Identity of the Generic: Socialist Mass Housing in Transition / Master Thesis by No Name

IDENTITY OF THE GENERIC SOCIALIST MASS HOUSING IN TRANSITION

HafenCity University Hamburg MSc. Urban Design

First examiner: Prof. Dr. Monika Grubbauer Second examiner: M.Arch. Marieke Behne

Declaration of authorship I hereby declare that the Thesis titled ‚Identity of the Generic: Socialist Mass Housing in Transition‘ has been carried out by Petra Palušová (undersigned author) and submitted at HafenCity University in Hamburg on 2nd of November 2018 as a fulfillment of the requirement for the Degree Master of Science in Urban Design.

Hamburg, signature

Acknowledgments I would like to thank to the multitude of people who contributed to this research. Firstly I want to mention the members of the professional community from the Faculty of Architecture at the Slovak University of Technology and the Department of Construction and Architecture of Slovak Academy of Sciences in Bratislava. Further I want to thank for advices to Prof. Ľubica Vitková from the Institute of Urban Design and Regional Planning STU Bratislava, the main architect of the city of Bratislava Ingrid Konrad and her team and independent researcher Kuba Snopek. From HafenCity University I want to thank for the directions to my examiners, Prof. Monika Grubbauer and Marieke Behne. Foremost I would like to thank the inhabitants and communities of Petržalka for expressing an enormous interest and providing support for this research in form of sharing their experiences, memories and personal stories with me. This work is dedicated to them.

CONTENTS INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................................................11 MOTIVE............................................................................................................................................................................13 THE CASE.........................................................................................................................................................................16 METHODOLOGY.............................................................................................................................................................19 POST-WAR HOUSING IN CZECHOSLOVAKIA Origins of standardized living................................................................................................................25 The beginning.........................................................................................................................................26 Bratislava becoming the pre-fab city....................................................................................................28 Standardized living, the socialist ideal..................................................................................................28 PETRŽALKA Petržalka - the phenomenon.................................................................................................................37 Planning the socialist showcase............................................................................................................42 CRITICISM, DISCOURSE, LEGACY Criticism and legacy...............................................................................................................................58 Humanizing Petržalka....................................................................................................64 Heritage discourse Intangible heritage.........................................................................................................61 Controversies in heritage interpretation......................................................................70 Dissonance heritage and the process of (re-)identification........................................74 Dissonance in the mass housing district......................................................................76 Urban memory as an identity carrierIntangible heritage.............................................77 Tangible vs. intangible - tools of assessing the heritage.............................................78 Uniqueness of the generic - What is there to preserve in Petržalka?.........................80 Public discourse, media and artistic portrayal Media and public discourse............................................................................................82 Film..................................................................................................................................93 Music................................................................................................................................95 Findings....................................................................................................................................................98 IDENTITY The term identity....................................................................................................................................102 Social identity theory..............................................................................................................................103 Space-tied identities...............................................................................................................................104 Place identity theory and Identity process theory................................................................................105 Identity of the ugly - places of stigma...................................................................................................106 Identities of Petržalka.............................................................................................................................108 Collective identity...................................................................................................................................121 A silent nation.........................................................................................................................................124 Findings....................................................................................................................................................127

COLLECTIVITY The social condenser..................................................................................................................................132 The role of the community space - expectation and reality....................................................................134 Petržalka’s unbalanced space....................................................................................................................136 Social capital as a bearing element of the community development................................................. ...139 Community development in Petržalka................................................................................................ .....140 The current community........................................................................................................................ .....142 Findings.......................................................................................................................................................152 ACTING IN SPACE - THE TRANSITION On modernist thought..............................................................................................................................156 On discipline..............................................................................................................................................157 Position of self - from universalism to fragmentation...........................................................................158 The power of everyday practice................................................................................................................159 Public vs. private........................................................................................................................................161 The radius of concern................................................................................................................................164 Findings......................................................................................................................................................167 JASOVSKÁ Jasovská 2-12, Lúky VII................................................................................................................................175 Domino cause............................................................................................................................................186 FINAL DISCUSSION...........................................................................................................................................................192 FURTHER TRANSITIONS - CONSIDERATIONS FOR FUTURE APPROACHERS...............................................................198 REFERENCES......................................................................................................................................................................206

INTRODUCTION Mass housing is a well-established topic among architects and researchers across the globe. Modernist thinking that has shaped these urban complexes has been examined over and over in attempt to find solutions for these urban structures. As they are slowly approaching the end of their life span, the debates have evolved from casual criticism to an urgent mode of having to take up a stance and act. The problem stands: they are massive, they are complex, they are controversial. They require multitude of disciplinary approaches, detailed understanding of forces that have shaped them as well as those who are currently re-shaping them. Engagement with this topic is not a rarity. Architects and planners propose design interventions in hope of changing their functioning and image, yet they are rarely implemented into the physical space. Sociologists and ethnographers engage with the analysis of daily occurrences, observe human behavior, but often with a limited connection to the spatial attributes of the districts. One way or the other, a crucial component seems to be missing. The form-oriented modernist planning has set a set of design principles which create the lay-out of the mass housing district. Beside the need to facilitate a good living to an increasing number of people in the cities in the post-war era, the districts under socialist regime had also a specific agenda in terms of shaping the social relations and process of identification. A disciplined space can discipline people - or so was the purpose of the rigid spatial zoning and outline schemes of social interaction. A district was divided into sectors, sectors consist of several blocks, each block contains a number of high-rise panel houses created of hundreds of almost identical flat units. We find repetition on all scales, which make the structures seem colossal and thoroughgoing. Scholars and critics often describe them as »failed architecture«. Yet it does not change the fact that these districts are physically present and in daily use by thousands of people. How do we then approach failed architecture? Two approaches are possible: first - it has »failed«, therefore we do not need to examine it further and should pursue the erasure, or second - it has »failed« the original purpose, but spaces used daily by thousands of people may have perhaps developed another one, therefore it would be valid to examine further strategies. Additionally, what is a definition of failure? Was it really the design that has failed, or have other circumstances contributed to it? As the districts are present for decades, and will probably persist for more, could the phase in which has the mass housing failed be temporary? Could these »bad« phases generate other kinds of qualities and conditions that can contribute to the future success? Before we blame everything on the »failed modernist utopia«, we should examine it as a phase of the city’s evolution. Besides the form and the design, we need to examine the evolution

of the concept in terms of possibility to adapt to a new perceptional spectrum of the people inhabiting the districts. In modernist planning, a person was reduced as a mere unit, a subject to calculations and rational purpose without personal input. As we shifted away from the modernist thinking, is there perhaps a possibility to alter the position of the district inhabit to a persona with his or her own perception and self-recognition? How would that change the original scheme of spatial use and social relations? The goal of the mass housing was to shape the process of identification. And in reality, it did. Just differently as planned. „Architecture has at least two lives“, states Rem Koolhaas, „one imagined by its maker and the life it lives afterwards - and they are never the same“ (1)

(1) The Invention and Reinvention of the City: An Interview with Rem Koolhaas / Interview excerpt from the Journal of International Affairs 2012, Issue: “The Future of the City”

MOTIVE Born in socialist Czechoslovakia, I spent a great portion of my life living in the housing block during the post-revolutionary 1990s and the early 2000s. We lived in an industrial town, in the Eastern district on the 7th floor, entrance C. I visited primary school no.5 in the district F. The facades were of all shades of grey and dark muted colors. All the houses, schools and district centers in the middle of the housing blocks were identical. This was my natural environment, the one I knew, the world I understood. When I was 10 years old, we had a visit from friends living in the rural Slovakia. I took their son, who was around my age, to play outside in our block when he turned to me and asked: „How come is your kitchen so small, when your house is so huge?“ For him, it was his first encounter with the world I was living in, for me it was a realization that there are worlds different than this one. To this day, I remember this sentence resonating strongly in my head. It was the first time I remember thinking: Why does this place look like this and why do the others look different? Why is the place where I live organized by numbers and capital letters? I felt the obscurity of this question. Till now, I remember that this moment has twisted the way I saw my home - the mass housing district. According to Rolf Legewie, the begin of the research does not start with the theoretically deduced hypothesis about the object. First and foremost it emerges from the preconditions and preliminary knowledge of the researcher in form of sensitized concepts (2004:3). These can be observations based on our practical knowledge about the objects through sensory experiences (Bunschoten, Chora 2000:76). They serve as a basis for building a hypothesis, leaning towards such proposition as would lead to the prediction of the observed facts, either necessary consequences or at least as very probable under the circumstance (Peirce 1878). It takes stand on the contextual knowledge, which Grounded Theory describes as one of the fundamental predispositions of research, consisting of information already in possession of the potential researcher, which he or she acquired in his or her personal life or other practical experiences (Strauss, Hildenbrand, Hildenbrand 1994:48). My experiences serve as a basis of preliminary knowledge, the contextual understanding of these spaces and the nuances of everyday situations that occur in this environment. To design the process of my research, I used this contextual knowledge which I acquired throughout my life by inhabiting the mass housing district as well as my academic knowledge of the subject. It brings together the natural tendency to navigate myself through this »world«, as it was the first and the most natural space my perception was adapted to, with (at later point) the opportunity to build upon

these experiences, summarizing, framing and using them to work on this matter. After several years of engaging with this topic, I still find myself reviewing and re-interpreting these experiences. I observe the districts and discover new layers and new connotations, interpret and explain as they gradually adapt a new shape and develop a new identity. Today, the district is not grey anymore, it shines the whole palette of colors. I no longer have to be worried to step into an injection on the playground, all the neighbors have nicely renovated apartments, yet the public spaces have much more »cracks« that they used to. The monotony retreated into the background as the many new colors, banners and new self-made spaces and places visually come forward creating an impression of an unintentional mosaic. The trees are much taller, bushes richer, volume-wise competing with the masses of the panels. Some spaces lost their relevance and stand vacant, other spaces emerged and created a mark on a clear design of the space. The spaces did not receive much attention during the last decades, the stigmatized communities inhabiting these districts fought through silently carrying manifold of adjectives assigned to the districts. Many projects offer small-scale re-designs projects or proposing new functions. Most of them are, however, superficial as they lack deeper understanding of the planning of these districts, the processes that have shaped them and most importantly - they fail to recognize the inhabitant. Without professional interventions or properly guided planning, the district unfolded organically and stepped into a new phase, that has not been named and described yet. The consciousness of an inhabitant of the mass housing district has shifted into new thinking, activating a new generation of people who call these places their a »home«. They inhabit them, improve them, treat them as »their space«. It is a silent force that emerged from the bottom and hides in the background. It is present, actively bearing the intangible, yet pretermitted. There is a rich body of exceptional work done on the topic of post-socialist city offering various theoretical perspectives using diverse empirical methods. Sonia Hirt notes that „only a few, however, have attempted to make sense of post-socialist urban change in relation to culture“ (2012:29). In academic field, examining post-socialism in regard to identity and urban memory is essentially a novelty. With an increasing need to develop new strategies for Eastern- and Central-European cities, there is a demand to analyze the issue in depth. Hirt argues that despite some few excellent studies and essays related to culture re-building, identity seeking and re-interpretation during the post-socialist period, there is still scarcity of such efforts, as studying such phenomenon by „observing many ordinary people going through their ordinary lives“ is challenging, demanding and requiring interdisciplinary knowledge (ibid). She additionally points out two important reasons why the linkage between culture and urbanism must attract serious inquiry. First, a proper

study as a basis for planning can startle variety of post-socialist (damaging and bizarre) spatial trends, but not as fragmentary interventions, but a whole picture (2012). Second, the culture and space are reciprocal. The space is not just a „passive physicality“ (Bodnar 2001, cit. by Hirt 2012) to project on the social and cultural phenomena. Rather it is one of the two constructive dimensions of this equation. Both realms send messages and exchange responses, they reflect in each other. To examine only one of them does not draw the whole picture, which may (and does) lead to ignoring many of the tools and potentials that are existing, but have not been discovered or considered to be relevant for planning. Throughout the process of working with the topic-related existing academic material, I noticed the niche that Hirt describes. While there are plentiful of studies focusing on socio-economic and political examination of the subject, it was difficult to find that would be concentrating on culture and identity. During my stay in Slovakia, while performing the field research, I published my efforts in order to search for interviewees. The project immediately aroused a wave of interest, but also a whole spectrum of responses. While some showed excitement, others warned me about the difficulty of the topic, or even impossibility to perform such study, as I was, as they said, »entering a completely unexplored territory«. By seeking for participants among the inhabitants I also faced strong reactions. They varied from enthusiasm, gratefulness and passion, through surprise and incomprehension to anger and disgust. This made me even more curious and ensured my efforts to explore the topic. 66% of Slovakian population lives in mass housing districts. In the capital city Bratislava it is almost three quarters of the total population. Despite the urgency of the subject, there have not been any comprehensive planning efforts, nor studies of the cultural landscape of these urban complexes in the Slovak context. It is therefore absolutely necessary to start to engage with this problematics, as it is concerning the majority of the people and the majority of the urban structure currently existing in Slovakia. This study is an effort to initiate a step into the »unexplored and difficult«. I seek to contribute to the existing discourse, pose questions and look for answers. At the same time I want to facilitate the (so far) weak linkage between the planning community and »ordinary people living their ordinary lives«.

THE CASE „Petržalka’s qualities are a result of an enormous uncontrolled process of change, still remaining unexplained.“ (Igor Marko, magazine Nové Lido, 2016)

After the World War II, Czechoslovakia turned into a socialist state, which meant an introduction of the societal order and a radical indoctrination of the system. Socialism as a branch of modernism with dominant political dimension has been known to approach the historical past radically. The entire social, economic and political realm has been subjected to a new set of rules. The country has undergone a major change of its landscape. The subject of this study - the biggest mass housing district of Central Europe Petržalka - has been re-modeled by the proactive intervention of the socialist regime. Formerly rural settlement has been flatten and instead, a »city of tomorrow« - the socialist showcase has emerged from a bare soil. A futuristic concept embodying the enormousness of the socialist vision was counting to create homes to nearly 150 000 inhabitants. Yet, the way the socialism regime has operated fell into disregard. Due to the freedom restrictions and societal control, it had severely damaged the original vision or any perspectives of its viable future. The (applied) concept has been proven to be non-feasible. The regime has collapsed in 1989 after more than 40 years of functioning. The collapse is commonly referred as »Velvet Revolution« and often described as a »shock therapy«. Slovakia has suddenly shifted into a new age - the post-socialist period, an era of chaos and reconstruction of the system on all levels. For Petržalka (and the society in general) it meant a rapid social decline and pathological phenomena appearing in cities. Petržalka was known to be the most dangerous district in the country. It cumulated urban legends and became a synonym to ghetto. The district celebrates its 45th anniversary this year. It has its own established life, image and - identity. The inhabitants love their home and jointly claim their identity and pride to be from Petržalka. Such claims generate a entire row of counter-reactions. It almost suggests that the people do not have the right to claim their pride as they have to fight constantly and defend »their identity«. The subject has lately become a public discourse and is debated in a controversial manner. Why is it so important, one could ask. Who cares about a group of people claiming to like their panel house home? For the discourse is not only about the identity of a group living in some anonymous mass housing. It represents one of the primary problems of the post-socialist citizen, who deals with a great challenge - dealing with the past. As the communist regime has usurped all rights to define all the identities and restrict their performances, it takes a considerable amount of time

for a society to re-invent the identity realm. Developing and establishing identity is thus a step forward, as Slovakia leans towards a new phase slowly approaching yet unnamed (so far post-post-socialist) period. It is a sign of changing dynamics and »delivery« of the first results of the period of transitioning of of the system is a time to restore the »self«.

PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS AND STRUCTURE The dynamics of Petržalka has been changing rapidly throughout the decades. The current Petržalka is the result of all these developments, »shock therapies« and transitions What is there to observe now? 1 Emerged identity discourse: Either among architects and planners, or publicized in media, Petržalka’s identity is a subject to discussion. The inhabitants claim belonging to the district and try to defend and protect the district. On the other hand there are many who mock and laugh at these claims, pointing out the uninviting nature of the district. 2 Petržalka’s community environment: During the last decade, multiple communities were found in Petržalka. The trend is currently still growing, reaching a scale of a network. Despite the lack of input from the authorities, people restore the district by their self-governed actions. 3 Spatial appropriations of space: Within large deteriorated public space, islands of renovated and restored places emerged across the district in many different forms (small gardens, playgrounds and seating) which exist in a contrast with their surrounding. 4 The technical condition of the spaces and Petržalka’s legacy: Visibly unbalanced physical condition of the space. While more than one third of the houses are newly renovated (sections co-owned by the inhabitants of the apartments), the shared spaces (outside and inside) are deteriorated. Many of the public buildings are abandoned, a large amount of shared space in the communal parter is unused and inaccessible. The overall condition and image raise questions of legacy and heritage.

QUESTIONS What are the processes of creating the identity in the generic environment of the mass housing district? How does it create the sense of belonging? How do places of stigma become places-to-be? How can the anonymous high-rise blocks become a stimulating environment for emergence of creativity and community activities? What is the new meaning of the collective and how did it emerge? What social capital is currently present and how can it be used? How can these emerging practices be used to render the future of Petržalka district? What kind of dynamics does the historical past and the post-socialist transitioning produce? How is the criticism and the heritage discourse constructed? What does the (positive) current state of Petržalka mean to the heritage discourse? How can these narratives be helpful to enrich the discourse about communist heritage, intangible values and overcoming the stigma? How to incorporate this legacy into a contemporary city and society?

The study firstly describe methodological proceeding, follows with the historical framework and introduction of the Petržalka project. The analytical part has been built along four main axes: 1 - identity formation, 2 - collectivity and community movements, 3 - transition, from modernism to post-modernism, the self within the space, 4 - legacy of the mass housing, criticism and contemporary discourse. Each of these analytical sections have conclusive summaries, which are consequently demonstrated on the example of Jasovská unit - a housing block of one of the Petržalka sectors LÚKY VII. The findings are discussed in the final chapter. The study ends with suggestions for formulation of future approach and an epilogue on the transition from post-socialism to a new era.

METHODOLOGY Since the formulation of the research questions demands analysis of both - the social and the physical realm, the research methods were selected accordingly. To examine and analyze the social context on a bigger scale, this study uses a mixed methods approach and combines qualitative and quantitative data from the online survey with open and close-ended questions. The survey is primarily focusing on the positions towards the identity of the district. For this sake, different socal studies were examined to built a referential theoretical framework on identity and its structure. Further, the field research focuses on examining the understanding and performance of the identity among the inhabitants. The respondents also also interviewed on matters of interest in their environment, tendencies to engage in the co-creation, evaluation of the social and physical attributes of the district, quality of the networks, and the evaluation of the spatial potentials and social capital, degree of their engagement and activities they perform. To provide a complex overview of the context I examined a rich body of archival material in form of historical documentaries, music production, newspaper and virtual media articles, recorded interviews with architects and photographic material. This material is available online or in the archive of RTVS (Radio and Television of Slovakia). Further I used multiple historical literature sources deliberately picking out situations describing particularities of the historical era (before 1989), societal and cultural struggles and historical interpretations of events that occurred or were occurring in former Czechoslovakia at that time. To analyze the physical realm, I turned to existing studies on the mass housing district, specifically analysis of the characteristics of the standardized panel housing units. I examined their history, the spatial concept, their spatial limitations and aesthetical evaluation. At first I started generally in Petržalka, later I chose the example of Jasovská unit in Lúky VII sector in the southern part of the district. I consider it to be the accurate representation displaying the challenges, transitions and movements I am describing in this study. At the same time I consider its current (severely neglected) spatial condition as well as its spatial scheme to be competent to potentially test the proposed scenario. At Jasovská I performed several observation sessions, several interviews with the inhabitants and collected drawings and photographic material of the unit and its environment.

The field research was conducted over the course of seven weeks in May and June of 2018 in Bratislava, Slovakia.

PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION The primary focus of the observation was the character of the public life and the social exchange, interaction between the neighbors, location and nature of these activities and their spatial assignment. At later point, it was specified to focusing on (1) interaction between the residents in terms of familiarity vs. anonymity, (2) spatial assignment of the gathering activities and their expression, (3) forms of changing and appropriation of the public space by the residents, (4) the arrangement or exhibition of the individuality and types of personalized contribution to the surroundings, (5) neglected, unused or damaged spaces and their (non-)usage.

SURVEY Two surveys were performed - one aimed to the inhabitants (a), the other to the community founders/organizers (b). The structure of the survey was built in order to collect both quantitative and qualitative data. The survey (a) consisted of two sections. First section of 28 questions was aimed at the inhabitants of all ages, additional second section consisted of 7 questions and was pointed to the group with personal experiences with PetrĹžalka during the socialist period and the 1990s. The survey consisted of open and closed questions, prevalently aiming at (1) evaluation of the districtâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s social and physical environment, (2) sense of belonging, identity, identification with the environment, (3) degree of involvement in co-creating the environment and willingness to take part in the community activities, (4) general development tendencies in built and social environment, (5) deficiencies, potentials. In total, 63 people took part in the survey - 33 via digital platform and 30 via personal contact. To develop this questionnaire, I used the experience from the earlier previously conducted interviews by mapping the reactions of the respondents to the questions in order to be precise in building the structure. Since the survey works with abstract terms, the pre-test of this survey was carried out with 5 people to detect errors, clarify the possible misunderstandings and to assess the motivation to answer the open questions. To reach the respondents, the survey was published in several online social media platforms of the communities and initiatives in PetrĹžalka and was actively shared by the participants via their

social media accounts. Additionally, some respondents were reached via my personal network or selected with the technique of random path directly in the field. A small number of people approached me personally and via social media with the wish to participate on the survey and to be interviewed. Generally, the older generation (60+ years) was moderately active in sharing their experiences, the middle aged generation (ca. 40-60 years) was proven to be restrained (there were no participants between 50 and 60 years of age), some of them ridiculing or doubting the meaning of this activity. The younger adult generation was the most active and directly engaged. There were minor difficulties encountered, the time of the year and the weather contributed to the active life in the public space, which made it easier to reach out and approach people.

INTERVIEWS The guideline for the informal interviews was developed in accordance to the online survey to complement the qualitative part of the data collection. They were concentrated around the topics of (1) identity, its understanding and performance; (2) community, its understanding and performance; (3) interconnection between the identity and community; participation on the co-creation of the environment (4) evaluation of the social network, neighborhood, exchange between the neighbors (5) development over the years, stigmatization, image, (6) evaluation of the district in terms of function, spatial concept, quality of shared spaces, (7) potentials, development tendencies and most resonating issues. Further, extensive parts of the interviews were dedicated to respondents’ personal way of experiencing, perceiving, recalling and remembering specific situations from the past (from the pre-war time, the socialist period, from the 1990s), the way how they were dealt with emotionally and how these experiences further shaped the world view of the respondent. The respondents have been interviewed informally in the public space or semi-formally in a form of a meeting in the cafe, public space or in their homes. All respondents currently live in Petržalka but one currently living elsewhere, but visits Petržalka on a weekly basis. Further, a small group of members of the architecture and planning community in Bratislava have been asked more specialized questions including details about the current projects in Petržalka.

POST-WAR HOUSING IN CZECHOSLOVAKIA

ORIGINS OF STANDARDIZED HOUSING „Czechoslovakia is practically the only civilized state in the world that has yet to devote itself to the scientific study of the housing question. This is one of the most important elements of social politics, of the care of the physical and moral health of the nation, and economically, it is the most significant segment of the building industry.“ (Block of Progressive Architectural Associations, 1945)

„The housing of the working people is not only unsatisfactory, but it is a direct blemish on the whole organization of the lives of working people. So far we do not give our laborers, our private employees, or our working intelligentsia well thought-out or organized apartments. We do not give them apartments that would offer sufficient living spaces for the families of working men, which would make our family lives more practical, rid them of the backward idiocy of the period of women’s domestic enslavement, give them air, sunshine and greenery, hygiene, and a real housing culture“ (František Jungmann for magazine Architektura ČSR, 1946)

The 1950s in Czechoslovakia - political circumstances of this period leads the country towards »better future and brighter tomorrows«. The country is still experiencing post-war trauma, but at the same time, it is devoted to a new socialist regime, proud, hopeful and optimistic. The technological development is speeding up, building new industries based on new concepts. Regarding the question of housing, the scene experiences the second wave of modernization. In 1931, one of the key personalities of the modernist architectural scene in the country, Friedrich Weinwurm that „it is the right of every person to have at least a roof over his head“ (cit. by Moravčíková 2011:9). The concept that followed, formulated by the architectural avant-garde, brought about „rationalistic approach to the design of apartments, apartment blocks or city planning, the ground for the developments to come“ (ibid). The living standards underwent an immense transformation, bringing central heating, sunlight and ventilation, running water and other hygienic facilities to masses of people. Thanks to the technological advancement, mass production of prefabricated elements, which would allow such concept to happen, has been initiated. The feelings of a great accomplishment faded quickly, as the new urban and architectural form

was criticized for lacking the organicity of the traditional architecture, picturesqueness of public squares and small streets. Despite providing homes with a substantive spatial and hygienic standard to more and more people, and filling the gap caused by the post-war housing shortage, the new type of housing was still a target of ambivalent reactions and received only a reserved acceptance in the 1960s. The following decade of the 1970s was the most expansive for the mass housing technology. Between 1971 and 1980, there were 1 261 000 apartments built in Slovakia (Slovak part of Czechoslovakia). In the 1980s, the concrete slab-technology created 93,5% of the overall housing construction. Till today, they create a substantial part of the urban environment of the vast majority of Slovak cities (ibid).

MONTDOM - THE BEGINNINGS The very first concrete-slab housing block - Montdom (2/Fig.1) - was constructed in Bratislava in 1956, putting together the results of the research held by the centralized state institutes Staveprojekt and Planning and Typification Institute in Bratislava and the efforts of the local architects and engineers. The authors of the first nation-wide competition-winning frame-concrete-slab system was the team of professor Vladimír Karfík from the Slovak Technical University in Bratislava. Karfík used his knowledge gained by working with prefabrication technology for the Baťa company in Zlín in Czech republic (3). Together with his colleagues Jozef Harvančík and Georgi Tursunov developed a construction type with fully reinforced frames, allowing the variation of the inner space using the full wall of empty frame. Even though a different system - the frameless system with full walls - was established across Czechoslovakia at later point, this was marked as a starting point and a milestone for the evolution of housing. Two years later it was followed by the first complex Februárka [Fig.2] on Račianska street in Bratislava constructed between 1958 and 1961. The authors Václav Houdek, Štefan Svetko, Ondrej Dukát, Štefan Ďurkovič and Emil Vician applied a mixture of concrete slab systems (BA type) consisting of cast concrete and traditional brickwork. Even till now, this complex is one of the most refined, well-composed domestic architecture works with favorable selection of the facilities and greatly integrated into the existing urban structure of the city [4]. Nevertheless, this type of project required longer periods of construction and more expensive material. Also, the integrative approach has soon reached its limits due to the space available within the urban structure. It was followed by the confrontation of this concept and growing pressure on faster and more efficient production which resulted into rapid development on the vacant areas beyond the city boarders (ibid).

