojka Magazine”, Issue May 2014, pg. 60, Available from http://issuu.com/tristotrojka/docs/ tristotrojka2 13. “303: Tristrojka Magazine”, Issue May 2014, pg. 60-64, Available fromhttp://issuu.com/tristotrojka/docs/ tristotrojka2 14. Marx Karl, The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte,(1852) VII. Chapter, [Viewed 12th April]Available from https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1852/18th-brumaire/
14
Images: Fig.1: archive seminar, http://www.strategies-research.ufg.ac.at/english/archive/warandarchitecture_ sarajewo2%20Kopie%20Kopie.JPG Fig.2: Photograph by Nedzad Hidovic, http://www.panoramio.com/photo/37990172 Fig.3: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/79/Marx_and_Engels.jpg Fig.4: “Pyramid of Capitalist System”, First Published in the 1911 edition of Industrial Worker (The International Publishing Co., Cleveland, Ohio, USA) Fig.5: Betthamm Collection Images, http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/09/21/article-22060500059AA091000044C-332_964x756.jpg Fig.6: https://youthhistoryblog.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/sarajevo-avaz-twist-tower.jpg Fig.7: http://electionmeter.com/hotlinked_electionsmeter.png Fig.8: Photograph by Boyan Hristov Fig.9-10: Photographs by Boyan Hristov Fig. 11-12: Photographs by Drazen Huterer, “303: Tristrojka Magazine”, Issue May 2014, pg. 60-64, http:// issuu.com/tristotrojka/docs/tristotrojka2 Fig. 13: Illustration by Haris Bulič, “303: Tristrojka Magazine”, Issue December 2014, pg. 101, http://issuu. com/tristotrojka/docs/tristotrojka3
15