(2) Montdom: from Slovak »assemble house«

(3) Architects of Baťa company (a shoe manufacture found in Czechoslovakia) engaged with prefabrication methods during the interwar period

(4) similarly successful with the integration were estates Škultétyho and Kukučínova built shortly after Februárka

Fig.1 [top right] Montdom Fig.2 [bottom right] Februárka

BRATISLAVA BECOMING A »PRE-FAB« CITY 1960s and 1970s are known to be the most intensive construction phases. Concrete-slab construction has spread across the Slovak capital in a rapid speed. It resulted into a fast urban growth which was supported by the regime representatives. The trend of the constant inflow of the workers boosted the industrialization and construction of the new settlements. Also for prevalently rural Slovakia, this was a major turn-over for the cities. The cultural continuity was disturbed by the masses of the new-comers. The large-scale housing estate development, truly a concept beyond limits, became possible because of the appropriated circumstances of the land ownership. After the communist coup in the 1948 with the arrival of the socialist regime began the process of nationalization, vastly limiting the private ownership. With the state having so much land on its hand, urban planners did not have to be modest in their designs. The first extension to the urban structure of Bratislava happened in the North-East direction with estates Krasňany and Rača, followed by larger Ružinov in the East, Medzi jarkami, Dolné hony in the South-East and finally the biggest mass housing experimental project Petržalka in the South, occupying the area of the other side of the Danube river. In the end of 1970s, the city expanded even more towards the Carpathian mountains in the North-West with estates Karlova Ves, Záluhy and Dúbravka, connecting rural settlements (Devínska Nová Ves and Záhumenice) with the mass housing districts creating a real spatial controversy. After such expansive decades, the last smaller estates were completed within the city with the focus on respecting the topography around the natural slopes of the Danube river - estate Dlhé Diely.

STANDARDIZED LIVING, THE SOCIALIST IDEAL The system of the mass production in Czechoslovakia was also vastly influenced by the Marxist ideology. The apartments, housing blocks and public facilities were an ideal realization of the leftist modernity (Moravčíková 2011). Realization of the »minimal flat«, the standard, functional and universal, was the ideal model of living for the socialist citizen wished by the authorities. The state was providing typified housing for everyone, the same structure, same visual, same quality. The socialist system promoted and expected un-difference and used architecture (but not only architecture) as a tool to modify people’s behavior and set their positions within the society. The calculations of the quantity of the housing units was laid down by the categorization of the citizens, analyzing the numbers of the family members resulting into setting a four-category system I. to IV., each category representing a specific size and basis for the standardized type. The most

Fig.3: Michalik (2016)

frequent were flats with two to three rooms with a kitchen - a medium-sized family unit. The exterior aesthetics of architecture was predetermined by the type of the concrete-slab system on the inside. The variable elements, balconies, loggias, entrances, color finishing or gap solutions were the creative tools composing the facades. The oldest system - BA type - applied in the early 1960s, was featured by the expressive vertical structures of the balconies, dynamically composed entrances and round elements in the opening of the slab as well as glazing staircase. In the mid 1960s the plasticity was reduced with the systems T 06 B and T 08 B. These were later united by the Stavprojekt designers into a structural system ZT creating a unitary system of 5 with wide range of types and sections introducing denser colors contrasting with the pale tones and more horizontality.

Fig.4: BA type

To fulfill the demand for the system with open typification, ZTB type was designed to pro-

Fig.5: T 08 B type Fig.6 [top left] Workers on FebruĂĄrka, 1960s Fig.7 [bottom left] Workers adjusting the panel in LamaÄ? district, 1970s

vide more variable inner disposition of spaces. At later point, in order to boost the quality of the construction, the state bought a licensed system from Denmark which was created according to the prefabricated model system applied in Eastern Germany. The collection of the Czechoslovak systems was then enriched by the new types with slightly less monotonous aesthetics applying more colors or historicist elements (ibid). By the 1980, Bratislava’s visual has changed completely. One of my respondents remembers: „I was standing on the hill and wherever I looked, there they were, the panel houses. Any direction, the same view. At least there were some church towers in the Old Town, the hill with the castle and the Danube. Otherwise we would have just drowned in the sea of panels.“ In the last phase, the emphasis was put on quantity instead of the quality of the built work. Despite the fact that the authors of the houses were asking to spend time to produce more elaborate prefabricates, the response did not follow. While the technological and design aspects were far behind the standard, the quality lied in a progressive experimental urban design launched for the first time in the history. The most successful designs were created by Ferdinand Milučký and Štefan Ďurkovič in Trávniky estate, by Štefan Svetko at Medzi jarkami and estate Karla Ves by Stanislav Talaš, who was also the author of the monumental Petržalka. All the designs played with the morhoplogy of the terrain, fragments of the former rural architecture creating excellent compositions and valuable living environments. On the other hand, many residents of the other estate were complaining of their »vastland« districts. The most controversial, celebrated by some and condemned by others Petržalka. A satellite district, an independent city, futuristic and all-encompassing, called to spring into existence in 1967.

Fig.8 [right] Crumbling panels during the construction

PETRÅ½ALKA

PETRŽALKA - THE PHENOMENON In Slovakia, the term Petržalka has indeed a powerful resonance. As the most famous urban district, it has been a target of various denominations. The prevalent negative affiliation from the past assured Petržalka a stable position in the public discourse and is often debated as a symbol of mass housing and the communist era. Moravčíková notes that with this fact alone and despite many negative connotations, Petržalka is in many aspects still-unsurpassed urban, architectural and technological achievement for the whole of the former Czechoslovakia, and an exceptional instance of mass housing construction within the wider international framework (2012). The original concept of Petržalka was designed by an architectural duo - Jozef Chovanec and Stanislav Talaš from the Centralized institute of design in Bratislava. The state as a general contractor issued a request onto the state enterprise Národný podnik pozemné stavby (National enterprise of the building construction) to build a residential area able to accommodate approximate 150 000 residents. During the construction over the course of nearly two decades, 49 829 apartment units were built. Such demand created an extreme pressure on the speed of the construction which has been met with several problems along the way. A historical documentary Výstavba Petržalky (Building of Petržalka) from the 1979 tracks the construction processes and the primary issue of the late 1980s - still lack of housing accompanied by urban growth, which marks the opening of the narrative: „Those, who are waiting for the apartment are in the first place interested in the number of completed units in Bratislava in the first quarter of this year. […] People are waiting impatiently and want to know, how is the state going to catch up with the delay and deal with such an incredibly hard task.“ The main engineer Alojz Biksacký explains the problems and challenges regarding fulfillment of the plan: „From the yearly plan of overall 1258 apartment units, which are planned to be handed over [from the state to the future residents] in the first half of this year, only 786 were completed. […] Overall, we are fulfilling 40-42% of the yearly plan, which is also a result of the inherited deficiencies form the previous year. Such low ratio is causing an insufficient speed of the construction processes and is forcing the builders to work less precisely with lesser quality of the construction. […] Accumulated unfinished tasks in the end of the year are being transferred into the following year and causing even bigger problems. […] Because of this we have intro-

duced a control procedure every two weeks to ensure the fulfillment of the plan. The housing construction in Bratislava is now the first and absolute priority for all the participators - the investor, the builders and the suppliers.“ Such numbers and statements are often the root of the accusations, that the priority of state socialism was the quantity, not quality. Consequently they resulted into building narratives about the qualitative content of the districts. Emanuel Hruška, one of the prominent Czechoslovak urban design theorists wrote that „in socialist society, it will not solely be a question of the quantitative satisfaction of the need for the housing through providing of flats, but the offering of completely conceived estates, organically integrated into a specific functionally balanced region“ (1959:104). Building the socialist society as an antidote to the much contested Capitalist West created a different dynamics for urban regulation, but also an atmosphere of competition. That even fostered the need to expand, the urban growth and migration to the cities created an impulse and needed conditions to extend the city and shape the urban landscape.

Fig.9 [bottom] Detail of a defective contant Fig.10 [top right] Fast and unprecise construction causing constructional damage Petržalka 1970s

Petržalka as an independent village was a symbol of migration in the pre-war period (Moravčíková 2012). A small rural settlement with the count of 904 inhabitants in 1890 grew without any conceptual or regulation plan into a small town of 14 164 inhabitants in four decades (Šimko 1993). The residents were always unwilling to annex the settlement to the rest of the city, protecting and claiming their identity as independent from the Bratislava inhabitants. Yet with the assignation of the socialist rule, the village was annexed to Bratislava in 1951 finally allowing Bratislava to be a „city on the Danube and not only by the Danube“ (Moravčíková 2012). The inahbitants, however, never adapted to the new organization, still insisting on distinction that between the people of Bratislava and the people of Petržalka. A documentary Druhý breh (The other bank) from 1968 reports reactions of the (former rural) Petržalka asking them about the identity of their settlement and their opinions about the future plans: [reporter]: „If I asked if you’re from Bratislava or Petržalka, what would you say?“ [the crowd on the terrace of a pub]: „From Petržalka!“ [young man]: „We are pure Petržalka people, we’re proud what we are, we’re not ashamed!“

[reporter]: „What do you say about the plans to turn Petržalka into the city of the future?“ [young man]: „Well, they say, hundreds of thousands of people will live here, I laugh about it. Look, they just demolish things randomly, buildings we use and then it stands empty for two years and where are we supposed to go? I bet they don’t have any plans.“ [reporter, turns to an old woman]: „And you? Until when are you planning to stay here? Do you have any hope to live in better conditions in a new city quarter?“ [older woman]: „I’ll be here until I die. Better conditions? What I have is enough. And those new apartments, that’s for those who are on a waiting list. And also I heard, when they take this away from me, they will give me something. Till then, I still have time.“ Besides the suspicion and mockery towards the ‚future plans’, we observe an obvious distinction between »us« and »them« in the early phase. Additionally, the »us and them« dynamics was underlined by the fact the area had the proximity to the not just a state boarder, but a boarder of the entire Communist bloc. During the Cold War, this territory was much guarded and every activity including planned construction was closely watched by the military and intelligence services (Moravčíková 2012).

PLANNING THE SOCIALIST SHOWCASE »The Southern sector« as the city representatives titled Petržalka, was meant to „differ from the majority of previous domestic and international complexes“ (Gross 1965:69, cit. by Moravčíková 2012). As all the territories bordering with the West during the Cold War, the area has become a display of the achievements, ideology of the socialist regime and opposition towards capitalism. During the 1960s the international situation has been consolidated, resulting into alleviation of the „fears from the uncertainties emanating at the boarder“ (5) which has opened new possibilities for international cooperation, towards the „ideal urban planning of the Southern sector of the city of Bratislava“ (ibid). After renewing political contacts with the West, Czechoslovak architects and planners started to cooperate internationally, which resulted into a competition for the urban plan of Petržalka in 1966. On the efforts to design an entire district participated 84 teams from around the world, the entries were evaluated by experts such as Slovenian architect Edvard Ravnikar or French architect André Gutton. The final results were announced at the meeting of urban planning at the UIA Congress (6).

(5) Issued by Mestský sektor Bratislava Petržalka 173

(6) The congress took place on 10-12 June 1967

Fig. 11 and 12 Publication of the competition results

PetrĹžalka was an effort to create an emblem of the regime and become the real Socialist City. The requirements for the competition corresponded to this vision as well. One of

Fig. 13 Printed orientation map for sector Dvory

the organizers of the competition, Kamil Gross, requested „such a study of construction that in its form would extend beyond the bounds of even immediately foreseeable reality“ (1967:70). The design was supposed to surpass the everyday practice of the socialist citizen and think ahead as to include the vision of the future society living in the district. So to say, the district’s potential was meant to gradually unfold along with the evolving socialist citizen (7). The successful entries were the ones that found a solution to the criticized hygienic problems in the cities and found the way to overcome traditional street-based urban design. Nevertheless, none of the designs were selected to be implemented because „none of them met the qualitative standpoint and the requirements of the competition guidelines to a sufficient degree as to be awarded a first or a second prize“ (ibid). Five third prizes were granted to projects which were seen a potential inspiration for the further, definitive preparation of the concept of Petržalka

[16]

[14] Fig.14 Tibor Alexy, Ján Kavan, Filip Trnkus – Czechoslovakia

[17]

Fig.15 Shyojiro Yamane, Denji Ogura, Yoshimasa Okuma, Masashi Miyakawa, Hiroshi Taniguchi, Jiro Onuma, Osamu Myojyo, Tsunehico Hongo – Japan Fig.16 Roland Rainer, Albin Arzberger, Herbert Karer – Austria

[15]

Fig.17 George Vernon Russel, Anton Jemric, spolupracovníci: John Mc Keown Jr., Lynne Paxton – USA

Compared to the capitalist West, the centralized planning of the state socialism created an environment with „enviable conditions for realization of the ideas and plans“ (Mora-

[18]

Fig.18 Karel Typovský, Ing. arch. Jaroslav Nováček, Ing. arch. Vít Adamec - Czechoslovakia

(7) A political program announced by Alexander Dubček (First secretary of the Presidium of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia) in April 1968. It was a process of mild democratization and political liberalization that would still enable the Communist Party to maintain real power. It initiated a reform known as »Prague Spring« which, on the night of 20-21 August 1968 was crushed by the Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia. (8) Normalization is referred to as a phase of extreme state control and political repression during 1970s and 1980s.

(9) At first the project was being prepared by the Office of Chief Architect of Bratislava led by Jan Steller (10) source: TASR

včíková 2012). In a centrally planned state with the control over the entire material stock truly opened the horizons of possibilities. Frank Lloyd Wright was also heard to be saying that even though the socialist society opens up this possibility, the realization of such ideas is far from automatic (ibid). At this point, the typical modernist approach toward the city planning - the determination of the parameters resulting into a spatial formula applied as a top-down approach - was already experiencing a crisis and began to be questioned internationally. The competition for Petržalka announced in 1966 took place in a phase of attempts to implement a »socialism with the human face« (7) and a certain level of liberalization of the system while the conditions in the planning environment were characterized by creative stamina. After the Soviet invasion in August 1968, the situation has rapidly changed being followed by a massive political repression. After the enthronement of the pro-Moscow regime, the normalization phase (8) began, which meant severe restrictions for society and for the planning. Building of the capital city became the priority, with Petržalka in the spotlight. The disturbance in the society after implement the post-invasion regime was meant to be silenced by the improvement of the urban environment by solving the housing shortage and providing increased living standards for everybody. The final design drafted by the architectural duo Chovanec and Talaš from the Centralized institute Stavprojekt (9) included some ideas from the outcome of the competition. The team was selected because of their early experiences with designing of the housing estates in Bratislava during the early socialist phase and were therefore entrusted with such important project. The design development did not get by without complications though. The influence of the radically worsened social situation, rigid orthodox political system, as well as the continuous altering of the assignment, such as enlarging the capacity from 100 000 to 150 000 inhabitants, disturbed the fluent progress of the project. Finally, on the 1st of April 1973, the permission was issue and on the 2nd of April the official beginning of the construction began (10).

The final master plan was strict in applying the method of dividing the area into several individual sectors, following the request to overcome the traditional urban structure based on the orthogonal order. Another significant design characteristics was the plan to segregate the motorized traffic and pedestrians. The bearing zone of the whole area was planned to be the central axis - a main boulevard containing the main traffic artery with the speed train (the subway) as well as rich social and cultural facility content. The Southern Sector was meant to challenge the known and implement the unknown. The embodiment of the futuristic visions such as high-tech solutions and previously never constructed urban experiments was the best way to show the socialist ambitions. To the

PetrĹžalka (Engerau) in 1753

PetrĹžalka (Engerau) in 1906

other side of the Danube with the historical city center, Petržalka was the exact antidote and a representation of the »really existing socialism« (11). Modernist ideas prevalent in the planning approaches at the time precisely reflected the structure of the project. The original plan was to divide the project into several phases in form of milestones that were meant to be finished gradually. The design is building up a new layer each decade, as to be seen on the conceptual section (Fig.20). These stages of planning, a vision for the year 1980, 1990 and 2000 were touching specific areas of the district. For example the main boulevard as the main axis as a one of the most complex parts had to be build in accordance with the technical and economic possibilities given in a specific time frame, for some of the attributes that were planned to be implemented were not invented yet (12). Obviously, some of these proposals went beyond possible for that time, raising concerns about actually managing such design. The first was a question about to what extent are these imaginaries realistic, the other was if they not just a political agenda to perpetuate the socialist ideology. Zooming out from the practical issues or politics, one additional reason was present. Moravčíková notes that Marxist ideology, which built the central pillar of socialist thought of the regime as the final phase of the societal evolution (2011) and cites Boris Groys, who states that „according to Marx’s teachings on dialectical and historical materialism, the socialist revolution (13) is the final stage on the path of the dialectical development“ (Moravčíková 2011:201). She further notes that „no other revolutionary changes in society were expected, only an undisturbed, continual development, giving hope for the gradual realization of the plan, however fantastic“. With such an assumption, any problem or postponement would be seen as mere issue of the time, as all of the aspects would not be connected and depended on anything else that the state and would still with the inevitability of the evolution lead towards the idea“ (ibid). Despite the courageous plans and visions accompanying the design process in the late 1960s and the early 1970s, following decade witnessed the real effects of the concerns. The societal atmosphere worsened in the 1980s and objection against the regime started to appear in greater scale. The mass housing district as a unit to be serving in its complexity was out of reach. Still, the first completed panel house went through its statutory approval on the 3rd August 1977 on Romanova street. Shortly after that Petržalka welcomed its first residents. Despite many harsh critiques, Petržalka notably exceeded considering what the newly built district usually offers, as well as compared to the other freshly finished districts in Bratislava. Atlas of mass housing estates in Bratislava lists facilities, schools or pre-schools that could be considered a great success given the circumstances. After only 6 years of finishing the construction of the panel houses, the district was already accommodating 100 000 inhabitants. The conditions in the district

(11) It is still debated by the scholars if socialism really existed.

(12) Publication Modern and/ or Totialitarian in Architecture of the 20th Century in Slovakia speaks about features such as automatically operated high-speed train line, moving sidewalks or individual transport powered by force-fields (13) Communism was in fact the ultimate goal and the final stage of socialism

Fig.19 [top] Sketch of the centralized axis along the subway line offering the complexity of the facilities Fig.20 [left] Conceptual section of the axis displaying the separated layers of transport and movement

were mapped in the documentary Služby v Petržalke (Services in Petržalka) from 1985. It introduces the issue by comparing the complex facility network in the centre of the city and »the other side of the bank«. It defines the needs of the dweller as an »urban creature of the new age«, which according to the footage also means to have an access to the complex selection of services right in the neighborhood close to the very own residence. Due to the facility construction being delayed for around two years after the housing, „for seven services out of ten, the residents have to cross to the other bank“. While the national committee was being obligated to open and enable access to the service facilities 6 weeks after moving in, to solve this problem, temporary compensatory facilities were arranged. People were asked about their level of satisfaction with the services and reported „no services so far on Dvory II. and Dvory III.“ (14) or „absolutely no facilities, not even the basics“. Others were aware that „there should be a dry-cleaning in Lúky V.“, they heard about a „hair-dresser somewhere in the South of the Lúky sector, always being full“ or that they „visited a shoe repair and a tailor in Háje“. Overall, there were accepting attitudes saying that „it is a completely new district, so it is understandable that not everything is finished yet“ and that mostly „it has not been a problem so far to go to the city center“. Partially there were people reporting having „everything they need“ and that „the district has absolutely everything it should offer“. Despite some deficits, the residents tended not to commit to a serious criticism on the camera. The majority of them waited for the apartment for a longer period of time and such district significantly advanced their living situation. In an interview with Emilia, who moved into the district in 1979 with her young family, I spoke to about the conditions the district really offered: „When we moved in, there wasn’t so much around. But we lived in Dvory [the sector closer to the city and the Danube river], there was more built already. We lived in one of those houses with the terrace [elevated platform with shared space in the parter of the house], we had a grocery store, pharmacy, restaurant and and some store with household items. I couldn’t complain much […]. Besides, it was wonderful in the house, we knew everyone, I had many colleagues from my work there and we were laughing when saw each other after we moved in…people were saying ‚oh they put you here too?‘ But at that time, you know, people didn’t complain, you were glad you had your house and your peace, what else would we want?“ Sharp critiques of some psychologists and sociologists have not penetrated the psyche of the inhabitants to a great extent. From the very beginning, people were seen to be trying to find a way to acclimatize in the new neighborhood which led to a gradual acceptance, as is the natural adaption process of a resident adapting to his or her environment. »A concrete jungle« as Petržalka is being termed in slang, did not seem to be so incompatible with the human nature as critiques predicted, nor it was necessarily teaching people dis-

(14) Petržalka is divided into three main sectors - Dvory, Lúky a Háje, which have their own sub-sectors marked in Roman numerals

cipline, as presumed by Le Corbusier. Rather it took a completely different route, the one that no scenarios at that time have considered.

CRITICISM, DISCOURSE, LEGACY

CRITISICM AND LEGACY American architect and representative of the postmodernist movement Charles Jencks has demonstratively rejected mass housing, marking the demolition of the Saint Louis estate as the end of the modern era. Severe doubts have been expressed related to this spatial concept worldwide, confirming its controversy and experimental nature. German psychoanalyst Alexander Mitscherlich examines this problem in his work The Inhospitability of the Cities: An Encouragement to Disquiet published in the 1965 as one of the first complex critiques of the mass housing. In communist Czechoslovakia, there has been a very little room for criticism because of the radically different political situation. Despite that, severe doubts occurred in the middle of the 1960s. The end of the decade was the last chance to express any disregards towards the state-mandated policies before the arrival of the strict pro-Moscow oriented regime and the normalization phase. A documentary from the 1969 Tu rastie budúcnosť (Here grows the future) comprehends this ambivalence towards the districts, psychologists debate the influences on the psyche of a child growing up in this kind of environment. Psychologists are foremost expressing concerns about the long-term mental damage of the future generations and point out that the possible results of their assumptions will only be observable in few decades. Document also describes the social circumstances and the atmosphere around acquiring the apartment: „Everyone needs an apartment nowadays, there is a lot of those, who tensely wait for the keys. In that phase, they are not concerned about how the environment will look like. […] The most of the young people coming to the districts, even before they buy the furniture or anything needed, they just place the baby cradle in between the four empty walls. When the baby arrives, it constitutes a complete revolution in the typified apartments. […] When the little human starts to walk, it is moving in the world of restrictions and limitations. In one or two years it is leaving the apartment and explores the hallway, the stairs and the entrance hall. The whole generation of children grow up in the environment that is not natural and does not ensure the conditions for the world exploration and play. We can hardly predict what this is going to cause in the future, but we can already observe some consequences now. It is a revolution in children’s play, there is no room for fantasy. The children have to very modest in their game selection. But what’s the worst, behind every corner, there is danger. We can hardly calculate the losses of life and the unimaginable health damage yet, but we can observe the statistical tendencies over the years already. But there are consequences we can not mark in numbers. […] That is a destiny of the small district creature, which’s world is defined by the large monotonous boxes made from the concrete and panels. The influence of all of this is

maybe not fully demonstrated yet, but the psychologists are confident in their standpoints.“ The scenery portrays an unfinished district with the housing blocks surrounded by piles of soil, a child slowly walking across the rooms, stairs and streets, nostalgically looking out of the window and an inscenation of a car accident in the end, all accompanied by eery ambient music. The critiques were often a mixture of the fear of the unknown and the knowledge about already existing deficiencies and structural defects of the prefabricated systems and errors in the management (Moravčíková et. al. 2011). The criticism originated in the planning and research field as well as number of designers start to mention „lack of comprehension of the complexity of the problem on the estates, the insufficient time for addressing such extensive urban studies, the lack of a good theoretical basis“ (Skoček 1965:119 cit. by Moravčíková et al. 2011). The engineers on the sites responsible for the construction process were reporting that „the planning methods do not know of a master to whom the investors and suppliers at work on the entire estate could submit their incomplete results“ (Beňuška 1965, ibid) followed by the complaint by the employee of the main architect’s office that „no one knows about the of inspection and completion of these entire estates“ (ibid). Despite these conditions, after toughening of the regime in the 1970s and the population growth, there was more pressure to produce even higher quantities of the housing units and continue with the outlined concept without any significant attempts for improvement.

(15) Samizdat was a form of dissident activity across the Eastern bloc in which individuals reproduced censored and underground publications by hand and passed the documents from reader to reader.

In the 1980s, criticism conceptualized by the intelligentsia escalated into claims that the mass housing concept is a „significant retardation of living conditions behind the needs of social development“ (Zapletalová, Zeman, Nižňanský 1988, cit. by Moravčíková 2011), gradually merging with the critiques of the political regime in general and finally resulting into samizdat publication (15) initiated by Slovenský zväz ochrancov prírody a krajiny SZOPK (Slovak Alliance for Protection of the Nature and the Landscape) binding contributions by prominent Slovak academics, psychologists, architects, sociologists and conscious public „providing a detailed analysis of the individual aspects of the living environment in Bratislava and drawing attention to the negative effects of totalitarian social control“ (ibid). When we compare the critiques of the professional community with the attitude that the new inhabitants of the district adopted, we observe large differences. We must understand the differences in position and the social status. The inhabitants were well aware that there simply is not any other accommodation available. Many of them were waiting for the apartment in the brand new district for a long time, what more, for the majority of them it was still step forward in terms of the living standard. Additionally, people were mostly adapted to the regime order which was strictly prohibiting any open criticism towards the state and its efforts. Those, who had some complaints, mostly kept

it to themselves, the other did not think in these measures at all and just accepted the circumstances and gradually adapted to the environment. In reality, there was no just little room for criticism, there were also mostly few relevant reasons to complain in the life of »everyday socialist citizen«. It was a realm consisting of different standards and expectations compared to other contexts, especially the capitalist system. Socialist society dwelled on simplicity and basic functionality, and even though people were compensating the lack of individuality in their private spheres, for the most, the socialist regimes has had an impact on their perception of ‚having‘ and ‚using‘ as well. When we look at the socio-psychological realm from today’s perspective, many circumstances seem shocking, especially in today’s world of extreme excess and complexity. In the given context, the circumstances were not understood as extreme or scarce to the inhabitants. Then again, even though mass housing district was (and still is) accommodating people with no concern of their education of social class (16), the truth was that the regular citizens who were not voicing their opinions created the majority of people. On the contrary, the intelligentsia, who was actively formulating the critiques and has also often suffered the consequences, was in the minority. Their influence is undeniable considering following events in 1989. But when we speak about urban identity of one district, the portion of certain people perceiving things in a certain way, it is important to talk about quantitative factors as well. One of my respondents, formerly being from a small rural settlement in Western Slovakian region working for the State chemical company, describes her process of assimilation and the 1980s: „We moved in 1979, among the first ones. I was very happy we could finally move in, we waiting for so long. […] It was quite hard at first, I wasn’t used to that at all as a villager. There, everything was so huge, it was like in those movies now. We got an apartment on the 9th floor, some people were saying they wish to get one somewhere lower, but we got one of those ones that people didn’t want. During the first months I had nightmares…I was afraid that the kids will fall out from the window or I don’t know…I was just afraid. But it passed, everything passes. After that it was really great. We knew almost everyone, we could walk to the park, to the Danube, there was everything and within 5 minutes walk. My mother [living in the village] often asked me, ‚how can you even survive there‘ and then I say ‚I have supermarket two minutes from the house…I love supermarkets [laughs]. And now when I moved back here [to the village], somebody has to drive me or I have to take a bus…I really miss it, my friends, my apartment and everything. I would move back if I could. I travel there at least once a week, I can’t stand being here for too long. I spent almost my entire life there, I still long for my home.” Many other respondents were reacting similarly. They claimed they had to get used to it, which was a significant challenge, but mostly they were high-lighting the positives about

(16) or in class-less socialist society the official version was that a class does not exist and everyone is equal; in practice it was more complicated.

the experience (having a sunny apartment, facilities in walking distance, close to the city etc.). When I asked precisely about the socialist period, there were no strong reactions or disapproval of the circumstances. What they evaluated negatively was the condition of the district during the 1990s. Emilia and Jozef comment on the matter: Emilia: „I can speak for myself, I have never had any problems. Communism…well how to put it…we felt the ‚strong hand of the regime‘, there was no way around it. But also, when I was growing up we were taught manners and helping each other, looking after one another. There was everything, and again, we weren’t millionaires nor we had fancy cars, but we didn’t have to be afraid that we won’t meet the ends. Later everybody for themselves, nobody cared about anything and anybody. So the real trouble came after communism. And I think if the regime wasn’t so strict, people wouldn’t become so wild after that. For me, the real hell started after ‘89. That was much worse than any communism.“ Jozef: „When I moved in, it was just bare houses. But there were brigades [voluntary work], you know, during the previous regime. I went every Saturday and when I had some free time. It was like that before, people gathered and did things together. But for some it was…you know, forced-voluntary [laughs]. But we didn’t mind, we needed sidewalks in the end. […] The regime, well there were rules. And when you followed them, there was no problem. I think it was better, everybody had everything, you couldn’t jump too much, but you can’t do that now either. It is the same, except now you cannot count on anything. I’m not sure if this is the freedom they were talking about. How is this better?“ After the regime collapse in November 1989, the criticism peaked as a result of the anti-communist moods in the heady first days of the new post-socialist era. Everything representing the former regime was disclaimed. Mass housing districts fell into disregard, common slang describing them only as »rabbit hatches« or »concrete jungle«. Architects and planners started to discuss the model of urban planning and re-definition of the housing estates became of the central topics among the professionals, prevalently debated in the forum organized by the architect Bohuslav Kraus in 1990. As architectural and technological problems were named limited range of architectonic expression, uniformity and monotony, non-flexible lay-outs of the flats, non-formulated public space and poor quality the structural assembly (Moravčíková 2012). There were three socio-economic key aspects resonating strongly in the early discussion (ibid): property relations, responsibility for operation and maintenance of the panel buildings and the relationship of the citizens to the state. Up till now, they carry the fundamental load of the transformation of the mass housing district. Even though these problems and mistakes have been assigned as the result of the failure of the communist regime and its planning, and some of them certainly were (for example poor quality due to the pressure on fast production), the fact

is that many of these characteristics were just mere following of the Athens Charter specifying the principles for the modernist planning in general and have »failed« in capitalist countries as well. In a study conducted in the early 1990s, Jozef Brath depicted the main deficiencies of the mass housing estates from the architectural and urbanist point of view (1993):

(1)

unclear functional assignment of the space

(2)

absence of the spatial hierarchy

(3)

illogical pedestrian routes etc., comparing to the real use of the space

(4)

unclear relations between the spaces

(5)

lack of connection and continuity between the inner and outer spaces

(6) lack of fit and active space for reinforcement of the networks, recreation and sharing (7)

unaddressed questions of safety, intimacy and relating to the space

From the sociological point of view, Dagmar Petríková formulates (1999):

(1)

inappropriate use of space (un-use, mis-use, abandonment)

(2)

lack of interconnection between the spaces in terms of social exchange

(3)

spaces with unassigned types of interaction

(4)

lack of spaces suitable for sharing

(5)

public spaces fail to provide basic security

(6)

fear and indifference towards the public space

By comparing both analyses, we see a clear overlap of the characteristics of the deficiencies in the physical and social sphere. They both refer and ovelap in their problematics. These deficiencies will be later considered in the proposal. The debates about failure are often referring to the failure of the modernist ideas and and livable aesthetics. Eric Dluhosch referred the mass housing in Czechoslovakia as to „one of the most depressing collections of banality in the history of the small country“ followed by the statement that „it will be difficult - if not impossible - to erase it from its map for decades if not centuries“ (Teige, Dluhosch 2002). In Frampton’s words, communist period was a „vast and destructive time creating an impassable »chasm« that distanced the remote people of the interwar period from those living in the 1990s“ (cit. by Zarecor 2011). Dluhosch’s statements depicts the opinion popular among older scholars, who say that architecture of the post-war period perverted and distorted the project of interwar modernism and claim that the buildings are the exact anti-thesis of the »socialist paradise« (Teige, Dluhosch 2002). Also, many scholars have refused to reflect on the communist period completely. In this context, it is important to ask: how do we define failure? Do we speak about failure of the socialist ideals of the self-less citizen or entire modernism, because they have failed to become what they meant to be? Did they fail to discipline to society? It all depends on the criteria we have set to define this failure, the »ideal« we are comparing to. Or perhaps the wrong anticipation of the future development, the psyche of the society and other multiple factors to consider, which were present at the time of shaping the criteria that will define if it failed or not? If this is the case, then yes, the goal has not been reached. The mass housing did not re-shape the human into functional being following schematic ways of living. Socialist system expected to gradually unfold towards its ultimate goals, did not reach the destination. Also, when we speak of failure, it often resembles something definite. It has failed, therefore it has reached its destination as being unsuccessful, and no other success will ever be manifested. In many (Western) countries, mass housing was marked as a failure and has been demolished, simply ending their existence. In countries of Central and Eastern Europe the districts still stand, many of them start to be appreciated for their unique designs or successful urban design (e.g. Lesná in Brno, Czech Republic), others have inhabitants defending them and perceive them as an integral part of their identity. In such case, is it still considered a failure when people are still willing to dwell in it, care for it and appropriate it, and foremost that they identify with it? Arguments of the professional community are often claims that it is just out of necessity. Partly, I do agree. If the development has been disturbed by severe socio-economic and political events causing chaos, it takes time to sober, evaluate and reflect. From the perspective of an everyday

citizen during that phase, often daily life is filled with struggle and many things occur out of necessity. During the process of overcoming this phase, other processes start to happen as a result of re-organization of all the realms and their structures. In a mass housing district, the meaning of the ownership, private property, relations between the private and the public, of one’s concern, the understanding of »own« space and the responsibility for it. These all factors re-shape the way of identification with the space and localization of oneself within the space. They all foster the emergence of new routines in everyday life that re-shape the district, its physical and social realms.

HUMANIZING PETRŽALKA „You are on a housing estate. Take a blanket under your arm and try to lie for a bit on the grass. Take advantage of the warm day. Try to have breakfast in the shade of the trees. Try to fins focal points of social life, or places for children to play when it’s raining or cold. Try to enjoy the cultured preparation, the harmony and elegance of your own building. Try to find the charms of life in your estate, Just try!“ (Iľja Skoček, 1965) As stated, inhabitants of the mass housing districts create almost three quarters of the Bratislava population. After the regime change, the people were no longer tied to their »assigned« homes in the panel houses. Theoretically, they were able to relocate to another residencies of choice. Practically, it did not happen and the mass housing districts did not experience any depopulation. The financial situation of the vast majority did not offer any prospects of acquiring higher standard commercial living (17), so relocation would mostly mean to relocate to another mass housing district, if we consider not changing the city of residence. Any radical solutions often applied in the Western Europe like demolishment of the whole estates, temporary relocation of the residents due to renovation projects or permanent re-settlement of the whole area were impossible economically and socially. Consequently, studies and projects about »humanization« of the estates appeared on the professional scene. Moravčíková notes that the chosen strategy was to implement „structured and targeted strategies, differing not only with respect to individual states, but even with the respect to the individual apartment blocks“ (2011). They were supposed to „eliminate the negative impacts of modern urban design and poor building quality of Bratislava’s housing estates“ (ibid). The first research appeared already in 1991, led by Marián Hanzalík performed at State Institute of building design and standardization (Žbirka 1993, cit. by Moravčíková 2012). The result of this study was a strategy describing specific »bridging steps«, as the term is used. Hanzalík addresses the issues specified earlier in studies by Brath and Petríková. He stresses that it is important to „provide the pre-

(17) The availability of a different type living other that mass housing was extremely limited at this time.

conditions for determining the real problems among people“ and notes the collective of inhabitants consists of different generations (1993). These two points I consider absolutely crucial, so far none of the planning approaches and research projects have come with a study completely considering them. What do they really mean and why is it difficult? Determining the real problems among people forces researchers to look at the environment as a product of complex relations and abandoning the position of planning based on functionality and calculations. It means abandonment of the planning perspective that has been in practice for several decades before the shift was occurring. By using this approach, the inhabitant is reduced to a number, a functional unit without organically changing preferences and a whole spectrum of psychological reactions to the events that occur around him or her. Considering the fact that the collective of inhabitants in the mass housing district consists of different generations means that each generation has distinct patterns of practicing routines which have been formed during different times, by different regimes and social system. A person born in the pre-war time, who’s spent his or her productive age during socialism has different thinking patterns and routines comparing to a person born in the 1960s whose perception during his or her young age has been formed in later stage of socialism. Naturally, the regime and social structure are not the only factors to form someone’s perception, yet they are important to consider especially when it comes to perceiving the environment and acting in space. When it comes to »humanization attempts«, Petržalka was in the centre of attention. Professionals in urban planning and sociological research expressed concerns in the early 1990s and joined forces in the competition in 1991 organized by the city council of Bratislava. The conceptual results were compared in a study by Imrich Jankovič and his team, eventuating into a „set of basic principles for the shaping of the environment Petržalka“ (Moravčíková 2012) proposing many formal changes in the urban environment. Contradictory suggestions appeared as well, such as „retaining the continuity of the original conception of Petržalka“, but at the same time „rebuilding the original structure“ (ibid). While the theme resonated through the entire decade, but none of the proposals, conceptions or principles have been transformed into tangible interventions. All of them remained ideas as well as all the other initiatives from the district government, often popping up as a part of political agenda before the local elections quickly dissolving afterwards. Petržalka then gradually became a symbol of unresolved issues. During the 1990s, the system of constructing the city was chaotic. The transition from the centralized urban planning to basically no conceptual guidelines of the city creation was the reason for unregulated construction reacting almost exclusively to demands of the real estate market. Even though Petržalka’s »inherited« infrastructure was not finished, it

was built well enough (and leaving enough spatial voids for capitalist projecting) to maintain the interest of the investment companies for it guaranteed easy and fast accessibility to the city. The investment was directed primarily on the facilities of the commercial sector and office space. It stood in the exact opposition to the principles articulated in the proposals and research studies. With no respect to the original urban planning concept and the chaotic infill of the urban space was a reflection of „exercising the public governance over construction in the city“ (Kachlík 1993:41). Additionally, the legislative deficiencies in the sphere of land use and construction activity, corruption among the government officials and the inability of public servants to take basic action against the problems made the »humanization attempts« impossible (ibid). The obvious defects in the planning approach did not improve even in the following decade. In 2007 the new regulation and zoning plan for Bratislava was approved, still lacking basic strategy for the future of the city. Even if it was, a strategy plan also can not supplement the detailed planning or development of the methods dealing with specific issues in the particular districts. Till now, there have still hardly been any steps taken towards a comprehensive development of the objectives for a future strategy. Instead, current projects resemble a »patchwork strategy« towards urbanism, dedicating limited time and resources in order to cover up the urgent issues.

HERITAGE DISCOURSE The beginning of the 21st century was marked with reigning international debate about the legacy of the modernist heritage. Mass housing as one of the particular themes invoked lot of ambivalent attitudes. In Western Europe, it became a symbol of the communist bloc which in some cases caused refusal to accept it as a part of the urban and architectural heritage. This tactics was mainly to be seen in Germany, which has disassembled and demolished the majority of the estates in the Eastern part of its territory, aiming to (formally) establish the closure with the socialist past. On the contrary, countries like France, Netherlands or Great Britain achieved good results in developing the renovation strategies, many successfully implemented. In the post-communist countries, we observe a different situation. The estates are continuously inhabited and protected from the demolishment or any larger intervention by their own inhabitants. Moravčíková notes that these radically different social factors behind the creation of mass housing continue to influence the current and the future physical form, far more than could have been predicted on the basis of similarity in their urban and architectural conceptions (2011). The appearance, the physicality - the tangible - is therefore only one of the aspects to consider. The lack of research on the social realm also causes the premise that the repetitiveness and homogeneity of the form stand for social patterns of the same qualities, and also that they are that way regardless on the location of the estate. The cultural landscape does not seem to have much connection to this issue. It creates false assumptions about the behavior of the »mass housing citizen« and often leads to non-realistic or shallow future visions. For this sake, it is important to focus on the »intangibles« of the mass housing district as to define the factors that are present in the social network and create the cultural landscape of the districts.

INTANGIBLE HERITAGE Immaterial manifestations of culture, patterns, routines or rituals represent the variety of living of humanity. Even though it is intangible, i.e. it does not exist as a materia, it is the most important vehicle of the culture, its diversity and »glue« among the people that are part of this culture (Lenzerini 2011). The creators and bearers of these concepts and meanings repeatedly recreate their content as a response to their ancestry, social environment of the communities they inhabit. Lenzerini recognizes this mechanism as »self-identifica-

tion« and pronounces it as the main constitutive factor of intangible heritage as well as the essential element of cultural identity (ibid). Culture cannot be abridged to its tangible products, because it is continuously living and evolving (Williams 1960:11). It explains the essence of the heritage as it is not the tangible properties that create the essentials of the living of the human community, as the tangible matter is a result of the intangible essence. All the immaterial elements that are considered as defining for a certain community, from the whole nation to the smaller tribe-like groups, possess intrinsic identity. They possess unique and distinctive aspects comparing to other groups and communities. The community therefore acts based on this distinctive idiosyncrasy. Lenzerini also points the existing trend of globalization and fastened pace of development, criticizing the fact that it is rapidly tending towards uniformity (ibid). Uniformity, to him, means a loss of culture, loss of heritage. From a broader perspective, this is true. Loss of diversity of people practicing different routines, which means a »wipe-out« of the diversity of cultures is particularly linked to intangible heritage. Uniformity seems to be placed on the other side of the spectrum, opposite to culture and identity. Does it mean that anything generic and uniform cannot have identity? Are uniformity and identity excluding each other? And if comes to the »wipe-out«, is the new space after is barren and cannot grow and foster any new identities and communities? Loss of culture, linkage to the past in order to »conceive totality« was in case of Petržalka a reality. On the tangible level, there was a complete demolishment of the original community, a fast and direct replacement for a new, different, »uniform« environment and programmatic installment of a new community - a collective of people who had to adapt to a new social environment, but also a to a physical environment they have never experienced. A new kind of the city - the city of tomorrow. Traditional understanding of the heritage recognizes it as an extreme intervention to the culture with irreplaceable losses. In societies of the former Socialist bloc, pervasive political regimes causing the disturbance of the cultural continuity are now perceived as traumatizing. In cases like this, how does one approach this kind of past as a heritage? How does one identify with it?

Fig.21 [top right] Petržalka in the beginning of 1970s Fig.22 [left] Petržalka around the beginning of the 1980s (Rovniakova street)

CONTROVERSIES IN HERITAGE INTERPRETATION „Forget communism…or sell it“ (Zoltán Duijsin 2007) Architecture of socialist modernism is the »heritage« that people of Bratislava confront everyday. They are not just mere monuments or statues with outdated meaning or museum showpieces. Even though the majority of the statues of the communist leaders were destroyed right after the revolution, the city consists of the majority of the communist architecture. They are an integral part of the city and functioning facilities of daily use. Few years back, a public debate arouse around this topic. How do we deal with the communist heritage? Do we want to present it? If not - why? If yes - how? What is going to be the story? The meaning of the communist heritage in Central and Eastern Europe became a topic from the early 1990s, as it was necessary to reflect on the previous regime and its downfall. On the first glance it is fairly obvious that the city is strongly influenced by the communist period. Tourists from the West started to travel to see the world behind the former Iron Curtain. They see these cities as semi-oriental, different, dangerous, deficient and even exotic (Todorova 1999). The number of the tourists particularly increased after Slovakia (along with other countries of the former Socialist bloc) became a member of the European Union. After involvement of the scholars, it received a term »communist heritage tourism« (Caraba 2011). It represents not only learning about the place and sightseeing, but also an additional aspect of obscurity and nostalgia. Number of blog posts and reviews of such traveling trips are to be found online, one of them disclose the experience of the Western tourist: „I have been reading up on the Slovakian capital when I was planning my trip. My friends told me it isn’t much, it certainly isn’t Prague, that I can see the sights in half a day. We had been traveling for a month and I didn’t fancy touring yet another old city with beer bars and souvenirs, as they all looked the same. When we arrived in Bratislava, I was stunned. It was full of communist architecture. It was a hot day in August and the streets were empty. The scorching sun shone on the bare concrete blocks, giving the city post-apocalyptic atmosphere, which magnified the ‚Big Brother‘ feel of those towering buildings. It was so unique. There should be the ‚must see sights‘ on the touristic websites, I didn’t come across this on any website. It is treading the fine line between utopia and dystopia.“ (18) It was a common practice for Western countries to promote the legacy of communism as a main attraction, while the local tourist agencies had no interest in promoting the communist heritage. Even though this interest to see the »other side« emerged right after the

(18) source: TripAdvisor

events in 1989, it became more popular only during the first years of the third millennium (Caraba 2011). Before that, there was no touristic program devoted to the presentation the Communist heritage. A media platform Bratislavské noviny (Bratislava newspaper) published a short article with title ‚Could Petržalka attract the tourists‘ in 2007 with these reflective thoughts of the author: „Yesterday night, as I was on my way home, I was looking at the panorama of the million lights. Even though I’m not from Petržalka, I think that these could be very attractive for foreign tourists. It is a typical concrete district, the biggest in the Central Europe, from the socialist era. Could it be interesting for the Western tourists? […] They didn’t experience it as well as they don’t know the endless blocks of houses. Does it sound crazy? I think that people get bored with just looking at the historical centers, maybe they would like to see something different. Something what they cannot find anywhere else. I know that everyone rambles about Petržalka, but what if we could actually use it effectively?“

(19) source: Authentic Slovakia

(20) source: Time for Slovakia

Couple of years after that, a touristic program related to the communist period was developed. Even though there are no tours and programs facilitated by the traditional touristic agencies, there are many offered by alternative platforms or local enthusiasts. In Slovakia, it is for example a cyclo-tour Panelstory through the mass housing districts in Bratislava or a tour post-communist Bratislava facilitated by an independent platform that promises to explore the „off-the-beat-track of Bratislava - concrete housing estate area Petržalka, the Soviet monument Slavín, abandoned factories, WWII bunker line, the former Iron Curtain border zone and loads of communist-era architecture“. It offers to bring the „story of Bratislava in the 20th century - political changes, city’s location on the border, contrasts between rich and poor, development of the society and urbanism, all in a legendary 1970’s Czechoslovak car Škoda or 8-seater van Škoda 1203“ (19). While these were mostly aimed at the travelers with regular-sized budget, with a tour of an approximate length of 2-4 hours, there is an offer of a high-end 4-day Retro Tour through the country with a pick-up and the drop-off from the airports in Bratislava, Budapest of Vienna to get a „first-hand experience of an everyday life in communist Czechoslovakia“ with the „communist drinks, snacks and retro disco“ (20).

Among all the obscurities, Petržalka seems to be one of the most attractive ones. A platform for travelers hosts this review of the area: „The majority of Bratislava locals live in prefabricated concrete blocks such as this concrete jungle, south of the Danube. As one of Central Europe’s largest socialist housing blocks, Petržalka may look forbidding, but it’s worth a visit.“ (21)

(21) source: LonelyPlanet

On the well-known global touristic platform, a traveler from Norway submits this comment and a question: „We are interested to see some of the old communist architecture, we read that Petržalka is an area to see such architecture. I wonder if it’s regarded as offensive to take pictures of the architecture here? Is the area safe by day?“

Fig.22,23,24 source: Authentic Slovakia

While nobody seems to question the interest of the tourists to photograph the architecture in the Old Town, a tour to see apartment blocks seems rather odd and arouses suspicion among some locals. When I asked the locals in Petržalka, if they know about the tours in their district, the reactions varied. Some, especially younger generations, were familiar with the concept. They evaluated these efforts as good, while some of the adding that „at least something that brings a bit of a profit“. Many others were not very fond of the idea asking if „they just come to look at as like at the animals“, saying that „they [tourists] have never seen such a thing in their lives for sure“. Another stared with inapprehensive looks pointing at the houses and asking of „they come to look at this?“. A middle-aged woman Marta explains what she thinks about the presence of the tourists: „If somebody, like some foreigners came here to look at me and photographed me, or our house, I would not like that. So we live in a panel house, so what? It’s not that I’m ashamed that I live in Petržalka. But I’m not a cinema!“ [P: What if they never saw a panel house? It is interesting to them.] „Still…you know, I saw you taking pictures here and I thought that you are a tourist. I was wondering right away what you are doing here taking pictures…I still don’t really understand what is there to photograph.“

On the other day, I met a group of American tourists bathing in the Draždiak lake and asked them about their motivation to visit Petržalka. Two women and one man in their twenties elaborate: „I had a classmate form Slovakia in the exchange program. We are visiting her and also we like to travel to some unusual destinations. For Americans, Slovakia is definitely something out of reach. I really wanted to see how it is in Eastern Europe. There is this stereotypical picture.“ [P: What did you hear? What are these stereotypes?] „That it’s very poor, cold and desolate, and that people are very unfriendly. There are some movies, also about Slovakia, not very nice. It’s actually very hot in here right now [laughs] and very nice.“ „I really like it a lot, it is so calm, the water is great and clean, it’s not full. But to look at this [the panel houses] during swimming is really weird yeah…I have never seen anything like this. We wanted to see some communist buildings, we already visited some in the city. It is amazing, very impressive…but really you think like whoah, how did that happen?“

[P: Did you take any pictures?] „Oh yes, many, in the city…it looks so good on the pictures. But not here, we did not know if that’s ok.“ [P: Why?] „We didn’t want to offend anyone.“

DISSONANCE HERITAGE AND THE PROCESS OF (RE-)IDENTIFICATION Interestingly, the interview extracts and the examples from the online servers deliver a similar message. It is attractive and worth seeing, but people are not sure if taking pictures would be offensive. The resident claims pride, but at the same time does not want to be seen as a part of it and presented to the foreigners. It is obviously a sensitive topic, as the responses are filled with strange mix of pride and shame or fascination and reluctancy. When I asked a Petržalka local to describe an apartment block, the answer was: „It’s an apartment block.“ When I asked a group of American tourists to describe it, the answer was: „It’s a communist apartment block.“ This as well represents the two-sidedness of how the heritage of the communist period is being currently approached. First is the position of the inhabitant of the city, taking part - some actively, some passively - on the collective effort to cope with the past and find a suitable interpretation for current situation while experiencing it as a daily environment, the majority used to it since their childhood. The other is a subject to tourism offering a strange and formerly forbidden sightseeings for travelers with an obscure taste. Light notes that besides the image that is produced by locals and fostered by tourists, there is a third party actively participating on its creation (2000). He notes that it is of major interest for the former communist countries, especially from the economic point of view, to develop an image that is not associated with communism (ibid). It is an unspoken general rule among the institutions that it is favorable to be drifting away from these associations, erase them or make them invisible. The effort should lead to the creation of a new institutionalized place identity that does not recall communism. The result is a conflict between two groups - one tending towards erasing the heritage in order to build a new contemporary image, and another one, existing community holding the organic urban memory. Additionally there is an association led by the professionals form the architectural and cultural field that claim that it is a part of the history and therefore it cannot be neglected and erased on demand. This conflict is a sign of a process of redefinition of the

collective social identity and the place identity (Balockaite 2012). The still ongoing transition is engaging in a „veritable orgy of historical revisionism of writing the communist period out of the past“ (Verdery 1999:112). Nancy Adler argues that this „ongoing negotiation of [what is] privileged to be remembered, what is officially disregarded, and what, in spite of official efforts at suppression, resists forgetting“ (2005). This is scientifically referred to as dissonance heritage (Ashworth, Tunbridge 1996, cit. by Balockaite 2012). According to Balockaite identity is closely linked to the issues of heritage (2012). Heritage, as the „contemporary use of the past“ (Ashworth, Graham 1997:381) directly ‚collaborates‘ with the meanings of the events and the way people identify with it. Identity is also integral to the tourism as it is a presentation of ‚what we are‘ (Balockaite 2012). Outer and inner conflicts of acceptance vs. refusal can be experienced as nostalgia or contradictory attitudes, such as mentioned mix of pride and shame. It does not represent the actual desire to return to the past, it symbolizes the ongoing discourse that is eventuating into a new destination. These ambivalent feelings and the process of coping with the unwanted past was firstly expressed in various ways. Kaczmarek and Young name three main strategies that post-socialist countries used to cope with the unwanted past: (1) Europeanization, (2) decommunization and (3) return to the pre-socialist age (2008). In terms of identity creation it means: (1) working towards development of the new ‚Western‘ image - contemporary, new and open, (2) physical erasure of the memorabilia of the communist period from the urban space and remodeling the landscape and (3) attempts to return to the Golden Age of the pre-socialist past, honoring the identity of that period known as „the sleeping beauty complex“ as reawakening of the past glory (Verdery 1999, cit. by Balockaite 2012). All three rely on the fact that in order to construct the new identity, the old has to be deconstruct or erased. Other scholars suggest other strategies to resolve this issue. They include decontextualization of the socialist heritage, spatial isolation or spatial/narrative reframing (ibid). They mostly involve specific cases like Berlin Wall, solitaire public buildings or removal of the socialist symbols from the daily environment. But what about the whole district and socialist towns?

DISSONANCE IN THE MASS HOUSING DISTRICT The planned socialist districts were the spatial and ideological units where each building, street and other built element has its position, value and meaning. The buildings did not emerge individually, they were planned as collaborative collective entities - microrayons (22). While the other cities and towns resurrected their pre-socialist past via the coping strategies, the removal of this type of legacy would be very difficult to achieve. Strategies as decontextualization, spatial isolation or spatial reframing are therefore hardly possible. Narrative re-framing is the strategy the current municipality is trying to apply, influenced by the efforts to re-frame the narratives on the national level. When it comes to choosing this strategy, we speak about re-narrating a discursive and material politically fostered systemic structures involving and developing an entire new type of community and personality. Even though the names of the streets and squares dedicated to the important socialist figures were all changed after 1989, the physicality of the district stayed the same. Petržalka was designed as the outpost of socialism, it is present everywhere. Concerning the physical environment, there is no place to return back as to the pre-socialist era as the only remains of the former rural community consists of the very few family houses from the original settlement on the Western periphery of the district. The official website of the district describes history of Petržalka from the 13th century until the year 1947 depicting important historical events, war battles, explanations of the name changes or different cultural influences. The communist period, construction process and spatial expansion are shortly mentioned as „the year 1973 [marked] as a beginning of the construction of the face of Petržalka as we know it today“ (23). The last paragraph contains a cheerful celebration of today’s condition of the district, briefly concluding that „from the minds of the people there has been gradually erased a long-term negative cultural imprint of the faded glory of the socialist era, disregard for the privacy, violence and crime“. The closing sentence ensures that „the prejudices against this place were eliminated thanks to the efforts of the district municipality“. Combination of strategies of narrative re-framing and Europeanization prove that beyond the typical challenges of the post-socialist transitions (privatization, change of the legal basis, social crisis, etc.), a further remark of the place identity (Balockaite 2012) is on the agenda of the district management. However, identities pursed by the officials and identities expressed by the inhabitants are rather incompatible. These discrepancies are also obvious from the way the public discourse is held. Despite the efforts to pronounce the socialist past as »erased from the minds of the people« and the prejudices as »eliminated thanks to the intervention of the officials«, these stay only vague statements and mere wishes that do not reflect on reality. Additionally, it is a sign of denial and even confirm

(22) Microrayon is a residential complex—a primary structural element of the residential area construction in former Communist countries

(23) source: petrzalka.sk

the lack of exchange and focus on the inhabitant. The real »organic« identity is proven to exist and rest on the foundations of the original community, experiences and memories of the residents related to the existing environment - the socialist urban design (see later in chapter Identity). The »real« identity cannot be artificially constructed or ordered like a product. The integral component of identity relies on the individual memories functioning as puzzle pieces creating a mosaic of the collective experience.

URBAN MEMORY AS AN IDENTITY CARRIER „We wander…surprised but not shocked by the continuous repetition of the same, the continuous movement across already vanished thresholds that leave only traces of their former status as places. Amidst the ruins of monuments no longer significant because deprived of their systemic status…walking on the dust in inscriptions no longer decipherable because lacking so many words…“ (Anthony Widler) The basic understanding of memory encompasses two aspects: a residue of the past experiences and the ability of the faculty, by which the past is being recollected (Crinson 2005). However the concept of urban memory is more complex. It can be meant as anthropomorphism - city having a memory, or more commonly it indicates that the city is a physical landscape and collection of objects and practices that enable the recollection on the past and that embody the past through city’s sequential building and rebuilding (ibid). Crinson notes that „the problem with memory in the contemporary usage is that is has become not so much a term of analysis […] and is often uncritically appropriated“ (2005:xii). Memory cannot be appropriated for it is associated with the personal, authentic, subaltern, acratic and humanized aspect in opposition to such matter as the institutional force or media who are deemed to be agents of amnesia (ibid). Maurice Halbwachs points out the contrast between the rationalized and instrumental version of the past. He marks such moment - a collective experience of a group of people recharging their commonality by a reference to the physical spaces and previous instances - a founding moment of collective identity (1950, cit. by Crinson 2005). Pierre Nora’s version is to compare history and memory - where history plays an archival role, a documentary evidence of an era, whereas memory is a „subject to dialectic of remembering and forgetting, unconscious distortions to it is subject vulnerable invidious ways to appropriation and manipulation, capable of lying dormant for long periods only to be suddenly reawakened“ (1996:3). Memory evokes loss, triggers the symptom of disappearance of an organic living moment located in the past. According to Nora, the environment, sites or »lieux de mémoire« embodying the incarnated memory serve as a compensation for this loss, based on which we are able to

detect, localize and recall the specificity of the trace - the memory (ibid). In a traditional city, memory obeys the historical periods (Crinson 2005). Urban memory in a traditional city with no particularly traumatizing past (which may be a subject to debate if such case exists) is when „the image of the city enables the inhabitants to identify with their past and present as a political, cultural and social entity“ (Vidler 1992:177). It is a city where monuments function as symbols of the past deeds, where the rhetoric is passed on spaces and objects out of which city constructs a memorial of itself - creating a memory theater (Vidler 1992:179). In socialist city, the memory of the pre-socialist past is sought to be erased. In post-socialist city, the memory of the socialist past is sought to be erased again. Each of the era represents a dialectical opposition to the preceding form of the city and tries to establish a new form, new interpretation, new identity.

TANGIBLE VS. INTANGIBLE - TOOLS OF ASSESSSING THE HERITAGE In cases of socialist modernism, the memory seems to be an enemy. Objects and places reinvigorating those memories play a role of estranged narrators of stories that might not want to be heard. Yet, more and more voices appear, from the residents or the professional field, that a specific value of mass housing is to be discovered and described. I seek to lay down the fundaments of the arguments which formulate the main aspects that would lead to considerations that modernist housing blocks can generate and foster identity and therefore they can, in fact, be worth of preserving. In terms of preservation, it is important to discuss the legal tools and methods that would enable such act. In this matter I turned to the thoughts of Kuba Snopek, who has been analyzing the procedures of the world’s largest and most important organization for dealing with the heritage protection, UNESCO. Specifically, he has been looking into the preservation trends and guarding standards and how could they be applied in case of the mass housing districts. Even though the focus of his work is Moscow’s housing district Belyayevo, it is sure to be said that the character of the district follows exactly the same schematic concept as it is in case of Petržalka. One might raise a question, what is there to preserve, if it is totally generic? What is so unique, if we can find exactly the same houses and planning schema in thousands of other locations worldwide? Could something intangible - the identity, make the tangible - the housing blocks, unique? The factor of uniqueness, so important to the identity discourse, plays a major role in assessment of heritage. It is one of the main criteria for the philosophical base for qualification for the UNESCO protection. Together with the other two - authenticity and in-

tegrity, they are unquestionable as they reflect the common sense and the existing habits (Snopek 2015). UNESCO holds a World Heritage List consisting of tangible architectural masterpieces. Also, it recognizes the existence of the intangible heritage, however the program devoted to the intangible heritage exists separately from the built work existing in the urban environment. As noted in the introduction of this chapter, intangible heritage is mostly referred to as cultural practices, rituals and living traditions. There is no mentioning of their connection to the architectural objects. The only meeting point between the tangible and intangible are assessed as a criteria when „the masterpiece represents the human creative genius“, „bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural tradition“ or are „directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance“ (UNESCO protocols, cit. by Snopek 2015). These criteria, however, can hardly apply to mass housing districts. Even though the arguments and explanations of the value of the socialist housing can be formulated, as Snopek notes, none of these criteria can encapsulate the essence of these districts (ibid). For it is the type of urban environment and specific circumstances that evoked the emergence of such specific type of identity, it was not the architecture that has followed the expression of a cultural practice or a community living. Because of the still existing prevalent opinion about the »unfriendliness« of the socialist architecture among scholars and general public, it would be hard to persuade the commission that the district do, in fact, have a great intangible value. Snopek examined a certain artistic activity that emerged in Belyayevo district, based on which the generic architecture was added value. Also, he states that it is because there certainly has to be something about the modernist neighborhood that has the potential to foster such practice. This can be easily projected onto the Petržalka district. The »unfriendly« socialist mass housing clearly had the capacity to evoke a sense of identification and belonging, yet it was the emerged identity that has helped the district to raise its potentials and value. Concerning this issue, Snopek proposes a new criterion that would make possible for the districts to be even potentially considered and allowed to take part on the preservation process: „To be an example of intangible content (events or living conditions, ideas or beliefs, artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance), being inseparably connected with the architectural environment that emerged from, unique and exceptional to the extent that it strongly reinforces the significance of the architectural environment itself.“ This new criterion would not only open a completely new range of possibilities of what to consider heritage, but it would mainly address the current deficit of the instruments that are able to assess the mixture of tangible and intangible aspects. It is crucial for the mass housing districts which are now crossing the threshold of potentially being the subject of

preservation due to their age. Additionally, it would allow the development of the methods and tools of preservation (ibid). It would also lift the evaluation of the architectural objects to a more complex approach where each piece of architecture is assessed by both, its tangible and intangible aspects.

UNIQUENESS OF THE GENERIC - WHAT IS THERE TO PRESERVE IN PETRŽALKA After laying down the criteria, what would be the subject to evaluation in Petržalka? What is so unique about the generic? Spaces and objects exposed to preservation procedures often become isolated, conserved in time and exposed in a static condition. They are protected from the physical damage, visitors thus have the possibility to experience these show-pieces at different times without any visible change. They are dead spaces with dead objects, frozen in time serving to exhibit purposes. Snopek notes that the prefabricated building types, if subjected to preservation, could change this concept (2015). They soon will have a historic value, yet they are not physically unique. The uniqueness of this type of architecture relies on the existence of the intangible aspect. In case of which every individual one of these generic, architecturally very non-unique buildings have to be examined for the intangible component. The need for searching for the uniqueness as the invisible »shadow« of these buildings can cause a revolution in examination methods or - help to overcome the crisis of uniqueness - when the lack of visible unique features will have to be compensated with a case-specific preservation method based on thorough understanding of the location and its context (ibid). From the architectural point of view, it is an indisputable fact that the prefabricated construction methods brought a new architectural typology, which based on its sole existence, is worth of noting. It was the first in the history when housing structures reached an immense scale incomparable to any other neighborhood planning before. Additionally, the construction technologies brought about prefabricated panel, a revolutionary technology allowing to construct buildings at a fast pace. The circumstances and the results are, in fact, unique as they appeared for the first time in the history. The preservation approach, therefore, cannot be focus on single buildings as in case of one-of-a-kind architectural works. The individual buildings not only cannot be isolated from their intangible value, but also they cannot be physically perceived as disconnected from their surroundings. For it is not one single panel house and its architectural features that is valuable. It is the panel house in its context, the spatial typology and the meaning of the schematic concept that emerged from a certain constellations of social, political, economic circumstances with an enormous influence on the psyche of people inhabiting these neighborhoods, generating a very specific type of community and

identity. Considering the current preservation criteria and the general public opinion, it is audacious to argue for preservation of the neighborhoods consisting of generic panel houses or at least or acknowledging their value and place in the world. Yet, the questions about the position of the mass housing as historical legacy and related approaches will be appearing gradually and will have to be answered.

PUBLIC DISCOURSE, MEDIA AND ARTISTIC PORTRAYAL MEDIA AND PUBLIC DISCOURSE „Petržalka - the culmination of the panel house madness“ (Daily newsletter Pravda) Petržalka appears in media frequently for many years. As one of the most controversial local topics on architecture and the city. After many praising statements, the readers never have to wait too long to read yet another negative counter-reaction. On August 16th, 2016, an article »Ode on Petržalka« was published by one of the most read alternative medium Denník N (24). The author writes appreciative words about a positive current image and claims that „many myths about Petržalka are out of date“ and that it „belongs to the greenest areas of Bratislava, apartments are the most expensive among all the districts, crime rate is the lowest and locals are loving their residences.“ He interviews people living in Petržalka, one of them confirms that „Petržalka is changing crucially and rapidly.“ One day after, August 17th, on the same media platform, a reaction to the article appeared. »Petržalka is the home to vulgarity«, claims the authors in the title and urges people to „get rid of the myth that only those who did not live there speak ill of Petržalka.“ Both authors speak about a »myth«, yet each has a different interpretation. The second author tried to negate the statements almost immediately, which says a lot about the intensity of the public debate. One of the interviewees of this study from the media environment says:

(24) originally published by Denník N, later shared by other media platforms such as Reflex News and other

Fig.25 “Petržalka already has a soul, still waiting for its heart” Fig.26 “Ode on Petržalka: why do people live here well?” Fig.27 “Petržalka is a phenomenon.” Fig.28 “Petržalka in its naturalness.”

„The more the locals defend it, the more other people appear and wave with their rational arguments saying how wrong it is, [...] It is almost as they were offended that the people have the audacity to praise the place they live in, it is like a tragicomedy.“ The mentioning of the »myth« points to the a notion that has been accepted by a collective of people producing it. The conflict of the two myths also signalize two different imaginaries existing in a contradiction. Assessing the issue from a proffesional point of view published in a comprehensive interview »Three qualities of Petržalka: What can the rest of the Bratislava learn from the place that is loved the locals and judged by the others« with urbanist Igor Marko, who marks Petržalka as „difficult to read“ as it is „a result of a long-term unknown development process.“ As three main qualities of the current condition, he names to be „free and spontaneous spaces, folk urbanism and equality“. He suggests that it is an opportunity to go with

Fig.29 “That’s how we have built the district with the worst reputation: The nest of roughs and hooligans” Fig.30 “Petržalka hides a lot of curiosities you have not explored yet” Fig.31 “Petržalka is the motherland of vulgarity” Fig.32 “Worse thanPetržalka: Frightening panel house hell in Hongkong Fig.33 “Three qualities of Petržalka: What can the rest of the Bratislava learn from the place that is loved the locals and judged by the others” Fig.34 “Concrete jungle with its own romance” Fig.35 “Bratislava is a laboratory of panel houses” Fig.36 “Panel houses need help and they will be around for 102 years”

Fig.25

Fig.26

Fig.28 Fig.27

Fig.29

Fig.30

Fig.31

Fig.33

Fig.32

Fig.35 Fig.34

Fig.36 83

as well, indescribable. the existing tendency of the continual change, even though it is, according to many other Even though there has been debates about mass housing in the past, it has never been so intense as during the last five years. To compare, in year 2005, one of the first comprehensive articles discussing the emerging discourse appeared. It was right after the period of using only discouraging adjectives. The authors of Sme magazine says that there is a romance to be found in Petržalka. „For many it is an impersonal space“, he writes, „but for some of us, it is home.“ He mentions a recently published book by the Centre of the community organization which was „one of the very few organizations that is trying to improve the living in the Petržalka.“ The booklet consists of short interviews with the locals, containing a powerful statement: „you just realize, that all the strangers on the bus stops, in the hypermarkets, buses and other panel houses, are close to you, your feelings are their feelings.“ The article debates the most criticized aspect, the anonymity, which has „always [been] seen as a problem for those who don’t live here. But it’s a different anonymity, it is safe. They don’t understand [because] the space outside, it is ours too. That belongs to you. Once you see that, you will never fell estranged here.“ Pointing to the outside, the shared public as belonging to the personal space is a key aspect that marks the era after the 2000s, when the notion of Petržalka as home a place of belonging entered the public discourse. The body of material from the period before 2000s is minimal and consists almost exclusively of crime reports. Even though the primary thread of the contemporary debates is discuss the identity and heritage, a less mentioned, yet important category is devoted to informing about the economic and technical aspects of mass housing. Reporters of Aktuality advise to not giving up on high investments, as the „originally planned lifespan of the mass housing, 77 years, can be prolonged up to more than hundred of years by renovating the coating structure.“ Besides, „demolishment is not an option for of two reasons: it is too costly and the state does not have other alternative“, suggesting that including the mass housing into the future planning is an inevitability. In 2015, approximately a third of the houses were renovated. To continue with the renovation trend seem to be the plan for the upcoming decades, as „the prices are getting higher as the demand still grows as for many, it is still the only possibility to acquire a residence and own a property.“

Fig.37 »Beyond the city« (Záboj Bohuslav Kuľhavý, 1977)

ART In order to be inspired by the city, it is not necessary to seek a specific place to encounter it. For urban citizens (for those who are) it is an substance of the daily perceptional spectrum. We react and adapt to it, it is challenging us in many ways. Fast-paced remodeling of the city brought about new forms and new aesthetics of the city. It was radical for the senses and hard to process. Artists naturally reacted to this rapidly transforming environment. They conceptualized the impressions and the new perceptional spectrum offered by the new architecture. The visual of the city was changing, the city was accumulating more volume every week. Older structures were disappearing and suddenly the city looked different. During the 1960s and 1970s, the most intense constructional phases of the mass housing, series of works appeared as a reaction to this extreme stimuli. The arrival of the new Âťprefabricated realityÂŤ was overwhelming, yet inspiring. The thematic range varies from depiction of contrast, scale and roughness, or carry atmosphere of sadness, nostalgia and longing. Often, the emotional aspects come forward strongly.

Fig.38 [top] »Nothing special III.« (Martin Kollar, 2003)

In »Nothing special III.« from Martin Kollar and »Beyond the city« from Záboj Bohuslav Kuľhavý (Fig.37), the theme contrast is present. Kollar works with the comparison of the cultures - the traditional folk culture in its new surrounding, symbolizing the shift from rural to urban, from the folk to the modern Slovakia (Fig.38). Kuľhavý works with the contrast of the new city within the typical topography of Slovakia - the dominant mountain landscape. Two figures in the forefront observing the panorama signalize reflection on the change as well as the upcoming challenge to adapt to the new. The two prevalent types of »scapes« of Slovakia - the mountains (the natural) and the mass housing (the manmade) - come together and symbolize the new image of the country. A symbol of an arrow appears in Sikora’s graphics »Away from the city« indicating intentions to escape from the new urban. An arrow is also a central motive of Koller’s »New district«. Oil painting picturing grey surfaces (the panels) and a small single vehicle represent the scale of the new over-sized static volumes as an overwhelming aspect and the need to look up as the houses are reaching impressive heights.

Fig. 39 [right] »Away from the city« (Rudolf Sikora, 1970)

In Filo’s collage »My Bratislava« is the clear motive of the »arrival of the panels« brought and created by the human hand pictured over the panorama of Bratislava. Observing single eyes symbolize careful attention as well as nostalgic and passive observation of the changing face of the city. The aspect of nostalgia in connection to contrast appears in Juraj Bartoš’s »Petržalka«. The central theme is »the new vs. the old«, recalling the old rural settlement and the traditional architecture compared to the new mass housing structure. Another photograph from this author, »Children in the district« woks with the theme of limits of the play - limits of the livability - in the mass housing district.

Fig.40 [left] »New district« (Július Koller, 1965) Fig.41 [bottom] »My Bratislava« (Julián Filo, 1964)

Focus on documenting the construction process comes forward in Július Koller’s photograph »Universal futurologic settlement« and Ivan Štubňa’s lithographic work »Panels«. The lithographic technique - the printing of the stone on the metal plate - is also a reference to the construction.

Fig.42 »Universal futurologic settlement« (Július Koller, 1973)

Fig.43 »Panels« (Ivan Štubňa, 1972)

FILM To represent the filmography I selected the satiric comedy »Panelstory«. The film was shot in the fall of 1979 and directed by Věra Chytilová. Firstly it appeared on the film festival in East-Slovakian city Košice. After winning several national and international film awards, it was condemned as a „cramp and a crooked mirror“ (Zákuťanský 2008) and officially prohibited by the communist regime. The characters live their chaotic und unorganized lives, in a confused environment and in constant hurry. As people are trying to proceed with their daily routines, the background noise of the construction process hinders the fluency of the day, working machines excavating and drilling are constantly in the way of the inhabitants. The story is performed by large amount of actors and has a mosaic structure. It is switching from one episode to another depicting variety of situations characteristic for the district at this time. Chytilová’s mosaic concept of the story use the symbolics of the prefabricated parts of the district that come together and are expected to hold a construction and compares it to the people moving together into the district expected to perform (play) a living reality. The atmosphere of chaos and shakiness are bought about by sharp and attacking editing style and nervous camera movements accompanied by discordant music. Miserably looking landscapes of hoarded soil, dredging machines, smoke and crowds of new inhabitants dribbling through the scenery, each of them trying to reach their destination, encountering difficulties on the way. Chytilová builds different typologies of a »new urban creature« - a neurotic mother, emancipated woman, lazy construction worker, corrupted state official, confused child, isolated old woman, bankrupt television star, cheating seductress and busy district doctor - all of them as distinct embodiment of selfishness, chasing their own benefit with no regard for others. As a contrast to the self-absorbed crowd, a character of the old villager moving into the flat with his daughter embodies the innocence, whole-heartedness and empathy that is pictured to be missing in the social realm of the district. Another »hopeful« character type is a young couple adapted to the lifestyle, developing a bond with the district and to each other. Each contact of the perfectly recounted characters cause ridiculous and often absurd encounters, which suggest a turn to a dystopian society. Film illustrates the typical difficulties with orientation, lack of privacy in the houses or technical defects, but also draws deeper parallels between the built environment and the human psyche. In a scene picturing an affair between the emancipated woman and the actor, he describes her as a „factual, ironic, cold-blooded, not differentiating between enjoyable and displeasing, only between effective and useless“, where she reacts that „it is Fig.44 [top left] »Children in the district« (Juraj Bartoš, 1985-1988) Fig.45 [bottom left] »Petržalka« (Juraj Bartoš, 1977-1983)

exactly what a self-sufficient woman with a lack of fantasy needs“. He turns her to the window saying: „Look outside, rectangularity, straightforwardness, no pleasurable absurdity, architect projecting this district only thought of strict functionality […], and the human is like a mirror, it is only reflecting what surrounds him […], now such vulgar directness invaded the human relationships.“ Despite the stressing the negative patterns, the author still keeps holding onto a hopeful vision till the end of the story. The young couple depicted as knowingly strolling through the »district labyrinth« comes together in the closing scene. Standing in the scenery of a dark room of an unfinished building, she answers his question of where she was the whole time: „I’m home, where would I be?“ He asks if she would rather fly to the moon, to which she reacts contently: „No, nobody is going to get me out of here.“ The film is a critique of failed utopia assigned to the communist regime, peaking at the end of the 1970s. The mass housing district is depicted as a spatial abnormality causing psychological defects and distortion of human behavior. Yet the story is intertwined by a thread of hopeful occurrences by actors performing sudden acts of kindness or expressions of affections as a sign of adaptation and renewing fluency of living.

Fig.46 Film screenshot

MUSIC

(25) All titles available through the internet streaming service

At the end of the 1980s, with most of the construction procedures already finished, districts started to develop daily routines. While people were slowly adapting to the new district, progressive social groups started to generate more intense critiques. This was a final stage of the normalization phase, soon resulting to the revolutionary events. Many artists, writers and cultural public figures were adopting counter-positions and producing tangible works of criticism - of political figures, social order and naturally, the visual of the city. In 1986, one of the most popular artist of the decade pop-rock band Elán released a title »Sídliskový indián« - The Indian of the Mass housing (25). The focus is on the in comprehension towards the adapted and conformal inhabitants and one’s own hopelessness from the position of a non-conformal rebellious individual against the homogenous mass. The work is criticizing discouragement of the regime to think for themselves [„they want to take my long-term habits away from me, empty room full of books“], feelings of suffocation and fear as the authorities punish those, who do [„they’re seriously going after me, all the pale faces against me“] and being constantly watched [„janitor left in my door a letter slightly warning“]. Authors underline the limited »room for living« - spatially [„one can hear every breath through the walls“] and mentally [„because of the neon lights I don’t see the stars, my only weapon is my laughter“]. The era of 1990s was marked by a serious economic decline causing severe social instability. All of the research participants who have experienced this period reported struggles with survival and difficulties facing on a daily basis. The sudden nature of the shift even amplified the intensity of the situation. Often described as a »shock therapy« causing chaos over the first years of the 1990s, has eventually started to consolidate at the end of the decade. Besides the interviews, it was difficult to obtain any ethnographic material or even photography of the district. During the search, the vast majority of the found material were reports of serious level crime, drug use, drug dealing and similar themes related to the socially declined and unstable society. Yet, the social condition, and partially the physical environment as well, is captured and conceptualized by the local rap artists. During this decade, a successful rap scene in Petržalka has emerged. The name of the formations refer to the social positioning, such as »L.U.Z.A« (from Slovak slang expression »lúza« meaning »the outcast«) or »Drvivá menšina« meaning »the vast minority«. »Druhá strana« - »the other side« refers to the social and geographical positioning of Petržalka, while »Názov stavby« - »a name of the building« and »Zvuk Ulice« - »the sound of the street« draw parallel to the urban environment. For the research purposes I analyzed two titles: (1) »Petržalka« (Zvuk Ulice) released in 1992 representing the early phase of the 1990s and (2) »Priamo z Petržalky I.« (Názov Stavby) from the end of the decade, released in 1999.

The members of Zvuk Ulice refer to experiencing the shift in their youthful age and getting to learn the declined condition of the life in Petržalka in the initial paragraph [„blinded by the light of the world, but this light was damaged short time ago“; „eye detained to see all the damage in the world“], they describe the chaos and the dreadfulness around them [„I looked around outside of my world, I saw I haven’t seen before“; „ just chaos, dirt everywhere“; „people almost everywhere around are buying their own death“]. Further, for the first time Petržalka is referred to as »home« [„pushing people deeper into the ground […] that is the everyday picture of Petržalka […] and I ask, why is this happening in our home“] and scale the problematics to the national level [„just want to live as one nation] and deliver ambivalent messages about the hopeful future [„no one cares about the hope anymore“, „people without illusions don’t ask the question that cannot be answered“; „even though there is a dark shadow over Petržalka, maybe someday sun will shine again and there won’t be so much beastliness“]. The dominant theme are feelings of shock, questioning, overwhelmingly difficult struggle for economic survival, crime and drug use, psychological damage, hopelessness but at the same time mild and seemingly forced attempts to stay hopeful. In Priamo z Petržalky I. (Right from Petržalka I.) the topic range has expanded. In the advanced post-socialist phase, some results of the early development are already observable. Názov Stavby brings back the theme of the collective (the mass) while putting an emphasis on occupying the same social position [„in Petržalka there live people, the same, pulling to the same direction“; „in trouble, uncharted, belonging to the mass“; „that is destiny of those who are the same, right from Petržalka“], reflecting on the previous experiences, with the first glances of optimism appearing [„everyone started to seek their own direction“; „the situation timidly starting to improve was forcing us to act joyful“; „looking at the life from the top view, they fought through with a great stamina“; „then everyone wakes up“].

Conceptual photography by Jaromír Čejka, Jižní Město [Southern City], 1978–1986 96

FINDINGS

This chapter has focused on the main points of criticism over the course from 1960s till now. The tangible (constructional, technical, functional) and intangible aspects (adaptation to the district, dealing with the socialist order or social decline, emerged emotional patterns and ways of relating to space) have been analyzed in order to map the development of the space and the relation to it. From the socialist period no precise study on functional and technical defects has been found. The analysis counts on indirect and mediated messages from the documentaries or interview extracts. The assessment of the defects during the 1990s is based on two research studies - an architectural study by Jozef Brath from 1993 and a sociological study by Dagmar Petríková from 1999. By comparing the key points of both studies, we can identify four intersections - four categories that these deficiencies fall under: functional unbalance missing interim space (semi-public and semi-private) lack of conditions for sharing and networking underdeveloped relation to the space (due to security and intimacy issues)

The critiques eventually resulted into the plans to »humanize« the districts, but none of the concepts have ever been implemented. The discrepancies and critique thematically evolved through the professional and general public discourse. To achieve a complete overview, past and current discourses have been analyzed - from the first formulated critiques appearing towards the end of 1960s to currently discussed topics. The process of development is mapped by analysis of the media and various modes of the artistic and ethnographic production. Critiques integrated into the film, music, visual and fine art, ethnographic documentaries capture a different way of conceptualizing the moods and personal stances to the topic. The artistic work thematically draw a parallel to the critical categories. Each phase had its dominant way of creative expression. The beginning, the 1960s and 1970s were dedicated to the fine art with themes conceptualized around shock, nostalgia, overwhelm and confusion from the rapidly changing environment. The normalization phase, the 1970s and 1980s, the phase of severe restriction was marked by lack of (published) material. The critiques were encoded and hidden in metaphors, and often forbidden directly after their release as in the case of the movie Panelstory. The main theme is fear of control, disorganization and absurdity with a strong ironic and cynical

undertone. During the 1990s emerge topics of hopelessness, daily struggle and severe social decline with an additional glances of references to the sameness, collective and togetherness. The theme of ÂťhomeÂŤ, belonging and identifing with the district appeared briefly during 1980s, more during the 1990s, resulting into an established public discourse on identity during 2010s. Discrepancies reflect in the heritage discourse as well. Communist heritage and mass housing have developed into a subject of tourism, yet it is not perceived in a traditional way. The still ongoing process of resolution of what this kind of heritage means and how it will be handled, reflects in the approach of the foreign tourists who come to observe the obscure sightseeings. The inclusion and adaption of the communist heritage, yet still present negative nuance result into double-sided image. For the locals it is the cause of feelings of pride on the one hand and shame on the other. For the international visitors it reflects as fascination by the obscure unknown, yet they are often reluctant to fully be present with the imagery, trying no to offend the locals. It is a sign of the evaluation process of the meaning and interpretation of the heritage, which is still evolving into a new phase - presumably with more tangible interventions by means of official heritage protection and acceptance of the legacy. Regarding the protection and preservation of the communist heritage, the protection assessment tools have been analyzed. The unique feature of the generic architecture lie in the intangible conceptual aspects - the unique socio-spatial scheme, the circumstances that have contributed to the emergence of the concept. The crucial point is the contextual viewing on the scale of the microrayon, not a single building, which currently does not qualify for applying for the heritage protection. Reviewing the criteria of the global organization for the heritage protection UNESCO, there are currently no protocols that could enable the evaluation of the mass housing. Still, the analysis of the intangible values of the mass housing, conceptualized and formulated statement can augment the relevance of the debate, foster the research and contribute to the adaptation of the heritage in the daily environment.

IDENTITY

This section will explore various theories attempting to explain identity, the factors that define it and the dynamics it generates. It is worth mentioning that identity as a research subject is, reasonably, quite difficult to deal with. Glynis Breakwell notes that identity is a term with indistinct borders (1986) and rather slippery term for researchers to be precisely worked with. In the mainstream language it is used in various contexts, usually describing a personality or a lifestyle, a certain atmosphere or a genius loci of a place. It is challenging to determine the integral components that construct identity. Even though it is hard to be precise, it remains a powerful and valid intangible force transmitting the meaning into a tangible form. I do not aim not to build a definition of identity. Rather I seek to explore different approaches towards explaining it and different aspects that surround this concept. As I observed and followed this phenomena, which later laid the foot-stone of my research interest resulting into this project, I was (and still am) convinced that it is something strong and resonant to encounter when it comes to the city. It strikes me greatly to explore it in such unusual context as mass housing district. Throughout the last couple of years I have seen the term identity being used in connection to Petržalka many times. Current planning projects mention Petržalka’s identity, professionals involved in these projects debate it on their meetings noting that „nobody really knows how to define it, because those, who can say something about it, are not present“ (26). Media produces articles about it, featuring positive or negative evaluations of this district using eye-catching titles. In hope to persuade the institutions, architects list its the top qualities or on the contrary shake their heads as a sign of skepticism. Among those, who discuss, one category weakly represented - the actual inhabitants. This chapter presents the theoretical framework as well as exerts from the interactions with the residents.

(26) From participant observation of an expert meeting

THE TERM IDENTITY Historically the word »identity« originates from the Latin expression »identitas« as „the fact of being who or what a person or a thing is“ (27). The use of this term in philosophy is dated back to the 16th century and was used until its substitution in the 1950s defining it as „the unity of the self“ (Gleason 1983). The dictionary of urban planning holds identity as the expression of distinguishing features of a being, which are unique to it (Ocakçi, Türk 2012). The definitions vary across different contexts and theories and are largely dependent on their disciplinary scope. Social psychology uses the term »self-concept« which often follows as an answer to the question »who am I«. The response to this question is followed by organized knowledge about who one is, which includes characteristics, be-

102

(27) source: Oxford English Dictionary

havioral patterns, goals and preferences that are associated with the concrete self. This self-concept is built of references that characterize us and select out those that do not. It is a unique concept of us, something that can only be understood through relation to something else or others (Howard 2000). Positioning the subject in a relation to something else creates the initial impulse of the identity formation. According to Katzenstein this is called mutual construction which points out the evolving nature of identity (1996) as well as the fact that the concept of identity involves an element of comparison (cit. by Kaymaz 2010:741). Comparison and mutual construction create a key substance of the next step - the construction of the social identity, the representation of »we«. Reframing the question to »who are we« calls for creation of schemas which contain information about a group such as social position (Howard 2000:368) defined by social status, nationality, religion, family or culture (Tajfel 1982).

SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY Social identity theory describes these two dimensions - the »I« and the »we« - as the two axis along which the identity of an individual is defined. They represent two categories: 1. personal - the idiosyncrasies of an individual based on which he or she is differentiated and 2. social - as a membership in a social group based on these idiosyncrasies (Deaux 1993; Howard 2000). As people structure the ways they perceive themselves and others into abstract social categories, it becomes an integral part of their self-concept. In every situation, the self-concept is being created out of many different combinations of these abstract categories resulting into production of the self-image. Any given circumstances create a different combination of these categories producing different kinds of self-images. By their interaction, group behavior is produced (ibid), which leads to finding, building and occupying a certain social position. Because „the social positions [which] we occupy have immediate consequences for our sense of self, group schemas play a major part in the processes of identification“ (Howard 2000:369). When we define what we are and what we are not, it creates a basis for our personal identities to join the groups and interplay with other people’s identities based on similarities or dissimilarities - in other words - if we do identify with them or not. Tajfel defines social identity as the individual’s knowledge of belonging to a certain group, additionally stressing the role of emotions and values which are associated with holding the membership in a group (1981). This perceptual phenomena - the cognitive concepts - serve as explanatory tools and justifications of social schemas embedded in the social relationships, which can be understood as a foundation for the abstract framework for identity (ibid).

103

The structure of the cognitive process also comes together in the theory of social representations by Serge Moscovici from 1981. His perspective is that knowledge structures which are collectively shared, originate and develop via communicating and social interaction (Innes, Augustines 1990). This theory suggests that the mentioned social schemas are undergoing a continual re-casting that is based on ever-developing social interaction (Howard 2000:370). The basic elements of the social interaction are created by the meanings and patterns transmitted and developed by communication. Symbolic interactionism addresses these elements and transmission processes as attaching symbolic meanings to objects, behaviors, themselves and other people (ibid). That means that people do not behave towards the objects based on their objective status, but based on their assigned meanings. As these meanings are developed and strengthened by people using them, such as those patterns which form the sense of identity, it can also be characterized as a set of meanings. Identities localize the person in the social context defined by these symbolics and meanings (ibid). The interactionist approach also emphasizes the fact that negotiation is an essential part of identity creation. The characteristics, meanings and social positions are being constantly negotiated which leads to developing mutual definitions and further reassuring or re-framing over time (McCall, Simmons 1979), which relates to the initial Moscovici’s premise of the continual re-casting and ever-developing through social interaction. On a larger scale, Cote’s model links these identity shifts to the historical and cultural re-configurations (1996).

SPACE-TIED IDENTITIES “Place identity concerns the meaning and significance of places for their inhabitants and users, and how these meanings contribute to individuals’ conceptualizations of self.” (Dragos Simandan) As debated in the previous section, the creation of identity is a powerful process of an intangible force emerging from a complex set of circumstances and conditions forming into a unique trait. We can see identity manifesting itself in many different forms and on many levels. Besides the social identity theory shedding more light onto the identity formation as a socio-psychological phenomenon, this chapter emphasizes the additional influence of the environment on the identity creation. Explanation of the relationship through the place-identity theory and identity process theory can extend the knowledge about the issue and bring more information about the environmental and geometric aspect and its role in this process.

104

Identity of a place is more difficult to define, because the »place« itself is too complex to describe. The term »place« itself also already contains a distinctive component. A place is a place for its specificity, as there exists a plurality of different other places. So by using this notion, we know that it always operates within a different context, deals with different level of complexity, the specifics of the social and psychological dimension. According to Yi-Fu Tuan „space is an abstract term for a couple of set of ideas“ whether „a place and objects define space, giving it a geometric personality“ (1977). What that means is that a place becomes a place after a meaning is assigned to it (ibid). Further Halpenny also notes that „place is a spatial location that has assigned meanings and values by society and individuals“ (cit. by Kaymaz 2013). Therefore the link between the individual and the physical environment is created by the symbolic tool - the meaning. This leads to Relph’s notion on 3 components of a place creation: physical environment, activity and meaning (cit. by Najafi, Shariff 2011).

PLACE IDENTITY THEORY AND IDENTITY PROCESS THEORY Place and identity are the two research subjects that come together in the interdisciplinary field of environmental psychology. The relation between the environment and the people is being focused on in the place identity theory. It describes place attachment as a process from cognitively getting to know the place, through developing and assigning emotional meanings to it, leading to familiarity and bond creation with the place (Gifford 2003). It is also a process of identifying the aspects in the space we identify with, which can be in a large scale of a country or a city, in a small scale a district, neighborhood or a even a single room (ibid). Chow and Healey argue that the process of the attachment to the place is far more complex which involves, besides emotions and affection, also a specific range of activities, beliefs, knowledge and behavioral patterns that represent the place (2008). It shows how cognitive responses to a place creates a basis for an affection towards it. By repeating these, the users are reinforcing the bond with it, therefore it is assumed that it is usually a result of a long-term process. Proshansky, Kaminoff and Fabian argue that place identity is, however, more than just an attachment (1983). Every place is to be considered a specific cognitive »database« (ibid) that is being experienced by a person with a specific self-concept. Throughout the life, considering the social and environmental skills, we learn to use different lenses through which we evaluate and categorize places and how they look to us, what they mean to us, how we interact with them, think about them and how we remember them, as well as how we negotiate what they mean or defend them. In Proshansky and Fabian’s research from 1987, it is described as five functions of the place identity: recognition, meaning, expressive-requirement, mediating change and

105

anxiety-defense mechanism. Identity process theory sees identity as a dynamic product of social interaction using the capacities of memory and consciousness which create an organized construct. This model does not distinct between personal and social identity. It is based on differentiating other two dimensions - the dimension of value and the dimension of content (ibid). While the dimension of value consists of the personal and social identity together, the dimension of content contains positive or negative evaluations depending on the social context. The role of the social context and cultural principles are central to this theory. It describes the identity structure as a a regulated accomodation-assimilation process containing two components: absorption of the new components and adjusting to the existing identity structure (ibid).

IDENTITY OF THE »UGLY« - PLACES OF STIGMA „I like where I live, what am I supposed to do? Do they want me to apologize for liking my own house?“ (28)

(28) exceprt from an interview

Environmental psychology assumes that people intrinsically strive to create a bond with the place they inhabit and spaces they occupy (Kaymaz 2013:740) - or they strive to attach a meaning to it. The sense of emotional attachment, however, involves more than the evaluation of the physical appearance. Psychology explains it as an attempt of an individual to keep the psychological balance (Lewicka 2008) as the relation to the environment is a fundamental prerequisite of the well-being (Inalhan, Finch 2011). Therefore the attempt to create and sustain the bond to one’s environment equals to the attempt to maintain one’s own well-being in general. When spoken about identity of a place, in a conventional sense it is usually referred to places that society has agreed to be fulfilling a norm of being aesthetically acceptable and/or culturally significant. Empirical studies researching relations between the place and identity mostly focus on recreational or scenic setting (29). These studies also work with an assumption that the bond with the place is formed by a positive nature of the associations with the place (Manzo 2005). But what about places that are generally perceived as unpreferable or even ugly? Mass housing districts with tall anonymous aesthetically boring towers are home to thousands of people. Could that generate a sense of belonging? Is that something people can identify with? If yes, how do people identify with a stigmatized place?

106

(29) Report by Åshild Lappegard Hauge, for the conference at the Faculty of Architecture and Fine Art at the University of Trondheim, Environmental Psychology

»Concrete jungle, ghetto, a drug hole« - were the appellations for Petržalka as a place of stigma only two decades ago. What is really a ghetto? What does it really mean for a space to get such attachment? The word originates from Venetian (local proto-Italian) word »gettare«, which means to »to throw/cast away« (Hutchinson, Haynes 2012). It is a place of insecurity usually in need of stronger policing due to its preoccupation by dangerous people and illegal practices (ibid). Talja Blokland notes that instead of asking which area is a ghetto, we should ask how does a mechanism of its border creation and its maintenance work, to be able to divide different social realities (2008). Stigmatization (or de-stigmatization) of the place is a longer process. To understand it, it is crucial to study the relationship towards what lies outside of the stigmatized place or a stigmatized group occupying the place (ibid). Michèle Lamont and Virag Molnar describe these boundaries as „symbolic conceptual distinctions made by social actors to categorize objects, people, practices, and even time and space“ (2002:168). Evaluation and categorization of the objects, as discussed in the theories concerning identities, are the integral part of the „basic mental way of organizing the many stimuli that our brain is confronted with“ (Massey 2007; cit. by Hutchinson, Haynes 2012:161). When the social categories arise, they are implicit in dividing subjects into categories by determining their symbolic worth (Boltanski, Thévenot 2006; ibid). Boundaries are also an implicit result of a process of relational identifications and negotiations amongst the groups, who exchange their feedback about each others characteristics, evaluate and categorize them. At the same time, the boundary displays the categories representing social and behavioral dimensions - which are used to classify the individuals as »us« and »them«, exactly as in case of identity creation. Once these categories turn into beliefs - when they become internalized - it is difficult to change them (Bourdieu 1991). In case of stigmatized groups inhabiting a certain environment, the context is more influenced by a group membership than in other contexts (Turner 1982). The research shows that this is especially significant in case of intergroup conflicts and/or discrimination (ibid). Social comparison theory describes a tendency of stigmatized groups to evaluate themselves in a positive manner, emphasizing the qualities and concealing the negatives - as a coping mechanism. Development of such mechanism is important for the groups who practice the act of defense to protect themselves and preserve their self-esteem. Tajfel and Turner also note that in case the people cannot leave the group and escape the negative affiliation with the group, they also have a strong tendency to deny the negative characteristics and reinterpret then as positive self-concepts (Tajfel, Turner 1986). If the individual feels less desirable than the others, it creates a particularly deep discrediting attribute (Goffman 1963). To the stigma creation then contributes a factor of social anticipation of a certain expectation about what is accepted as normal. If an individual or a group

107

cannot satisfy these social expectations, they are constituted a deviation or abnormality (ibid). When a place becomes stigmatized, it has undergone a negative change in the environment, which then profoundly influences local identity and identity of the dwellers.

IDENTITY OF PETRŽALKA Throughout its entire existence, Petržalka was never considered to be a regular place. Each historical phase carried a distinct set of circumstances that augmented this position. Fast period of construction followed by a period of people quickly moving into the unfinished neighborhood, scale of the neighborhood, challenging living conditions hindering the creation of the urbanity of district were all rather non-traditional. After 1989, the district was known for its high crime rate, drug dealing activities and weakened social stability. Petržalka became a highly discussed topic, the common language adapted comparison phrases using Petržalka as a mocking expression. Petržalka became a phenomenon and was burdened by stigma. The topography and positioning towards the rest of the city also contributed to strengthening of a border between the two social realms. As the only city district lying behind the bank of the Danube river, it made Bratislava a city on the river, not just by the river. Many other formerly rural areas were annexed to the city during the rapid urbanization during socialism. Petržalka as the only part lied behind a clear natural border created of river and the forestation making it spatially detached. A former rural settlement was a home to the immigrants coming to work in the factories in Bratislava. It was a subject of international negotiations between three countries (Czechoslovakia, Austria and Hungary) about the position of the national border in the region after the World War II after the disintegration of the Habsburg monarchy. Later a flagship camp of the Nazi Germany occupying the region from 1938 till the liberation by the Red Army in 1945. During socialism, it used to be a border of the entire Communist bloc, or the Iron Curtain, which has secured Petržalka an extraordinary position within the geopolitical context. This continual process of defining borders, limits, contents and rights to identify with the place as an inhabitant or a citizen, formed a strong »need for definition« causing the insideness/outsideness (Relph 1976) that conceptualized the ties to the place and what it meant to be at that place. The »insiders« represent the commitment to the place, from the individual or collective perspective, i.e. the position of the »experiencer«. The »outsiders« signify the separation and represent the position of the »observer«. Experiencers tend to internalize the experience of the living, negotiate the value and protect their iden

108

Fig.48 [top right] A control point on the border, between Nazi Germany and Slovakia during the World War II, beginnng of the Petržalka territory Fig.49 [bottom right] Disassembling of the Iron Curtain in the early 1990s, Petržalka in the background

Fig.47 Affiliations of PetrĹžalka to different geoplitical complexes on the timeline

tity. The observers negatively evaluate the stigmatized place from the outside based on facilitated message (non-direct experience), which strengthens the protective mechanisms of the experiencers. Theories suggest this continual negotiation between the experiencers and observers can be considered an impulse for the identity shaping.

PERFORMED IDENTITIES In this part I will present and analyze the material acquired during the field research in May and June of 2018 in PetrĹžalka district. The material consists of quantitative and qualitative data gathered from the survey, participant observation, short and in-depth, informal and semi-structured interviews. Sampling strategies involved using an existing network of locals contacts and directly approaching residents in their habitat. A small group also approached me wanting to participate after learning about the project via online platforms. All interviews were held in Slovak language, important parts were transcribed and translated to English. The translation may to a certain degree influence the meanings of the quotations, as the language used by the respondents is contextual and locally nuanced. The methodology for this particular section was designed to gather schemes of thought and action through experience and interaction. It relies on the fact that individual inhabitants or specific social groups have developed stable imagery of the environment they inhabit and their self-concepts, additionally with the effect of being able to recall their observations and experiences from the past. The act of performing identity is relied to be a set of practices and thought associations that have been established among the inhabitants within this specific context. It is the importance of the used language, as Dixon and Durkheim note, what enables the observer to understand the construction of identity and its place-related components (2000). Following section presents extracts from the interviews, where people, despite many critical occurrences, were able to develop and maintain the bond with the place they live. From the theoretical framework, these core factors can be extracted and used as referential categories to indicate the identity-creating factors mentioned in the transcriptions. 1. Comparison aspect - subject is set in a relation to other subject and compared to it, followed by recognition and evaluation of the difference Fig.50 [left] PetrĹžalka in 1900 during the era of Habsburg Monarchy, deteriorated Bratislava castle in the background

2. Uniqueness factor - subject recognizes its unique traits and exclusive characteristics, developed sense of distinguished self

111

3. Value, content, patterns - subject establishes its own specifics, characteristics and behavioral idiosyncrasies based on own preferences, develops self-concept 4. Negotiation - subject negotiates its substance with a subject lying outside of its definition area (reflection on the other, defense…) 5. context

Contextual self and social recognition - subject localizes itself within a social

6. Identification, sharing, membership - subject evaluates social environment based on similarities and dissimilarities, finds a match, identifies with it, join a group 7. Experience, familiarity, memory - subject builds a history within its location and context and perceives the accumulated experience, projects it into a practice of recognition and identification; usage of symbolics and established meanings

How do people of Petržalka understand identity? At first it was important to formulate the understanding of the notion, resulting into multiple descriptions. The most people understood the meaning of the term and were using it properly within the context, but for many it was difficult to summarize it in a definition or build a statement. Only a negligible amount of respondents did not understand the subject of the debate. Some were avoiding the question, showing ambivalence or confusion, stating that it is „that’s too hard to answer“ or „that’s too philosophical“, or that is means „nothing“. According to the interviewees, identity is… „…it means that a person knows who they are, they have their own thinking.“ „…unambiguous determination or definition of a certain characteristics.“ „…relation to certain values.“ „…it’s like…what creates you specifically.“ „…be specific in something?“ „…uniqueness.“ „…a personality.“ „…when you know you’re home?“

112

„…belonging to a community.“ „…sense of fellowship?“ „…knowing who I am and where I am going.“ „…home.“ „…origin.“ „…a collection of properties that characterize the environment, a person or an occurrence.“ „…a footprint.“ „…stable relation to something and similarity to it.“ „…knowing people with similar interests.“ „…character, type of behavior.“ „…a shared value.“ „…assignment to something…belonging to something.“ „…sharing some specifics.“ „…how I see myself…and how that relates to other people.“ „…own opinion.“ „…it’s who I am.“ „…it’s what defines me.“

113

INTERVIEWS First I interviewed a group of people in their mid- to late twenties, Marián, Ľudmila, Anna and Radoslav. Their opinionated nature and the knowledge about contemporary trends brought a fresh and cheerful atmosphere. Born and raised in Petržalka, they spent there their childhoods, youth and a young adulthood.

Marián: „Petržalka has identity…certinly yes. I think because it’s such a strange place…never-ending panel houses. And it’s huge, well it’s definitely not a classic living environment, like a traditional house or a smaller apartment house, like those in the center. I guess you can be quite overwhelmed…I mean for someone who doesn’t live in panelák (30), when they’re not used to it.“ Anna continues: „…which I think is pretty weird, because most of the people live in panelák in Slovakia…I think, like, when you said you were from Petržalka and they were like uuugh. So Petržalka definitely has identity…but it’s like, a different identity, I don’t know if that makes sense [laughs].“ Radoslav: „I don’t like hearing that though. It is just…there isn’t probably anyone who doesn’t know Petržalka. Even when you’re from the other side of the country. The further it gets, the stranger reactions you get…like I said, in the past that I’m from here and they asked me if I was selling drugs. But these were extreme cases. But everybody knows Petržalka, it’s a buzzword. That is the identity, I guess.“ Ľudmila: „Also Petržalka is biggest mass housing district. There is plenty of them, but Petržalka is the biggest and it has history…so many rumors and legends always, how you get lost here, and the drugs. It’s exaggerated, but I guess that›s how it started.“ Anna: „That’s the identity yes, roughness, danger, urban legends, social outcast…and so on… it has become less, but you don’t get rid of this so easily you know. But this is somehow just how it is pictured, because for me, I never saw Petržalka as something brutal, I don’t know, I still don’t see it. I remember the ‘90s, but that’s long gone. I mean I kind of get it, but for me it’s different.“ [P: Do you take pride in living in Petržalka? Do you like it?“] Radoslav: „Well, yes. I can say yes, it’s just, you know, my home. I go here to the pub, and here to a concert, I went to the school here, played on these playgrounds. , I was born in 1987 so I was conscious during the ‘90s, but still it was a kid’s perspective. Actually I was ashamed,

114

(30) panelák - slang expression for a panel house

(31) street in the other part of Bratislava outside of Petržalka

(32) Slovak street fashion brand

(33) Slovak street fashion brand

back then. I went to high school on Kvačalova (31) and I had problems because I was from Petržalka. I got into many fights, because I was attacked. It was rough. But not anymore.” Marián: „I have the hoodie from Bratiska (32) with Petržalka on it. I have some old shirts too and a hat. I wear those, yes. “ Anna: „Right, and the hipsters with the panel housing shirts. I think it’s from Kompot (33). I don’t have one, but I’ve seen some people wearing it. But the joke is that some of them aren’t even panelák kids (group laughing)…or maybe they are, what do I know?“ Marián: „They just pretend they are (laughing)…gangsters, tough life.We were trash and now it’s cool, how about that? And if I like to live here, yeah, it’s ok…and write this down and say this to everyone: it’s not a ghetto (laughing)! It’s starting to be cool this panel housing stuff. And the communist stuff, all these communist buildings in the city like Prior, the Radio and SNP bridge. I’ve seen these paper puzzles where you can build your own paper panel house and put it onthe shelf, somewhere in a bookstore.” Ľudmila: „I know people who are super proud. I guess I’m too but I’m not rapping about it [laughing].“ Radoslav: „I’m proud! I guess I need that hoodie. I like to tell people like ‚yeah, I’m from Petržalka! Deal with it!‘…no I’m joking. But I think that it also means that you’re kind of trained in life. Like you have been through a lot, you have seen things. When you say you from here, nobody is going think about some poslihed dude with a lot of money. This is like, school of life.“ Marián: „But it’s not like that anymore, no. It’s a normal district now, I’d even say people are striving to move in here, it’s very convenient, it’s close to the center, it’s nice. I guess the coin has flipped.“ [P: Would you say you share this with your fellow neighbors, this kind of ‚status‘ of being a resident of Petržalka?] Radoslav: „Absolutely [everyone nods as well]. We’re in the same boat, you know, it’s not like your house is different from your neighbor. Maybe a different color now [laughs]. I guess that’s changing as well, with all the new people coming.“

115

Following interview was performed at Draždiak lake on Monday at noon. Three men in the retirement age, Milan, Ján and Jozef spend a summer day fishing. While during the previous interview the understanding of ‚identity‘ was smooth and the expression was incorporated into the talk rather easily, in this case it was not as automatic. As the first experiences they had with Petržalka were during socialism, it exists as a memory and is constantly used for comparison with the later stages. The prevalent view of the mass housing district tends to be sentimental in sense of longing for or recalling the initial experiences in the district. This generation was adapting to the district in a different time and different context, when the meaning of self-concept was highly influenced by collectivistic visions and socialist propaganda. Obviously they tend to think about identity differently. Milan: „Petržalka changed a lot. There there was nothing when I came, just the panel houses. Not even sidewalks, grass, nothing. Here everywhere were just piles of soil. I even helped to build it, you know back then, there were obligatory brigades. Back then when not everyone had a car, that was so much better, now it’s a circus, cars everywhere…everything was better back then.“ Jozef: „I have a 26 year old grandson and he’s looking to buy an apartment here. It’s a similar apartment to what we got and now it’s like 4-5 Million (34). After 1989, we bought the apartment for 170 000 crowns.“ Milan: „But it was a luxury to be here, we were on the waiting list. My wife was sitting at the people’s committee’s office everyday (35), that also helped. And then we moved in here and we knew many people already. It was like ‚oh they put you here too?‘. And then we laughed and talked about which sector we live in and if we already has a grocery store around [laughing].”

(34) Older generation tends to use the old currency - Slovak crowns

(35) socialist administrative office

Jozef: „After 1989, it wasn’t prestigious anymore. We were thinking about moving away, because we lived in a house with quite some problems, there were constantly drug addicts lying on the stairs. You know, downstairs where the post boxes are and then in the basement and the shared rooms. We were locking it, but they still got in somehow. But then we stayed because we thought it won’t get better anywhere else.“ [P: What would you say to a statement that Petržalka has identity?] Milan: “I’d say it’s not a special place, because it’s not for me as I said, I live here for 40 years, but I guess you’re asking if that’s special for other people…no it wasn’t special…we all moved in here at once, together, there was no such thing as special.“ Ján: „Everybody knows Petržalka. People were looking at it through their fingers (37), not at first though. But that’s not identity...identity is that you are what you are…I don’t know how

116

(37) Slovak slang expression for judging someone, looking away from sight of them

to…my old brain doesn’t manage…it’s like you belong somewhere. Like when you’re Slovak then you speak Slovakian and you know the foods and dances and so on…and then you have this identity.“ (39) an expression for a person from Petržalka

Milan: „I always say I’m Petržalčan (39), always. In fact my colleagues at work were rolling their eyes every time I said it. Not Bratislava, but Petržalka. That’s not the same. The rest of Bratislava never liked Petržalka. And the other way. That was even before there were any panel houses. I have a friend and his house was demolished because they wanted to build this. And he was fighting for that house. But he was forced out of the house then. He later got an apartment here, but he was always hating the rest of the city. And of course that they torn down his house, it was after his grandgrandparents. I think that was the identity of Petržalka. The roots.” [P: Did you ever feel judged for living in Petržalka?] Ján: „Yes. But I didn’t care so much.“ Jozef: „That was after 1989. Before that, what would you be judged for? But after that yes. I have family in villages and they were like ‚why don’t you just move away‘. But where to?“ Milan: „Yes, but I don’t care anymore. People have worse problems. I just want my peace. I only heard that while I was still working, now I rarely leave Petržalka so I don’t meet those people anymore. I have all my friends here.“

117

Emilia, who spent more than 30 years in the district and had to move away to take care of her mother, comes to Petržalka on regular basis. The interview was performed in her home in a village close to the town Senec. Emilia: „I go there whenever I have time. I grew up in this house (points at the neighbor house in the village), but my life was in Petržalka. All my friends are still there, I miss them, we lived together, worked together for so long. I would never move away if I didn’t have to take care of my mother.“ She further elaborates on early phases in Petržalka: “It was too much at first. But a person gets used to things. It just panel houses, it goes on and on…but I think it’s a really great place for life. It was for me, I had good times and bad times…as everyone. During the 1990s, for me it was devastating. But for personal reasons, the job situation mainly. We didn’t have any problems with drug addicts or crime in our house. We heard that many people did, but fortunately it wasn’t our case…but I was very cautious, because of the kids, so they don’t join some gangs or take drugs, they were teenagers then. I was closely watching everything in the neighborhood, I was really afraid. But I think it was in every district. But somehow people only talked about Petržalka. For other people, it was like Petržalka was something worse. [...] I exchanged apartments in 1996, because I got divorced. It was also a good environment, no extreme conditions. After that it was ok, I just lived peacefully in my apartment. But it was never as good as before ’89. The truth was that we were missing a lot of things in the beginning, but I just liked that life back then. We lived in Dvory II sector close to the Janko Kráľ Park. I loved it there, and the life in the house was very good, as I said, we lived like a family. [...] Petržalka is special for me, I spent my life there. I have all the memories there, my friends…I go there at least once a week.“ [P: Do you think it has identity?] Emilia: „Identity? It’s like personality?…if Petržalka has personality? [P: Anything you think according to your understanding of identity.] Emilia: „Personality…the way it looks like, that doesn’t have identity I think, those are the same panel houses as everywhere else. But on the other hand Petržalka has a personality, but when you look at it, it’s not anything special…I said it’s special for me…but like aesthetically to other people…I don’t think so. Does that count as identity?“

118

[P: Maybe! Would you say that you identify with Petržalka as your home or something that is important to you?] Emilia: „Certainly yes, as I said…I thought you’re asking if it has identity for other people… for others no, for me, and I know that for many other people from Petržalka it does…and also, I think this is important for you…I only heard other people ramble about Petržalka, never people from Petržalka. They…we will always hold our colors.“

119

I started to talk to Roman, a man in his thirties while he was walking his dog on Turnianska street in Lúky VII sector. When I said I am doing research here, he lifted his eyebrows and asked: „Here? Why?“ After a short explanation of my aims and showing him my university card, he agreed to an interview, from which I selected this part: Roman: „I was surprised, because this is like the end of Petržalka. You don’t go here, unless you live here. What is here to see? It’s not like it’s a touristic attraction.” [P: For some it is. Did you know there are tours to mass housing districts for tourists?] Roman: „Really? Oh well. For people who have never seen a panel house I guess.” [P: For example. But there has recently been a trend, that the identity of the mass housing district is being discussed, what do you think of that? Identity of Petržalka.“ Roman: „Yes I caught some articles. Hmm, I don’t know. I live here for 10 years, I came when I started to study here. [...] When I told my mother I live in Petržalka, she has this horrified face. But I really like it, it’s calm and nice here, behind this row [of the houses] there is only a road and then a field. Not much going on. I can be in the city in 15 minutes, at Draždiak [lake] in 5 minutes. I told her there is nothing to worry about. [...] And identity, I think is something that the locals relate to, I can’t really. I guess you have a different point of view if this is your home. Otherwise people would not be raaping about it [laughs].”

In the extracts, we can observe usage of following expressions: 1) Petržalka is special and different, because it is - strange, weird, huge, massive, never-ending, not classic, a buzzword, well-known, rough, dangerous, a personality or on the other side of the spectrum calm, green, a home, comfortable, convenient, a nice place or the best place 2) Petržalka is not special, because the exact aesthetics can be found at other places in the world, yet it is somehow different 3) It is an established expression of the common language with a clear reference to a certain characteristics and symbolics 4) Decades-long constant negotiation between the inhabitants and the rest of the city based on shaming the inhabitants, them defending their personal dignity has led to establishing a coping and defense mechanism

120

5) The negotiations have strengthened and established the reference and symbolics by repeating mentioning the associations with the district 6) The stronger the associations, the stronger the defense mechanism leading to a spiral effect of exaggerating the characteristics, leading to more publicity, formation of the public discourse and an established phenomenon of negotiatiing the identity 7) The inhabitants established a personal association with the district as a result of inevitability of staying (socialism, 1990s) and coping/defense mechanism that had gradually led to identification with the position of the inhabitant. The negative associations of the district have been re-narrated as positive as an act of self-defense. 8) Hardship with possibility to change the location has led to establishment of a certain shared status, a social position and awareness of sharing these with thousands of other people. It is reflected spatially - standardized living and socially - occupying the same/similar status, dealing with similar problems. It resulted into development of the colelctive dynamics based on ‘sameness’, in positive and negative sense, accumulation of the collective experience, establishemnt of shared symbols, references and common language in regard to memory.

COLLECTIVE IDENTITY These mentioned aspects extracted from the discourse before and see where the process »identity« and »collective identity« creation intertwine. Collective identity is usually used to explain the nature of the social movements, the way they generate and sustain commitment and cohesion between the actors over time (Fominaya 2010). As I mentioned, the notion of identity, although understood by the majority of respondents and used correctly in the context, was hard to describe as a definition due its intangible and abstract nature. Collective identity is not different, marked as „notoriously abstract“ (ibid). The centre of the attention for scholars was to understand how collective identity stabilizes the sense of cohesion and mobilizes collective action (Hunt, Benford 2004; Poletta, Jasper 2001). Georg Simmel, studying the formation of the groups pointed out another aspect of such group dynamics, the fact that „the group cohesion develops in tension with conflict in specific historic contexts“ (1955). Fominaya raises these key questions in the matter of identification of collective identity: Can outsiders point to and recognize it? Is it something that potential members identify

121

with and keeps them committed? Or maybe it is not a »thing«, can it be a process? Could it be one generated through the interaction between the members over the time by sharing certain characteristics, similarities, lifestyle, etc.? David Snow argues that there is „no consensual definition“ (2001), but notes that „discussions of the concept invariably suggest that its essence resides in a shared sense of »oneness« or »we-ness« anchored in real or imagined shared attributes and experiences among those who comprise the collectivity and in relation or contrast to one more actual or imagined sets of others, […] a shared and interactive sense of »we-ness«“ (ibid). Verta Taylor and Nancy Whittier formulated a definition explaining collective identity as „the shared definition of a group that derives from members’ common interests, experience and solidarity“ (1992:105) followed by Whittier’s later addition to the concept of collective identity as „located in action and interaction-observable phenomena rather than individual self-conceptions, beliefs and attitudes“ (1995:16) Alberto Melucci sets also a different point of view and sheds light on the role of collective identity in the social movement arguing that „the empirical unity of the social movement is rather a result than a starting point” (1995:43). By this, he is rejecting the idea that the collective identity is given (Fominaya, 2010) and instead he urges to focus on finding out how the collective actor is formed in the first place. He also compares the role of the individual belief and personal meanings to the dynamics of the collective action, and repeats that it happens through the act of negotiation, understanding and repeated interaction constructed and shared by the actors (1995) and further that collective identity involves the ability to distinguish the collective self from the other and to be recognized by these others (1995, cit. by Fominaya 2010). Fominaya further notes that collective identity as a process „involves cognitive definitions about ends, means and field of action [as a] process given voice through a common language and enacted through a set of rituals, practices and cultural artifacts“ (2010:395). This construction of the cognitive framework does not necessarily have to happen through the unified and coherent ideal though. It means that in order to reach a mutual structural understanding, the actors do not have to completely agree on the beliefs, interests or ideologies to come together (ibid). However, they have to shape a cognitive framework - the formation of the collective identity through the conflict situations and tensions specific to the historic contexts as „conflict provides the basis for the consolidation of the group identity and for solidarity, rather than shared interests“ (Melucci 1995:48). The importance of these emotional ties and affections are repeatedly highlighted all over the literature. The assuring of what »we are« automatically selects out what »we are not« and creates a boundary creating a make the members reciprocally identify commonalities and differences with the group members and the outsiders (the

122

Fig.51 [right] A social media post of Bratiska street clothing brand, “Which of these district has a bigger hype in Bratislava: The Old Town or Petržalka?”

protagonist and the antagonist) - the comparison aspect. The differentiation is reflected in multiple ways: behavioral and verbal - formulating differences and presenting it to the other side by expressing certain behavior or verbalizing the differences; or manifesting on the physical level. The connection between the material culture and collective identity through the ritual practice can be done by using symbolic resources. „Symbolic resources as signifiers“ (Fominaya 2010:396) can often also commercial extensions of the membership and strengthen the factor of otherness by showing either a piece of merchandise or a self-made symbol. The pieces represent the shared meanings of consciousness, what Melucci calls contributing to formation of the cognitive framework (1989). Regarding the demonstration of the symbols, several respondents mentioned usage of t-shirts, bags, buttons or hats with logos as a way of identification with Petržalka. The intention of this practice is to make it visible to the others and »reveal« the identity. Just as wearing a team-scarf at the football match to differentiate the fan clubs, wearing such product relies on the knowledge of the collective to understand the reference. It is a form of non-verbal negotiation.

Fig.52 [left] T-shirt ‘PaneLove’ from the clothing brand Kamo Fig.53 [right] Bag from glothing brand Bratiska

A SILENT NATION Collective identity is inevitably linked to the shared collective action (Melucci 1989) primarily concerned with the socio-psychological aspects (Gamson 1992). Because of the psychological character of this matter, it is important to take into consideration the specifics of the cultural contexts - in this case Slovakian culture. If we look at the history, major events which are in other countries usually marked by severe conflict and excruciating acts, go by without much excess. Caroline Baker in her work about Slovak nature writes: „In the face of an increasing number of bloody dissolutions of states around the world, the »velvet divorce« between Czechs and Slovaks has often been cited as evidence that such excesses can be avoided“ (1998:45). »Velvet Revolution« of the November 1989, although certainly carrying signs of much more radical event, was compared to the standard revolutionary event with »velvet« procedure. Recent tragic events that marked the spring 2018 were followed by several protests with masses of Slovaks standing up for »polite Slovakia« (40) silently marching through the streets. Božena Slančíková-Timravá describes Slovak nature in one of the celebrated works of Slovak literature Ťapákovci: „Silence

124

(40) Pochod za slušné Slovensko A march for polite Slovakia

(41) cited from the interview by Majerová 2016

reigns. Somehow conversation has stalled, even though there are fourteen people in the room […], not even the child’s screaming troubles them. They are content even though it screams - they are content regardless“ (1914:13). The nature of the personality is of course much more complex and these examples oversimplified. What is, however, undeniable, is the general tendency towards modesty and non-excessive behavior, also usually falsely understood as lack of ambition by foreign observers. Stanislav Kirschbaum cites the words of Peter Pares, the British consul-general to Slovakia who commented the atmosphere after the after-war independence declaration: „…there were no great manifestations of joy, the townsfolk went about their normal business as if nothing happened, […] the general impression is one of apathy or pessimism“ (cit. by Krischbaum 1995:190). Steiner argues that „whatever they think of them [Slovaks], in a needed moment there is no doubt they are prepared to bring the highest sacrifice and show their real mettle“ (173:66). As an example: the famous photography shot of a man standing in from of the Soviet tank with throw open shirt from the day of Warsaw pact-led invasion in August 1968 in Bratislava was granted a credit of the most notable photography of the 20th century. The man on the picture, Ladislav Bielik, became a worldwide symbol of resistance. His family only learned about his act after the shot became famous appearing in the newspaper worldwide. His daughter commented on the act saying that „he did not tell anything, he said he was just passing by and saw the tanks“ adding: „I guess we are all more of silent warriors“ (41).

The reason I included this explanation, is to bring up the subject of the specificity of interviewing Petržalka’s inhabitants. To approach them was an act of art itself. It was important to find the right way to not just approach them, but to communicate such sensitive and personal subjects, entering their personal spaces, asking them to recall memories, sometimes of a painful character. On the other side, the known straight-forward low-key communication style with low regard for political correctness (often described as offensive) ensured the authenticity of the situations and responses. It also worth mentioning the Slovak attitude towards the authority. Kirschbaum describes the pattern of collective behavior - passive, resigned, suspicious and almost always standing in opposition - as a result of unsuccessful way of handling external pressure originating from the major historical events and the acts of oppression during the entire millennia (1973). Events and transitions after publishing his work even reinforced these attitudes noticeable as severe disillusion and disregard to anything representing the position of power. For the researcher and the interviewer it is therefore crucial to establish a common ground with the respondent (not to resemble a representat of an authority) to overcome the initial suspicion or distrust. Once this ground is established, the communication was fluent and open.

125

A mobilization of a movement or a group formation in Slovakia carry certain distinct characteristics. It has to be understood within its context as well as the dynamics of the cohesion. A membership, a formation, a movement normally gets more self-promotion, is louder, proud, identified as »we« and wants to be recognized by others. In Slovakia it happens much more subtly. One might argue, understandably, if such characteristics fulfill the precondition for an impactful collective action. Yet I consider the »loudness« of the collective actions only a secondary factor. Impactful actions call more for consistency of the routines based on the common ground and thus acquire legitimate force with possibility to transform the conditions and spaces. The development of such dynamics can be subtle, yet fruitful as they are a matter of ever-developing everyday practice as well. Regarding the processual development of the submerged networks or collective formations, Melucci notes that their impact cannot be reduced only to visible expressions (cit. by Fominaya 2010). He stresses the meaning of collective identity generating networks and cultural meaning through everyday routine and interaction, and insists that it is the main reason why they must be understood as a dynamic and reflexive process (ibid). Steve Buechler also argues that collective identity should be understood in terms of continuum, with structurally and historically given identities at one end and collective identities that must be formed from scratch at the other (cit. by Fominaya 2010:398). Collective identity as an element of strengthening or sustaining the networks contains all kinds of (potentially) bonding aspects such as shared interests, goals, subcultures, rituals, ideologies, practices or values, commitment, solidarity worldview, tactics and strategies, oppositions, or definitions of the »other«. Fominaya stress out the fact that „these are not synonymous and cannot be reduced to any of these things“ (2010:398).

126

FINDINGS To build a referential framework explaining possible ways of approaching the concept of identity, various theoretical models have been reviewed. These were summarized into seven main categories for further recognition in the interviews extracts. These categories were used to analyze the research material and identify the aspects indicating the presence of the identity-inducing/fostering factors. The material consists of quantitative and qualitative results.

127

IDENTIFYING WITH PETRŽALKA ACROSS THE 20TH CENTURY During the first half of the twentieth century, Petržalka was an area of shifting boarders assigning variety of political and cultural statuses to the area, frequently re-classified and annexed to different geopolitical terrains. The residents were repeatedly exposed to different choices, they had to evaluate and claim their belonging to a specific culture or political affiliation. The rural settlement was also facing frequent initiations of annexation to the city of Bratislava, which was fought against by the Petržalka inhabitants. Over the course of five decades, the inhabitants had to make a conscious choice of what they identified with, which was accompanied by the internal process of reasoning resulting into identification with one of the sides. In the second half of the century, Petržalka was remodeled into a new district. The new mass housing was meant to foster the identity of the socialist citizen. It was imposed and did not form naturally. Socialist identity was understood as given concept that had to be followed. According to the responses of the interviewees, none of them correlated it to their personal identities. The »identity-inducing« policies of the socialist order have not been successful in linking personal agendas of the people to the system. The vision of a homogenous universal socialist identity as a concept has collapsed along with the collapse of the regime. The first reference to Petržalka’s identity started to emerge during the 1990s. For the first time Petržalka is described as »home« and the collective of the inhabitants as »us«. The analysis of the ethnographic material bring up themes of sameness of the people going through daily struggle and facing the sights of the social decline. The collected material shows a prevalent usage of the »we« and »everybody«, individual experiences are also often explained in the context of the collective. Sameness is stressed as a social status and spatial occupation. Relating to the social condition, a strong theme of stigmatization appears with more than 93% of respondents reporting feeling stigmatized at a certain point in the past or at the present moment. Interviews show a pattern of negotiation of the negative image with the rest of the inhabitants of the city as an act of self-defense, and gradually as an act of defense of everyone else as a practice of relating the stigma to not just an individual, but all of the inhabitants. The long-term acts of comparison, negotiation has shaped and confirmed the affiliation of the people to the district, which resulted into identification with the place. Stigma can thus be understood as a factor contributing to formation of Petržalka’s identity. More than 82% of respondents claim to be proud of their origin and/or residence.

128

By repetitive usage, these have been transferred into the later post-socialist period (till 2010) as established interpretations of the past and present occurrences. In the interviews, the residents were using established terms and narratives while referring to the district. Usage of almost identical phrases and ways of describing the relation to the district created a coherent image of the perceptional imagery. This coherence led to establishment of specific symbols related to the memory of the space. PetrĹžalkaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s inhabitants have developed and currently operate with a stable imagery of their environment. The identification with the district is a result of a long-term process of adapting to new contexts, environments, social conditions while they are being compared, negotiated, adapted to, accepted - and thus transformed. The established meanings and patterns are currently developing into a network, reflecting in sharing values goals and interests (in communities), ideologies and oppositions (claiming the identity and positioning it against the other side) or development of subcultures referring to the districts. The inhabitants also operate with a coherent symbolics and references to the memory. This entire phenomenon is a subject to a general public discourse.

129

COLLECTIVITY

THE SOCIAL CONDENSER „Narkomfin - the sealed key to the utopia.“ (Mikheil Mikadze) Moisei Ginzburg, testing an avant-garde Constructivist theory proposed a radical social experiment, a collective house for government employees - Narkomfin. Since 1932, a prominent site in Moscow hosts a multi-level reinforced concrete structure containing apartments and social spaces interconnected through bridges and sharing a functional rooftop. Ginzburg’s concept of the »social condenser« includes besides the residential part shared kitchens, space for social interaction and collective activities. His attempt to influence social behavior through a new type of architectural design challenged established class hierarchies and promoted egalitarianism through overlapping spatial relationships and circulation was groundbreaking (Nikolaeva 2015). The timing of the construction completion aligning with the time of Jozef Stalin’s rise to power caused that the concept was repurposed and the meaning altered in order to represent the new regime of the post-revolutionary Russia (ibid). Despite the political hijack of the project, the intention and the theoretical background behind the social condenser became one of the most influential spatial concepts of the 20th century spreading virally across the globe. One of the most prominent architects of the era, Le Corbusier, studied Narkomfin building, later transferring his knowledge into his social housing projects and designing the famous Unite d’Habitation - a machine for living. Narkomfin’s original progeny, infused with social ideals of the constructivist design suffered the circumstances of the political moods and became a subject to economic advantage. Instead of further exploration of its potential for the social benefit, it was used to embrace industrialization through the production of the large-scale housing. A revolutionary concept turned, as often noted, into a conventional type of architecture. Thanks to the technological advance, simplified and oversized versions of Narkomfin mushroomed and inhabited the cities all over the world. Something that would never be possible for Narkomfin in the 1930s. Mass housing districts marked as a spectacular failure of architecture by many was often being blamed for poisoning the Narkomfin concept. This original theory of social housing that has been developed according to the constructivist ideals, was adapted to socialist political agendas or capitalist markets. Narkomfin’s dominant feature consisted of spaces devoted to programs serving not only the personal comfort of the residents, but also boosting the spirit of »sharing«, such as dining halls, libraries, spaces for sport activities or shared kitchen spaces. Later version known from the large housing estates rarely included these types of amenities, yet, the vision of the »collective« living was still present. Its later

132

Fig.54 [top right] Narkomfin building Fig.55 [bottom right] Unite dâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Habitation 133

version, Le Corbusier’s Unite d’Habitation in Marseille and it slightly adapted version in Berlin, include the amenity selection to a range of communal functions such as shopping mall, bakery or cafe available to the inhabitants only due its spatially elevated position within the building. Shared spaces in mass housing districts as we know them today, were formed at a lower level, devoted to sharing, meeting and the communal function in the parter of the building, accessible from the street. The facilities cover a broader spatial radius, serving inhabitants of the entire block or further. Currently it is time to re-think these structures again. They are considered unworthy of attention or investments and unfit of being included into the future planning. Their general inconvenience usually leads to municipalities deciding that it would be too much effort trying to keep them in a habitable condition, which makes them an easy target for redevelopment projects and developers seeking large-scale sites within the urban intravillan that can be demolished and re-modeled. These considerations completely leave out the inhabitants of the estates, usually counted in tens of thousands. The vast majority of them have spent considerable amount of their lifetime in these districts, co-habiting and appropriating the private and public realm, creating identities and communities that exist today. The time invested in »experiencing« these districts was also an era of testing. We can now react to the concerns of the psychologists raised during the 1960s, predicting tremendous influence of such environment on the human psyche, as well we can assess how such space reacts to the changes of the political, economic and social climate. We can now study how people adjust and create in such spaces, how they perceive them and what the initial aim for the collective living brings into the practice.

ROLE OF THE COMMUNITY SPACE - EXPECTATIONS AND REALITY One of the main goals of the socialist government, which has actively started to implement the ideology during the 1950s, was to reach societal consensus. To cover everyone basic needs, providing universal housing, health care and transportation to everyone equally was a must. The amount of resources invested into a complete re-structuring of the cities and the society was unimaginable by today’s standards (Haumann et al. 2015). It was important to be fast and effective, therefore it was necessary to abandon traditional construction methods that have been proven to be expensive and slow given the circumstances. Considering the post-war living condition in often dilapidated, crowded and overpriced accommodation, a new, sunny and modern flat with running water was an enormous step forward for almost everyone, who has been given the opportunity to move to a newly constructed district. Shared communal and community spaces were the most

134

important assets of these housing projects. They were not only a convenient adding to the housing function, they were an essential ground stones of the housing schemes. Originally they were expected to enable a superior form of communality and urbanity (ibid) based on the socialist visions of egalitarianism and societal cooperation. Generally we can classify three main (originally intended) purposes of the community spaces in socialist mass housing, as: 1)

platforms for identification among the residents

nodes of social activities catalyzing societal coherence, belonging, integra tion and socialist collective identity

plenum that would boost political activation of the residents

Community spaces as platforms for creating the »new society«, which mass housing estates were meant to foster, were particularly important in a sense of network creating and identifying with the collective. The housing policies gradually resulted in first formulated criticism in the 1960s and a crisis at the beginning of the 1970s. At this time, the experiences from the previous two decades have shown that the expectation related to the community spaces were unrealistic. The housing estates built in the following decade carried signs of poor construction and the results were delivered with a significant delay. In districts like Petržalka, most of the inhabitants moved in before any of the community spaces were even functioning. The inhabitants were left in freshly finished bare towers, with hardly any infrastructure at disposal. Depending on the location of the sector, inhabitants waited approximately 3-8 years for the facilities in their building or in a walking distance. During this period, the primary aims of the community spaces (from the socialist perspective) did not come through. While planners and government officials conceptualized community spaces with their potential to shape a specific form of identification, communities using the spaces tended to appropriate such space in their own ways, which resulted into reinterpreting their meanings. The way the residents identified with the individual features of the spaces and practices associated with them, turned out to be significantly different than originally intended. Such discrepancies between intentions and real use created a tension, which can be understood as a one of the factors boosting the identification process. Even though this tension embodies a major challenge for the preservation of the socialist architectural heritage, it might also provide unexpected opportunities (ibid). After 1989 the situation not only did not foster the community in a »planned« way, the crisis provided many tangible reasons that even underpinned the decay of the community spaces. Instead of societal coherence, empty unkept public spaces filled with litter

135

became a plenum of self-organized activities, often of illegal character. Instead of community behavior, it fostered sense of danger. Mass housing estates, the ultimate symbol of the collectivism in the cities, declined physically and socially, and became a place of stigma. The estates were, opposite to the original aims, associated with social disintegration and a lack of identity. Political indifference was also one of the major shortcomings of these urban environments. The dominant associate with the »lack of identity« was the main reason why the stigmatizing discourse exceeded the talks about social and economic problems (ibid). Considering the three main aims of the community and communal space, Haumann et al. pose a question regarding the three original aims of these spaces - identification, societal coherence and political activation (2005): could - and should these be planned at all?The authors argue that stigmatized places, as they turned out to be at a later point, could hardly be understood as the foci of identification (ibid). Even though these spaces do not look as traditional objects that could possibly wake the need to identify with them (from a conventional point of view), I argue that it is important to understand the process of identification as a complex long-term procedure, especially when it comes to identification on a collective level. Stigmatization can, in fact, foster the sense of identification and result into formation of urban identity (see the mechanism described in chapter Identity). Though, it is adequate to ask if it should be planned in the first place. The numerous factors involved in the process of recognition and identification rely on the psyche and its mechanism of a significant amount of people. Even though they are later considered to be a pattern, it is still up to every subject of this mass to develop its own perceptional agenda towards the object or the space. This not only cannot be planned, it should under no circumstances be attempted to, for it creates a risk of developing defective compensating behavioral patterns (such as under authoritarian order).

PETRŽALKA’S UNBALANCED SPACE Today Petržalka celebrates its 45th anniversary, arriving at a point that raises a lot of fundamental questions. Even though its demolishment has been mentioned, the debates did not result into any concrete measures. Technical condition and functional deficits and unbalance is debated. Again, the divergency between the two views is present - the outside view of the public and the perspective of the residents. A young architect I interviewed for this study confessed that he does not „see any future for the mass housing“ and anticipates that „people will gradually, but within a decade or two, purchase apartments elsewhere and move out for their own sake“ due to the „general bad technical condition and an inconvenience to live there“. When I asked how should this process happen practically, what finances will be used for this purchase and where are the alternative residences

136

that could be purchased and accommodate thousands of people, no thoughts have been further offered. However, such attitude is not surprising, for it is often automatically assumed that people do not want to live in these districts and only live there because they do not have any other alternative. „Nobody would stay there, if they did not have to“, was a powerful statement, after which I asked about the background of this interviewee, who then said he grew up in a family house in a rural settlement. Here we observe a common phenomenon - the question of how we identify with »home«, with a place towards which we build positive associations and anticipate feelings of »belonging«. It is often assumed, that mass housing is unable to foster such associations. In the survey and in the interviews the majority of the residents, however, claimed that they do want to stay and keep their residence, not only as inevitability, but as a choice. Haumann et al. notes that „the inside image is very often a positive one, whereas the outside tends to focus entirely on the failures“ (2005:11). The residents are very aware of the negative image that is projected onto the district, therefore onto them, which resulted into building of various compensation mechanisms (also debated in chapter Identity). Usually the residents take a very good care of their apartment units and spend a decent amount of money and time to renovate, adapt and upgrade their homes. On the contrary, the public spaces have been facing severe neglect for decent amount of time. There are two main reasons that caused this condition. First, the communal space fell to a private owner during the privatization phase or under the district administration, who began to rent it for commercial purposes. In some cases, the space was used for a limited amount of time and afterwards was left unused, empty and often locked without possibility to access it. The second reason is a distinction between the spaces of concern for the residents. As the public and private constituted two realms with two separate list of rules that applied to them, it caused establishing of a sort of standard approach of how one treats the private - »the own space« and the public - »the sphere of the other« which constituted and at later points recalled the control of the public agenda resulting into anxious behavior of the citizens. The public functioned under the restricted agenda of what is tolerable and a ban of possibility to alter or co-create the space. Gradually, people have adapted to this order and have lost relation and interest to participate on creating the public and the communal, which is now in a process of change. This contrast is physically projected into space and creates sometimes bizarre sights of for example perfectly groomed rose gardens existing right next to littered, damaged and unkept greenery. Visually, the boarder between these two »spaces of concern« is blazing. Haumann et al. note that this „physical contrast might lead to the assumption, that residents do not care about these spaces or that they do not mean anything to them“

137

(2005:11). The fact is that these spaces simply lie outside the area the residents they can be responsible for (ibid) and often do not have the tools and resources to care for them or even access them in the first place. Also, it is not primary the residents who are responsible for the maintenance of the public space, even though it is often assigned as their disinterest. The residents themselves first commented on and complained the lack of (accessible) communal space. Reported neglect and bad technical condition of the spaces were, however, not a subject of focus for the municipality. The improvement initiatives usually appear in a fitful manner for a limited amount of time before the communal elections. Afterwards they tend to vanish quickly. The residents accommodated to this circle, they mostly do not rely and expect the city or the district to act upon the situation. While skepticism and disillusionment still exists, over the time the residents developed strategies attempting to cope with the situation by themselves. Today many active residents found communities and are actively engaged in the matters of the public space and the communal space. The problems with the inaccessibility of these shared community spaces leave them often with one solution - trying to mobilize the owners of these spaces lobbying for better maintenance. In some cases the spaces lied empty for so long that it is unknown who should be contacted and undertake the responsibility. The community activities that recently emerged, focus primarily on improvement of the environment and the living conditions in the district and operate with limited budget or resources. The activity usually consist of people gathering in order to perform certain activity, such as collecting trash around the block, cleaning playgrounds, building and constructing meeting points or gardening. Some also have an additional focus on promoting the district as a whole outside of its area in order to look for sponsorship and then improve the existing condition through a specific activity.

SOCIAL CAPITAL AS A BEARING ELEMENT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The measurable factors of well-being of the society are usually primarily connected to the economic sphere. There are statistics of life expectancy, education level, access to the services, health condition of the residents, ecological factors, etc. Besides these, less quantifiable (subjective) factors exist and are extremely important to be included into the quality of life influencers, such as personal structure, self-actualization, life goals and reaching them or social relationships (Janto 2016). Indirectly, scholars try to measure them through the declared feeling of overall life satisfaction, degree of involvement in volunteering activities, percent of people living in partnerships or declared quality of the social relationship that surround them. There are several quantifications chart that compile all these Fig.56 A terrace parterre on KrĂĄsnohorskĂĄ street in PetrĹžalka, renovated fassade and groomed garden in contrast with the deteriorated terrace

139

factors into the charts, such as Human development index, Happy planet index, Global peace index or Gross national happiness (ibid). The information that can be extracted from these charts point at, almost exclusively, at the economic factors that are generally considered to contribute to the development and the happy society. Janto argues that „these measurements exclude the non-economic aspects which are a subject to the socio-cultural anthropology“ (2016:8). One of the most important non-economic factors, he notes, is the principle of the participation of the inhabitants, for it is a „pre-requisite of purposefulness and sustainability“ of the development (2016:9). It cannot be a „mechanical import of interventions from the outside, it has to come from the inner sources […], while the most valuable potential is brought by the residents - their abilities, responsibility, level of cooperation, defining problems and finding solutions, awareness of the purpose and building of the social relationships“ (ibid). Instead of passively waiting to get help, that does not have to come, it fosters active involvement and realization, that the residents, in fact, do possess powerful tools to form their environment and communities. Described values and qualities are by scholars encompassed by a term »social capital« of the location. Social capital is a social network based on trust between the members of the group that is beneficial to the group and brings gain (Janto 2016). The term »capital« points at the fact that is can be looked at as a resource. Robert Putnam defined the theoretical understanding of the social capital and shifted its definition to „human relationships connected to the community living“ (Putnam 2000, cit. by Janto 2016:9). He states that when social capital is higher, the locality is healthier, more inhabitable and more productive, public space is cleaner, people are friendlier and the streets are safer“ (ibid). „When the social relationships and mutual trust strengthen the responsibility for the space, increase social control and safety, support cooperative attitudes and allow sharing activities with focus on improving the environment“ (Janto 2016:9). Janto additionally stresses the role of the social capital as a carrier of tangible and intangible practices and routines, even the simple ones, which are crucial for place identity creation (ibid).

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IN PETRŽALKA Even though it is theoretically possible to accept the fact that the socio-cultural aspects are important for creation of the well-being, practically there is still focus on the economic (short-term and unsustainable) aspects. The result is the overall economization of life, but also the unfamiliarity with the seemingly »slippery, non-measurable and hardto-grasp« social and cultural factors. One of the dominant and most defined approaches

140

focused on these aspects, on the residents and their relationships as the most important inner source for the location, is the intentional community development (Janto 2016). In Slovakia, this approach emerged during the 1990s, as a result of the strategy of Europeanization with an intention to apply the Western models. Because of the (by socialism influenced) understanding of the community, it took more than a decade to properly startto developing programs with this focus. Besides that, the 1990s were marked by more dominant societal problems, which made the community development a rather secondary issue. Since the community development navigate the people towards taking responsibility and being in charge of the events that influence them on a daily basis, the first phase was dedicated to overcoming the mass disillusionment, passivity and skepsis. In the late 1990s, the model of the »community organization« was applied (ibid). The activities are led by a trained community worker who had a position of a coordinator of the activities. Janto as a trained leader of these initiatives describes that this model is „typical for pressuring the residents against those holding the responsibility for finding solutions, such as municipal administration or local entrepreneurs […], it identifies those in power and supports the confrontation of the residents with these powerful figures […] and balances out the inequality between them“ (2016:15). It gave the residents the lost sense of empowerment and navigates the dissatisfaction towards qualitative change based on the initiatives with a clear vision, planned activities and local leaders. Still, the first stage was focused on mobilizing of the residents while the activities were organized and led by a trained professional. It usually contained pressuring and confrontational aspects throughout the process which often resulted into exhaustion and aversion by the people and distrust and suspiciousness among the authorities (ibid). These moods were negatively influencing the cooperation and despite the successful outcome of many of the demanding initiatives, there were requests to »soften« the approach. The second stage approached implemented a more cooperative model of the community development. This model abandons focusing on the power conflict and instead of seeking confrontation, it pursues agreement and fostering a non-conflict environment. Instead of mobilizing the people as in the first stage, it focuses on motivating them. Instead of targeting problems and demanding solutions, it supports the residents in developing their own activities and own engagement. The pressuring is still partially present, but the focus has shifted to seeking consensus and co-creation. At this point, circa around 2010s the public space and its role starts to be debated among professionals. Term »public space« gradually establishes its position in the common language, it spreads from the professional field to regular citizens. What happens, is a redefinition of the public space, its role, what is its content and who is responsible. The »radius of concern« (further debated in the chapter Transition) is growing, the boarder between the private and public is less sharp.

141

People start to enter streets and parks with a new intention. At this point they know they can express an opinion (compared to the past), openly criticize, point and demand. People started to gather in protests, meetings and collected ideas. In this phase still dominated more of the demanding and less of the co-creative approach. Some of the community initiatives even transformed into organizations, such as »Petržalka’s playgrounds« (Janto 2016:18). Thank to these initiatives the vast majority of the playgrounds in Petržalka are now renovated. Janto points out the differences in approaches between the model of community organization (the first stage), which would be asserting that the residents create pressure on the municipality to a so-called »pro-cooperative model« (the third stage) which highlights the own responsibility and participation of the residents. Nevertheless, it was an important step towards the third stage.

THE CURRENT COMMUNITY OF PETRŽALKA After 2010, a number of communities were founded. The years of coordinated community work has contributed to discovering »local leaders« or simply awakened the interest in some individuals who now actively lead communities in the district. Even though there are initiatives consisting of trained professionalS such as architects, planners or human geographers, many of the civic groups are led by mothers on the maternity leaves or young generation in their productive age. At the end of the 2010s Petržalka has also successfully established a cooperative network of the communities and organizations which has been facilitated through a collaborative platform »Jarmok petržalskej komunity« (Fair of Petržalka community - JaPKo) or »Petržalský sprievodca« (Petržalka guide) (ibid). Currently communities and initiatives in Petržalka: Mladá Petržalka (Young Petržalka); My sme Petržalka (We are Petržalka); Mládež Petržalka (Youth Petržalka); Naša Petržalka (Our Petržalka); Lepšia Petržalka (Better Petržalka); Petržalský okrášľovací spolok (Petržalka beautifying association); Petržalka, miesto kde žijem (Petržalka, the place where I live); Zelená Petržalka (Green Petržalka); Iniciatíva za efektívnu a ekologickú dopravu (Initiative for effective and ecological traffic); Občianska iniciatíva lepšia doprava (Civic initiative better traffic); Psí Park Petržalka (Dog Park Petržalka); Participácia Bratislava Petržalka (Participation Bratislava Petržalka), Stavebná polícia (Building Police) etc. Janto states that from a position of an experienced community worker he often faced a dilemma: his role was to facilitate the communication, which was a challenging task especially in the early phases. With his team he was supposed to navigate the engaged residents and not speak for the community, which was possible only when the community

142

had a strong local leader. Learning to step into an empowered role is still an act that people adapt to. Gradually, some residents actively use their voice, others do not. The goal is to find the balance between the positions within the cooperative model that people are willing to accept and perform the activities naturally and organically. Still persisting concept among some, that being a part of the collective and taking part in community work is a mandated task and not performing the role means suffer the consequences. We can see a process of re-narration of the meaning of the collective and community from the programmatic one to an act that occurs naturally. This was also a subject to the interviews: How do you understand community? How is it performed? Among responses the definitions varied. Throughout the process, the character of the answers naturally split into two main categories correlating to the age group. I will demonstrate on the sample of ten answers:

According to the younger residents (21-40 years) of Petržalka, community is: „a group of people going towards the same goal“ „a group of people sharing the same values“ „a group of people sharing the same characteristics“ „people who help each other and are interested in each other’s lives“ „a group of people interacting on daily basis“ „understanding other people, interest in a collective goal“ „initiative that is not organized and is for selected group of people“ „a group of people sharing interests“ „a collective with a shared interest and goal“ „a group initiative going towards shared goals“ „association based on a shared thought and goal“

143

On the other hand, respondents over 40 were tending to nuance the definitions differently. According to them, community is: „a group of people sharing a vision“ „a society“ „co-living“ „cooperation“ „association of people“ „a group of people occupying the same place“ „knowing your neighbors“ „sharing“ „people among which I live“ „living together in the neighborhood“ By comparing the tendencies of these answers, the younger part of the interviewees often included shared interest, goals, values and thoughts into the definition, while the older counterpart community meant only a shier fact of inhabiting the same space. Some of them mentioned importance of a network and interaction, but mostly without any intangible substance that would bring the people together in a first place. Similar tendency occurred when the people were asked if they see any connection between the community and identity. The younger generation answered:

„community is based in identity“ „community forms the identity of an individual and the opposite way, I guess“ „identity is to belong somewhere and that place is a community“ „identity is the character, thought and the goal of the community“ „having an opinion of some trait is the identity and where you share it is the community“ „there must be harmony between them, they need each other“

144

„that is how values are created, by connecting them“ „a group of people with the same identity belonging to the same place“ „every community has an identity“ „every person leaves something in the community and that creates the identity“

The counterpart answered:

„there is no correlation“ „it is not important to connect them“ „there might be a correlation, so you know where you belong“ „the group of people with the same identity belongs to the same place“ „there is no automatic correlation, but sometimes you have a community that has its identity“ „community builds the identity, but not the other way around“ „depends on the people, those who live like robots can create communities with some values, otherwise not“ „I guess it has something to do with being able to fit“ „that’s too philosophical and not important“ „they might be connected, but not necessarily“ „they have no connection“

The first group directly connected the two terms, and identified the value, traits and characteristics as identity and act of sharing as inherent to community. The second group had difficulties with grasping the term identity and struggled to use it in the context. Most of them did not find any correlation, try to make sense of the union or did not work with

145

the intangible ÂťvalueÂŤ component. Own contribution, interest and personality were in the background or not present in the answers, while the other group tended to stress the meaning of the individual contribution, interest and personality as a main aspect. We observe different understanding of collectivity and the role of the individual in the collective among the groups.

146

To examine the community environment in Petržalka, the online survey has been performed. Five active communities contributed to this survey. The beginning of their founding is dated between 2015 and 2018. As a main activity they specified to “mobilizing of people for the communal politics, engagine people in volutary work and perform positive changes in Petržalka district.” The number of members varied from 15 to 30 active inhabitants. All of the communities reported increased interest for the community work during the last years. While the evaluations of the tendencies were positive, they also mention no help of the district municipality. The majority of them pointed out as their primary challenge limited resources which was also specified to lack of space to perform community activities. Yet it is not the scarcity of the spaces, it is their inacessibility, they noted. To improve the community environment even more, “there should be more support from the municipality”, says one of the founders. “If not financial support, then they should allow us to use the shared spaces, not just us, but all the communities”, as there is an “abundance of shared space that nobody uses.” The founder further mentions: „We don’t even try to contact anybody anymore. We would spend so much time with writing proposals that nobody is ever going to read. We are trying to motivate people to become candidates in the communal elections, people who currently work in communities already. Otherwise there is no link, nobody is responding to our letters. Instead we use the time for the actual work. We want to access these [shared] spaces, there are whole buildings we could use, that just stand there and nobody is taking care of them. Once we have some people there [in the communal politics], they could move something.” When I asked what would be the plan with the spaces, he added: „Anything really. We would create a community center, for everybody to come in the afternoon. We organize some crafts and workshops, for children, youth, adults and seniors, everyone. There are hundreds of people in one house only, where do they go in their free time, what should they do? They have the building right in front of their windows or it is right in their house. Some of these spaces have been empty for fifteen years, clearly nobody was interested to use them. Besides couple of pubs there is nowhere to go.“ Another member adds: „Me personally, I was tired of waiting for something. There have been promises, but they never came through. So when we started it was really like ‚if you don‘t do it, you don‘t have it‘ kind of mentality. And people here are very skilled, they can do things manually. But at the same time, when I came out with this wish I was suprised that many people felt the same. Not everyone, but some. So we thought, ‚they don‘t care what we do anyways‘, so we just started

147

to do random things. I painted a bench with flowers and collected the trash around the house. Somebody brought two chairs, we painted them. And we just hung around and brainstormed, people brought things they did need in their homes anymore. There was no budget, just leftovers and unneeded things. Later it took off and we were organizing a small budget we put together. Step by step, from nothing.â&#x20AC;&#x153;

148

Fig.57, 58 Empty public facility buildings on Beňadická street

The quantitative data from the general survey also confirm the claims of the community workers. While more than 81% reports a difnite increase in engagement in own environment, more than 65% evaluates the conditions for such activity as worsened. The force that has emerged can thus operate only within available spaces (public space) with limited resources (own contributions). As there is no formulated response from the municipality, who is responsible for governance of the shared space, it is no surprise that the communities seek to »infiltrate« the communal politics with already active community workers in order to enable concrete procedures that would allow to legally enter and use the inaccessible shared space. Till then, they can only focus in improvement of the accessible, the public shared space.

149

Fig.59 ATM as an only functional spot of the complex

FINDINGS

Re-narration of the collective concept The first inhabitants of the new socialist Petržalka were moving into the district quickly and in an organized manner. The number of inhabitants between the 1970s till the end of the 1980s grew rapidly, reaching almost a decuple of the status before the construction. Petržalka’s new inhabitants consisted prevalently of generation in the productive age with young families employed by the state companies. The relocation of such large amount of people was a result of an arrangement initiated by the state, which facilitated accommodation for its workers. For many, the new accommodation was of higher standard, yet the relocation was a matter of limited choice that was available as a result of the socialist system. The collective of the new inhabitants moved into bare new houses, the environment did not carry any signs of previous living culture. People from the at that time productive generation tended to speak pragmatically about the relocation, mention collectiveness in connection to the physical presence and gathering of the people in Petržalka. The new district offered, compared to their previous residence, variety of convenient facilities available in short distances. As many of them were workers of the same company, they recognized each other on the street, many speak about knowing their neighbors in the house well as they were of the similar age. Being a part of the collect was understood as a default program and performing community worh as an obligation. They tend to not think about collective as something where to exercise own interest and individuality, rather as a necessity. It is anticipated that such thinking is a result of the learned socialist model of the collective, which happened programmatically. In the understanding of the collective among the younger generation (born around 1980 and later) I observed increased appearance of the own concern with the goals of the collective or sharing. To most of them, formation of the collective or community tends to be a matter of identifying the goals and interests as an impulse for it to occur naturally. The crisis of the collective which occurred in the 1990s was marked by lack of action and coherence. At this time, a temporary form of collectivity - strategic collectivity - appeared. It emerged as a coping mechanism that helped the people navigate through the chaos of the early 1990s in order to exchange information and basic help. The system which generated the previous socialist collective concept was no longer valid. The younger generation started to adapt a different concept during the 1990s and later, they create a substantial part of the active community and collective movements today. In order to foster the process of re-narration of the collective, organized community development has been

152

introduced in Petržalka. The followed progress can be summarized into three phases of development resulting into residents’ ability and interest to form a community based on shared interest and a goal. Physically we can observe it as growing number of established communities currently creating a network.

Focus and spatial expression of the communities The community has become an established practice in Petržalka. Physical reflection of these communities appear organically according to the particular focus of the community. The primary focus of the community work is the improvement of the deteriorated spaces or filling missing functions, it directly reflects the bad technical and/or functional condition of the space. The results of the work are observable as islands of improved spaces within deteriorated public space with clear spatial boundaries. Additionally, communities seek to mobilize active community workers to enter communal politics in order to gain legal tools to access (interior) shared spaces in their housing blocks or other solitaire unused public buildings. Once they gain the needed representation in the communal politics, they plan to enable the access of the spaces for all the active communities and activate the vacant spaces. So far, they only focus on restoration of pubic spaces and motivating people to participate in volunteering. The residents of Petržalka operate with a degree of collective dynamics with observable spatial expressions.

153

ACTING IN SPACE: THE TRANSITION

ON MODERNIST THOUGHT The modernist project - universal and immutable - was based on a tremendous effort (of the Enlightenment thinkers) „to develop objective science, universal morality and law, and autonomous art according to their inner logic“ (Harvey 1990:12). The original idea was to accumulate the knowledge generated by individuals pursuing enrichment of a daily life and overall human emancipation. From those, extraction of rational formulas of social order as well as the modes of thought was meant to liberate the humanity from the irrationalities and the arbitrary use of power. Through eradicating the myth (the »intangible«), the humanity could be given a concept of living, being able to liberate themselves from their chains. It generated doctrines of liberty, equality and universal concept of logical reasoning (ibid). „A good law must be good for everyone, in exactly the same way that a true proposition is true for all“ (Condorcet, cit.by Harvey 1990:13). Adorno and Horkheimer argue that the logic behind this Enlightenment rationality was a logic of domination. In the name of human liberation, the human emancipation would turn into a system of universal oppression (1972). Marshall Berman notes that the discrepancies between the original idea and the outcome can also be a matter of how modernism is being approached - from the material or spiritual perspective (1982). He stresses the fact that the vision of modern life tends to split into these two meta-concepts. „Some people“, he writes, „devoted themselves to »modernism«, which they see as a species of spirit, evolving in accord with its autonomous artistic and intellectual imperatives. Others work within the orbit of »modernization« as a complex of material structures and processes - political, economic, social - which, supposedly, once it has got under way, runs on its own monument with little or no input from human minds or souls“ (1982:131-132). He points out the „pervasive dualism of modern life, the interfusion of its material and spiritual forces, the intimate unity of the modern self and the modern environment“ (ibid). This can build a premise that there is a gap between the idea and the application, or in Habermas words „the means and the ends“. In that sense, Harvey argues that these thoughts constitute a troublesome contraction and stresses that „the goals could never be specified precisely except in terms of some utopian plan“ (1990:14). The fluidness of such plan can therefore look emancipatory to some, while oppressive to others. It also raises the issue of who exactly has (should have) to claim such »truth« and exert the superior reason inclusive the manual under which condition and circumstance should this reason be exercised as power (ibid). Further, Max Weber says it is just a „bitter and ironic illusion“ (cit. by Bernstein 1985:5). He says that even though it maintains the linkage between the rationality and human freedom, the legacy is really purposive-instrumental. This kind of rationality therefore affects the socio-cultural sphere encompassing economy, law, administration or even art. He strictly criticizes strengthening of such thought (purpose-instrumental rationality) and says it

156

„would not lead to the concrete realization of universal freedom but to the creation of an »iron cage« from which there is no escape“ (ibid).

ON DISCIPLINE „The series-produced housing estate should, under good organization, crate an impression of peace, order and cleanliness, and unquestionably teach its inhabitants discipline.“ (Le Corbusier) The »eternal and immutable«, the essence of modernism contains a lack of the natural continuity. In reality of the city, we must deal with continuity. For Harvey, it is the point of adding the destructive nuance to the concept. He notes that being »creatively destructive« or »destructively creative« is in fact a world of becoming (1990:16). The purpose of »creative destruction« is important to understand modernity, because it „derives form the practical dilemmas that faced the implementation of the modernist project“ (ibid). This granted architects a very special position within this new conception, for it meant to have a creative role in defining the essence of humanity. Creative destruction as an essence of modernity contained two elements - the creation and the destruction - and thus, as argued by Frank Lloyd Wright, „the artist must not only comprehend the spirit of his age but also initiate the process of changing it“ (cit. by Harvey 1990:19). Artists, according to Condorcet, had the „most beautiful destiny […] of exercising the positive power over society, a true priestly function, and [are] marching forcefully in the van of all the intellectual faculties in the epoch of the greatest development“ (cit. by Bell 1978:35). Modernists therefore had to accept the »transitory« as the locus of their art and the conditions against which they were supposed to react. Le Corbusier in his City of Tomorrow defends his positions by these words: „People tax me very readily with being revolutionary, […] but the equilibrium they try so hard to maintain is for vital purposes purely ephemeral, it is a balance which has to be perpetually re-established“ (cit. by Harvey 1990:21). He saw the revolutionary purpose in mobilizing the capacities, imposing them from above, implementing the possibilities inherent in the machine and the factory and subsequently projected them into an utopian vision, creating a »machine for living«. Balancing the ephemeral but at the same time the practicality of living brought the concern with the aesthetics. Modernism sought to combine this ambiguity and merge these two aspects by providing sensibly created design for the everyday life. „By order bring about freedom“ was his way to merge the rational order and social aspects which was followed by establishing Athens Charter in 1933 at the Congress of International Modern Architects (CIAM) creating a broad definition of the modernist architectural practice.

157

POSITION OF THE SELF - FROM UNIVERSALISM TO FRAGMENTATION It has been shown that in order for the identity to form, it must exist in a relation, to be compared to the »other«. Mihaela Dumitrescu describes identity as a »divine essence« in relation to what it is not and notes that „it is this demonized »other« that enables us to circumscribe, even consolidate our own identities“ (2001:11). Modernism, so concerned with the objective truths, failed to resolve the issue and explain the position and meaning of the »I« as well as what is it made of. From a general point of view, modernism has only assessed it superficially and did not formulate the real consistency of the »I« and the »other«, for it „heavily relies on the idea of universal reason and social progress achievable through advances in knowledge […] illustrated by the »grand narratives«“ (ibid). These modernist meta-narratives have a major flaw - they aim to define the »generic human nature« without considering the individuality, the difference, the local or an aspect taking into account the sheer existence outside of the totality - the existence of the »other«. Dumitrescu notes that the human subject is being rationalized, unified and understood as a coherent entity. Such perspective only offers a limited perspective and looks at individuality and alterity as an inferior (ibid). The identity dilemma so characteristic to the post-modern and the post-socialist has come up as necessary consequence of this history. The merit of the post-era was to redefine the key elements of the identity - to identify the »I« and the »other«. That meant to „reject the universal reason in favor of specificity, […] and replace the grand narratives by a plurality of narratives that emphasize the difference“ (ibid). The uncertainty and indeterminacy as a result of the collapse of the centre was core of the post-modernism (Bertens 1986). The absence of the stable authoritative referential points has started the tendency towards the definition of the the »self« as a reference. The transition phase was, although shocked and concussed, a revival of the »self«. During socialism the selection of fashion, groceries or different kind of common ware was limited and produced in batches. The ware was of plain, basic, functional design and of higher-quality. Often it resembled a uniform. People wore similar clothes, had almost the same furniture. In mass housing district they lived in standardized apartments of minor spatial variations. The aesthetics was reduced to the basic level ensuring the equality or the sameness. These attempts to limit the variability of life and to reduce and organize the everyday routines, however, did not result into an orderly disciplined society. Even though the control of the public ensured certain patterns of behavior, the realm of privacy experienced emergence of a counter practice compensating the monotony. People were sewing their own clothes at home or arranging ‚independent spaces’ in their basements reaching at least a certain level of individuality and difference. Such counter practices represented an »interruption of the order«, which was according to Michel de Certeau an implicit re-

158

action to the order (1984:xiv). It shows the fact that the everyday practice does not only constitute subordination and submission to the laws (ibid). Instead, it generates the innovative potential for the new routines to arise, where the actors occupying the weaker positions modify and adjust the enforced rules (Kalekin-Fishman 2013: 716-717). The counter reactions constitute an escape without leaving. The subordinate group represents the majority and creates the most and the vast impact in real terms. Everyday practices thus constitute a creation tool for adjusting realities and - appropriating spaces.

THE POWER AND IMPACT OF EVERYDAY PRACTICE According to de Certeau these »ways of operation« constitute the innumerable practices by means of which users re-appropriate the space organized by techniques of socio-cultural production (1984:xiv). He focuses on perception and analysis of bigger or „microbe-like operations proliferating within technocratic structures and deflecting their functioning by means of multitude of tactics articulated in the details of everyday life“. The creative procedures that are exercised by the groups or individuals, who are „caught in the nets of discipline and pushed to their ideal limits“ can be understood as a network of »anti-discipline« (ibid). The utilization of the urban space by everyday rituals, re-use and function of the memory ‚despite‘ the authorities - the extensions of the weighty apparatus - consist of „almost orchestral combinations of logical elements (temporalization, injunction, etc.) which are determined by the circumstances and conjectural demand (1984:xvi). These activities are performed by the majority, yet on the margins. They are unsigned and unread. The actors are unrecognized „discoverers of their own paths in the jungle of functionalist rationality“ (1984:xviii). In mass housing district, the technocratically constructed and functionalized space, new trajectories and paths are subordinated to the paradigmatic orders of spaces that are neither determined nor captured by the system. Since they are not statistically investigated, they are not a subject to classification or calculation, they refer to their own category. Yet they suggest a movement, thus inscription into space (ibid). The »ways of operation« - walking, speaking, ways of using, producing, etc. - each lay down a law itself, establishing a degree of plurality of choices how these operations are performed. These modes of usage „multiply with the extension of acculturation phenomena“ (De Certeau 1984:30) and each represent a way how a person identifies with the place in which he or she lives or works. Though, in the environments constructed in prefabricated manner, as is socialist mass housing, the multitude of individual interventions are

159

visible. They are not (usually) recognized as space-creator, rather they are seen as either intrusive »amateur« interventions or accidents resulting from thoughtless actions. They are not considered important for urban design, yet they are evaluated or criticized. They are visible and invisible at the same time. They remain within the prescribed syntaxes (the paradigmatic organizations of space), they are heterogenous to them and represent different preferences. A panel house with a repetitively structured facade, empty terraces around them or a generic public space, they all become a canvas for these expressions. Here and there somebody decides to paint their balcony green, a neighbor decides for yellow, other for pink. After several years of use a number of people decide to renovate their deteriorated balcony banisters, each of them in a different style, some of them pick the one that is now on sale, others pick a more expensive profile. Some people decide to close the loggias and create more room in their apartments. Couple of people still have old wooden window frames, visibly different from the upgraded plastic newer versions. After a decade, despite being one building unit, the whole house splits into two administrative sections. Each unit now operates under a different housing association, having their own ideas about the insulation renovation. One section decides to renovate and paint »their« house green. The other section decides not to renovate, because it is a too big of an investment for them right now. »Their« house, the half of the house, remains looking used and grey, with the raster of the prefabricated panels coming together on the facade. Just around the corner at the other house, there is a small nicely groomed rose garden. An arc around which the flowers grow, the bench and a small water pump has an imprint of somebody who cares for this small oasis. The other front garden, with small ceramic dwarf statue figures, a painted wooden chair and hanging swing surrounded by daisies. Perfectly cleaned decorated front door with a sign saying ‚please don’t touch the glass!‘ reveals that somebody in this very house cares about this very door. A circle of chairs where there is no place to sit, a kayak hanging on the facade symbolizing the water sports club, a window randomly nailed into a wall as an advertisement for a window company. A self-constructed wooden terrace sticking out of the massive concrete block into a plain open space surrounding it. Hundreds of small universes, personalized spaces and appropriations across the district exist within an enormous, often empty or unkept space of bare concrete or bare grass, empty used-to-be playgrounds or abandoned schools. All these interventions - in public or private space - are small-sized spatialized versions of somebody’s effort and devotion, a mosaic of multitude of those interests and desires. The results of everyday practice.

160

PUBLIC VS. PRIVATE Confronting the public and the private is a matter of everyday life. These notions might seem understandable and straight-forward. There are things that we do in public, which we would not do private and the same goes for the opposite. Sonja Hirt suggests that the realms construct each other discursively - „the public is what the private is not“ (Bailey 2002, cit. by Hirt 2012:14). The boarder between them has been a subject to a rich debate among academic scholars as well. Hirt notes that the public is considered to be the social arena, comprising „the setting and mechanisms through which human interaction and decision-making with community-wide implications occur“ including the formal institutions of power or subject of collective concerns in the open forum (Boggs 1997; Taylor 2004, cit. by Hirt 2012). The private includes interactions and concerns belonging to the more intimate sphere of friends, family and closer acquittances (ibid). The routines, patterns and practices assigned to these realms operate, naturally, within material arenas. Public spaces as public squares, parks, streets, etc. - are meant to be »open« for everyone, in theory. However in practice there are several restrictions that may apply (Lofland 1973). On the contrary, the spaces that are »closed«, the private spaces used by smaller groups of people, spaces of limited access due to various limitations (Hirt 2012). We understand physical objects such walls or fences that mark the borders, measures are taken to signalize that we are crossing into another sphere where different rules apply. But when we enter one, we still get a glimpse of the other. As Hirt asks, „who would want to live without a window, without any contact of the outside?“ At the same time, any house or apartment has an area where the residents gather and receive the guests, a place that has a role of a public in the private (ibid). The private needs the public and the public needs the private. When unnatural and enforced rules and following routines appear in one (such as control), the routines of the other one reorganize reacting on other as the primary essence disappears. Jacobs argued that it is exactly the conjunction of space - the semi-private or semi-public - that keeps the city alive and makes it work (1961). If the two do not relate to each other by completing each other, engagement with both realms will experience distortions in behavior of their users. The border between them should then function as a gradient in order to keep the balance. However, when a rigid impermeable border is erected, where the one realm fears the other, the both of them are under siege (Scruton 1984, cit. by Hirt 2012). Interim space is thus essential to the existence of both, a vital middle category of civicness that is needed to prevent the totalitarian order. It is therefore all-important to aim for the trichotomy (ibid). During socialism, the relations between the private and public have been disrupted. Public realm was under the control of the state with a prescribed content that was not naturally

161

adapted by the citizens. Public and private were clearly separated and »divorced« from each other. Without the interim space, public and private have been radicalized in their meanings, leading to learning compensatory behavior such as what one has learned to say in public, meant to be to opposite in the private. The interim category between private and public only existed in theory, as the socialist regime allowed the citizens to form the bottom-up associations to pursue beliefs and interests of the citizens. In practice, these associations were never bottom-up initiations, as they were mostly initiated and funded by the state and thus meant to support the state’s agenda. Their role was not to negotiate between the state power and private interests (bridging private and public), they were only another agent of the state, also preventing formation of any kind of civic activism. The control of the public has thus been spread through the interim space to the private, the only place, the refuge, where individuality and opinion could be expressed, silently, hiding and not too loud for someone to hear. People learned to avoid and fear the public. Free expression and any bottom-up citizen initiations were non-existent. After 1989, despite the fall of the regime, this dichotomy persisted. Public was under siege, resulting into the rise of the private. The shift into neoliberal capitalism brought about the economic interest of private investors in the city. On the site of the citizens, the concern with the public, environment and politics, as follow up of the previous regime, has become minimized. People’s worlds have shrunk into small universes, most of the people did not believe in idea of a good society or a positive change. Anything that resembled a public activity was automatically shut down as propaganda. These attitudes resulted into a long-term passivity, people had no interest in any sort of collective activities, community work or initiatives. As the public seemed dark, dangerous and »unmanagable«, people focused on their minimized private spaces, mentally crowding out engaging or even discussing the public. Hirt mentions embracing an ideology of „privatizing positives and publicizing negatives“ (2012:24). It means that anything negative that is happening is automatically assigned as a fault of the structural inabilities of the public realm, whether positive gains are assigned to the individual private efforts (Kolev et al. 2007, cit. by Hirt 2012). This widespread belief in the viability of the public is called »privatism« (ibid). It leads to Matei’s conclusion of general post-modern rejections of meta-narratives in the post-socialist societies (2004). As these narratives are resisted, it leads to „almost unrestrained personalism and privatism“ where only meta-belief that has formed is that „there are no more beliefs capable of moving people“ (Hirt 2012:24). The state power has repeatedly confiscated any right to act as autonomous social agents (Matei 2004) which resulting into a death of the public spirit. The private spaces were essentially serving as »safety zones« for people to feel, at least to a certain degree, that they have power over their lives. All these factors together created a strong concern with the micro-space, they ways it can be maintained, altered and personalized as a reflection of the re-invention of one’s position and the »self«.

162

From the previous chapters, it is obvious that the relationship between the state and citizens is shuttered. People hold no respect for it and for its representatives, deliberately seek ways around the system all the time. Hirt notes that as a reaction to decades of abuse of totalitarian regime, people accepted it as inevitability (2012). In a lawless system of the post-socialist period, the feelings of inability to change things even increased. There has been persisting aura of resignation and passive revulsion. While the revulsion still persists, there have been signs of transitioning. Socialist generations are consistent with their passive attitudes. The post-socialist generation, despite the inherited skepticism and aversion towards the state power, presents itself as much more active in the matter. On the contrary to the silence of their foregoers, they verbalize and point to issues much more. A total loss of political correctness, because people do not this it is necessary anymore, leads to open proclamations about state’s failure, public shaming and ridiculing of the institutions in power. As an example, towards the end of my field research I encountered an initiative that has suddenly popped up in Petržalka’s public space. A public event, led by young local municipal worker with his team, also active in community work in Petržalka, named »The most expensive stairs in Central Europe« was organized in order to uncover and disclose to the public yet another case caused by corrupt local government. A standard practice of grossing up the price of a simple construction project severalfold, hiring colleagues and business partners from the field in order to gain aside profit. Via social media platforms the organizers have invited the city to christen the stairs with chocolate ducats, prepared merchandise in form of t-shirts and buttons with a picture of the stairs and a logo of the event. A number of people came, celebrated and grilled at the parking lot, updating social media, medializing the issue and publicly shaming the responsible. Another example is a regular event in one of the Petržalka’s public parks explicitly called »How *daddle* the system« providing tips and tricks in a financial and entrepreneurial field about »playing« the institutions in order to gain as much personal benefits as possible. These initiatives have a bitter tone underneath them, yet they symbolize the progress from the »passive revulsion« to the »active revulsion«. The difference of the perspectives and attitudes between the generations also generate other new trend. The older generations still understand public space as a realm of institutional power, as an arena of restricted own expression. The younger generations still see the public as unmanaged, chaotic and »invaded« by the power, but has the tendency to enter the space with their own spontaneous activities and initiations. It also the representation of the »passive« and »active« revulsion. One passively avoids it and the other enters »despite« the condition.

163

THE RADIUS OF CONCERN The subject of the revulsion remains the same, the »other« - the state, the government, the politicians, the society, the system. The positioning of the citizen towards these subjects may seem to be consistently negative. However, the way of developing a coping mechanism to deal with these attitudes varies according to the psychological setting of the individual, also depending on the type of society this individual has been raised in. Many research studies describe socio-economic dynamics, flaws in the legal system and a describe the reaction to them as a »flat phenomenon« that was supposed to refer to the unified collective reaction. Often it does not leave a lot of room to interpret the social investments which still have minor positions because it is seen as »fighting with the windmills«. Due to the collectively expressed distrust, is still assumed, that everyone is skeptical and nobody has any interest. Throughout my research, I discovered many personal stories where people disclosed what they actually do to improve things. These activities are unrecognized and unseen, yet they exist. While the concern with the external world in a bigger scale (the state, the system…) is severely damaged, there is a much smaller and different scope where people show their interest with their surroundings. For the sake of improvement, should not be overlooked. The understanding of public, private and emergent interim space create a major component of the phenomenon of growing »radius of concern«. Radius stands for an area around an individual and concern stand for responsible an interest. From no participation, no interest and no concern with the events beyond this minimized zone in the 1990s, through slow and gradual introduction of new influence factors (fostered community development, establishing urban identity in the district over the course of two decades, building of the informal supportive networks as a coping mechanism, new thinking of the post-socialist generation etc.) this radius has been growing. It meant adding more »concern« to one’s own zones which caused growing spaces where these concerns were located.

1. a person lives in a standardized flat in a prefabricated panel housing unit with no spatial alterations since the construction, the flat is state-subsidized 2. after the abolishment of the restriction forbidding to alter the space, person is left with their flat as their minimized zone of concern, becomes an owner of the flat 3. after a certain period of time, the flat is in need for the renovation, the owner is responsible for the project, but also for its aesthetics; new windows and a new balcony

164

construction is installed, the owner pays for the renovation and picks the design according to their preferences; chooses plastic window frames and paints the balcony wall in a pink color, adds a sun shield and hangs flowers 4. the condition of the house leads to other renovations among the neighbors, many of them initiate the renovations, each has their own design preferences 5. after reconfigurations of the ownership relations, the housing unit is now formed of one or more housing associations, a collective of people who own the flats in the whole unit or a specific part of the unit (more common case), each association has its own design preferences 6. the facade and the entrance door are in need of renovation, the housing association collects the money, votes and decides for the design of the facade and picks the model of the new security door system 7. the collective of the owners has now organized and paid for the renovation projects, decided about its aesthetics and considers it as »their own«, they share the cleaning and reparations of the shared space (the entrance hall, the lift etc.) 8. the concern with »their own« expands to the public area in front of the entrance, some neighbor recreate small parts as gardens and plant flower, pay for the arrangement, considers it as »their own« —> the practice has entered the public area 9. the practice expands to the larger area, plants are planted around the parking lots and corners of the lawn surrounding the housing block 10. practices and routines are perceived by the others, compared between the units, they are »seen« by the public 11. practices motivate some of the other inhabitants, expand functionally and a small local initiative is formed based on shared needs; group of inhabitants clean and renovate the playground 12. such initiatives emerge across the district with different functional focus (collecting trash, building a dog training park, building a small construction for exercising) Due to the short distance and immediate visibility of what the others do, it is easier to find a shared interest and connect directly at the location. Janto’s study (2016) also describes a community of mothers who have initiated a reno-

165

vation of the playgrounds. With their efforts, now almost all of them are renovated and functioning. The scale of the efforts vary. While some, like this particular initiative echoed across the entire district, others function among a few neighbors who join the forces to build a sitting to have a place to sit in the sun and have a chat. The different »radiuses« differ in size, yet their expansion is visible as they pop-up in the public space. The initiatives, naturally, have their borders and limits and cannot take over the responsibilities for the whole public space. These borders are clear and visible, as the practices appear as islands within the often deteriorated surroundings. Yet they symbolize efforts and someone’s »concern«. These practices, despite their seemingly temporal articulation, create a spatial sequence. They are „indissociable from particular moments and ‚opportunities‘, thus irreversible, […] it is thus mark in place of acts“ (De Certeau 1984:35).

166

FINDINGS

This chapter has examined the shifting trends of thought with the focus on the position of the »self«. The »self« within the grand narratives - a generic human who acts rationally was a subject to be disciplined towards universal behavior. As unnatural to the human, it caused a counter-reaction - reconfiguration of the concept with the focus on subjectivity and individuality. As this trend occurred in Czechoslovakia, it was captured and re-directed to even more aggressive, despotic universalism which resulted into severe distortions of understanding the public and private realms, behaving and acting in space. Two different kinds of spaces have emerged, existing as counter-realms. The interim category between them was also subjected to the control, leaving the category missing. People not being able to act naturally and perform their own agendas in the public, have re-directed their focus to their private spheres. They have abandoned the public, as it was no longer possible to perform any personal agenda. Their concern with acting in space has shrunk to the minimum, creating personal micro-spaces where the concern and acting could be practiced. The two realms constructed each other discursively, yet they were distinctly separated. After the system dictating the order has collapsed, re-configuration of the relations within and between these realms has occurred. The content of the public was no longer controlled, yet it was also neither subjected to any coordinated planning. Over the three decades, an organic unguided development has occurred. From the initial chaos, people have developed new routines through everyday practices, which has been reflected in an area of their concern with the space and the coverage of its impact onto spaces. In this study, the concern with the space and the impact of acting has been described as a »radius of concern«. The growing concern with the space has materialized as spatial appropriations in the public space or in the private spaces and accessible shared spaces. Currently we can observe these spaces as islands of newly-built places within the large and unkept space which is a remain of the formerly abandoned public - the space outside of the radius of concern. The relationship between the two realms is being slowly and gradually restored and interconnected again, by semi-private appearing in public and semi-public appearing in private. The interim space has also become a cultivation platform for the natural practice of this category of spaces, such as community activity or individual co-creation and occupation of the public.

167

THE RADIUS OF CONCERN

168

169

JASOVSKÁ

174

JASOVSKÁ 2-12 / LÚKY VII Jasovská unit is located in the South of Petržalka in sector Lúky VII. With Lúky VI and Lúky VIII, they create the Southern edge of the district. Jasovská street is the address of other housing blocks, this study focuses on a housing unit number 2-12. Sector Lúky VII has been built among the last sectors in Petržalka in the period 1984-1986. After finishing the housing blocks and giving the apartments over to the new residents, it took only three more years for the regime to collapse. While other residents inhabited Petržalka up to 10 years in the Northern parts with a decent pubic space and a selection of the facilities, the public spaces in Lúky VII and VIII have only been »straightened« and introduced to a very basic functionality. Unit Jasovská 2-12 is located on the edge of the sector bordering with an empty corridor which was originally planned as the central zone and a bearing functional and transportation element of the district. This unit stands on the edge of large amount of bare space resembling a concrete desert. The construction of the subway as a part of the corridor has started in 1988, the project has been abandoned shortly after. The end depot of the line is located at the end of the corridor between Lúky VI and Lúky VII and has not been professionally manipulated with ever since.

(42) In Slovakia this space is referred to as »intrablock«

By comparing Jasovská to the other housing units in sector Lúky VII, it is visibly in worse condition. When we turn our focus onto the inside areas of the sector, we observe many spatial expressions of the concern and many renovated places. The space still falls under the public space, yet it offers the spatial composition that qualifies for emergence of the semi-public/semi-private spaces - the interim space. They are the »interior public spaces« of the sector (42). Even though they are accessible to everyone, they still resemble a »private corners« of the people who I’ve directly in the buildings. These are the expression of the new emerged category of space - the interim space. Jasovská unit does not have any spaces with such qualities at disposal. It stand exposed to the (still) abandoned public, to the main corridor with the proximity to the abandoned depo. The »radius of concern« firstly emerge inside of the units, but as it grows, it adapts and expresses in spaces that possess the qualities of becoming the interim spaces. The surroundings of the unit lie outside of the this area, thus it cannot manifest spatially. Jasovská stands in a vulnerable position within the sector and within the entire urban complex.

175

Fig.60, 61 Intrablock spaces of Lúky VII sector

Growing radius expressed spatially in Lúky VII sector

176

Affected areas in the intrablock of the sector

177

From universal to fragementary - Jasovskรก development

178

179

Division of the spatial scheme in Jasovskรก unit

180

181

Fig.62 Jasovskรก unit exposed to the corridor

Fig.63 Exhibition in the abandoned subway depo, January 2017

DOMINO CAUSE „When the dredging machines came, I looked out of the window and saw other neighbors on their balconies. I was shocked, but not surprised at the same time, to be honest. They just do whatever they want, nobody cares what we think. They literally come with the bulldozer to your house and start digging holes in front of hundreds of people and they just know, they expect that everybody will jut mind their own business, as usual. I felt angry, this was too much. Who do they think they are? Will they come with the bulldozer to my bedroom too?“(Stanislav, 38, resident of Jasovská) In October 2013, Petržalka district initiated construction of five residential buildings in Lúky VII directly in front of Jasovská unit. The project - poly-functional houses DOMINO - has not been announced, nor it was legally authorized. The acts of the mayor of the district as a main contractor, his group of colleagues and associated network of companies became the most debated topic of the corrupted and illegal practices of the authorities in the new history of Petržalka. The project is not only contravening with the legal protocols and the regulation plan, it represents the relation between the authorities and the people. „Dear mayor, how could you do this to the people of Petržalka,“ writes author of the article in Pravda newspaper. Shortly after the initiation of the project, the residents of Jasovská have organized into a collaborative group, found a community organization named DOMI-NO. Besides taking legal actions against the project, they started to perform group actions hindering the construction process. Hundreds of residents of the unit stood in a line holding hands during the winter time disallowing the workers accessing the machines and continuing the work on the site. Later they organized a symbolic performance by dragging string with a domino pieces from their windows to the unfinished building. The project has been stopped, yet the highest court did not order the removal of the unfinished construction. Even though the relics still occupy the site, the media have announced that „cause Domino on Jasovská has opened a new chapter for Petržalka“ (43). As for many years, such collective action would be unthinkable, the ability to form such collective action and react is seen as a beginning of the new era.

186

Fig.64 [top right] Residents of Jasovská blocking the construction, December 2013; source: SITA Agency Fig.65 [bottom right] Domino pieces prepared for the symbolic group performance, October 2014; source: Facebook page of the event

(43) source: Bratislava Newspapers 2018

183

Fig.66 Unfinished domino houses

FINAL DISCUSSION

This study has focused on examining the development leading to the current condition of the mass housing district Petržalka. Arriving at current status is a result of a transition process marked as „unknown and unexplained“ (Marko 2016). Given the facts that the precedent goals of mass housing was to apply rationalistic planning methods leading to concrete outcomes (known and explained) is a paradox. Petržalka was supposed to create such environment that would lead to formation of the perfect socialist citizen. To foster the socialist identity (identifying with the socialist vision of the society), a programmatic collective behavior was enforced onto the people. To allows such identification, the personal (the private) and the collective (the public) merged in order to create an universal realm. Such order was hindering the process of personal involvement of the citizens as they were forced to perform an unnatural act of identifying with an universal concept and abandon their personal agendas. The space was meant to reflect such paradigm. By designing an universal shared space with overlapping spatial schemes, the plan was meant to »overcome« the social and spatial divisions functioning in totality. The space, the collective, the identities were expected to co-exist as one universal realm according to universal principles After the collapse of this concept, the physical realm, the collective, the identity and relating to space fell into crisis. The transition period of nearly thirty years resulted into observable facts: Organic emergence of identity and a new form of the collective action. Through these, the radically divided public and private started to approach each other (converge) resulting in the early phase of overlapping - emerging interim space. Further grounding of the new collective action and the identity performance is causing the growth of the radius of concern which is the intangible match to the tangible interim space. The district has been subjected to foreign forces resulting into appropriation of the space as one’s own (observable). When a place is being appropriated as one’s own and being established within the other (the functionalist paradigm), it produces important effects (De Certeau 1984:35): 1. The triumph of place over time: acquired advantages that are capitalized prepare future expansions, thus give a claim a certain degree of independence and the variability of circumstances 2. Mastery of place through sight: through panoptic practice, when the foreign forces are transformed into objects that can be observed and measured, they are included within a scope of vision. To be able to see is also being able to predict and run ahead of

192

time by reading the space 3) Creation of readable spaces: definition of the power of knowledge by the ability to transform the uncertainties of history into readable spaces. Recognition of a strategy of a specific type of knowledge that is sustained and determined by the own power to create and claim one’s own place Petržalka is a space that is changeable and transitioning at all times. It is not a paradigm that can only be subjected to an ordered function. There is always a variety of actors and circumstances present. They are mostly unrecognized and/or they represent the ‚antiorder‘ of ‚counter-order’ as a reactionary practice.These counter-realms are developed through counter-practices and transformed into visual qualities.These aesthetics contain information about these forces. The future scenario can thus be constructed by ability to read these practices (and the ability to recognize the knowledge behind them) because they constitute one’s own power to create and claim their own space within a technocratic paradigm. Such paradigm has thus been a reason for the counter-forces to emerge, which is why we observe such paradoxical result.

193

194

195

196

197

FURTHER TRANSITIONS CONSIDERATIONS FOR FUTURE APPROACHES FOSTERING A HOLISTIC STRATEGY The majority of the existing projects developed for Petržalka are focused on urban regeneration. What does regeneration really stand for? The idea of regeneration means that within a complex system, there are specific parts of its structure that have to subjected to renewal to allow a proper functioning. It points to the structural damage with the focus of discovering the non-functioning components or relations within the system and renew them. For an urban district, it means firstly approaching it in a holistic manner by examining all the layers within all the dimensions, not just the basic physical functionality and aesthetics in selected places. Existing projects rarely refer to the socio-cultural aspects or acknowledge the relevance of the social structure, in some cases even its existence. Practically it means suggesting regeneration without properly formulating, what exactly should be regenerated. When we come back to the definition, the projects do not look for the non-functioning component or a disconnected relation within the structure. District such as Petržalka is based on a distinct scheme involving physical and social aspects and in order to function properly, they rely on interconnection and cooperations of these two dimensions. By superficial physical interventions of the selected areas without considering their real impact and actual use, severe imbalance in other parts of the district is caused, representing the other layers of the functional scheme. Right now it is important to consider already existing dynamics - the positive as well as the negative ones. The opposition towards the authority has been growing divergently to the point of high level of aversion to everything that comes »from above«. This has to be considered for the future strategy as well. Own difficulties during the initial phase of the field research, when people denied a conversation due to me wearing a specific type wardrobe symbolizing a position of the authority (a tailored blazer), or „people standing with their arms crossed and then verbally attacking the architects after a presentation of the project“ (44) must be considered as a restraining factor.

198

(44) from an expert interview with one of the presenters of the new regulation plan for Petržalka

INTRODUCTION OF THE NEW COMMUNICATION TOOLS The substantial part of this research was to have conversations with the inhabitants. It this case, it has been crucial to establish a communication platform based on equality of all people involved. After this has been reached, an entire new communicative realm has opened. People were acting naturally, authentically, sharing stories and interests. To be able to communicate with the inhabitant will also be one of the crucial aspects for the strategy development. Because of the fact that the inhabitants currently hold the »moving force«, it will not be possible to access it without developing proper communication tools. Many currently active architects adapt the role of a superior (an authority), which is problematic. The communication has to be initiated in a way that the inhabitants do not feel in the inferior position. For this purpose, I propose to include a trained mediator to perform the task directly and/or to train the other professionals in the team. It is of great importance not to intervene and disrupt the emerged dynamics and networks among the inhabitants or try to redirect them. Also, the mediating practice has already been used in Petržalka during the 1990s in a community development program. The model has been proven to be successful, yet application had to be persistent and dedicated to overcoming the initial difficulties. The practical results are observable only within the last years.

CONSIDERING THE TIME FACTOR Mass housing districts are projects planned with a vision. Their scale and structure were expected to develop into a fully functional rayon over centuries. Due to their structural interconnectedness, they are much more vulnerable than traditional structures, for they rely on the mass of the people acting in a organized manner and producing a collective dynamics. What is meant by vulnerable? Because the district is a large-sized functional unit based on a cooperative scheme, if a problem appears in one part, it will be reflect in all the other parts. It is a fundamental reason of their former decline, as the functioning of many of the components has failed, yet it can be a recipe for success as well, if the collective dynamics finds a balance. This study has been primarily concerned with these dynamics and tendencies as long-term processes. Examining development throughout one decade or focusing one a single component of the scheme would automatically exclude other important aspects, thus would not offer a complex view. The recoupment period in Petržalka - the results of the applied policies and strategies - will be a matter of decades, not years. Also, being attentive to the entire process allows to adopt a safe distance from the errors, failures and imperfections, because they are the process itself. It allows to acknowledge the temporality of such phases, that is so significant for project

199

that originated from a vision.

THE FUTURE OF THE HERITAGE DISCOURSE After evaluation of the current criteria for heritage protection, I conclude that according to existing protocols - international or national - mass housing does not qualify for heritage protection. Yet, engaging in debates on heritage does not only have to aim for taking legal measures to protect the structures. Further development of the discourse might eventually lead to formulations of the specificity, uniqueness and quality of the concept. Currently, the discourse in media is prevalently focused on debating the identity and the meaning the intangible. Snopek also proposes a new criterion for assessment of the mass housing with the focus on intangible aspects. It signalizes a new era for mass housing. We have shifted from evaluation of the »physical« aspects to debating the identity that is fostered in the district. The fact that this debate is currently held in public and for public, not only among architects and historians, points to the existence of a large audience to which this constitues a personal matter. Also it should be stressed that claiming and voicing the qualities is not only up to the professional community. The concept of standardization was a revolutionary concept. The type of planning that makes it impossible to exclude a building from the scheme for evaluation purposes as it only exists contextual as a part of the microrayon is unique. Yet being realistic, the protection of the entire microrayon would not be feasible. Yet it is important to contribute to the evolvement of the assessment criteria as it sheds light on their incompleteness (or obsolescence). Additionally, the such discourse can also result into »normalizing« the idea, that there are intangible qualities of the mass housing.

THE NEW COLLECTIVE How do we think of collective and community in the current world? „We are all in this together“ is the slogan that is often being used to persuade others that we are on their side. To claim being »we« can be profitable, it can win over the political votes. »We« is powerful. Yet, when I say, that the community can also be exclusive, it sounds like a contradictory statement. It is not to discard the concept, it is to bring the awareness of a multitude of meanings and understandings - its comforting togetherness as well as sharp edges. »We« is the agent of cultures, politics, religious beliefs, it comes in various sizes. Being a community, therefore defining the aspects to collective identify with, automatically

200

excludes everything that does not meet the criteria. But the real »we« is not only people coming together to renovate a garden. It can be a collective of people losing jobs, struggle with life and share the decline with the others who are present and are aware that they can succumb to the similar misfortune (Nawratek 2015). Facing the adversity, the community is reborn - as a selfless act and as a necessity. This study has focused on examining the kind of collective that has been emerging from the depths of chaos. The »we« that emerges from sharing the chaos, could be the genuine one. Additionally, the collective with the stigmatized past, resting on sharing the negatives and developing a defense mechanism holds an additional bonding element.

USING THE DYNAMICS Petržalka is a high-density district with a collective of people. The social environment is heterogenous. One housing unit is inhabited by people of various age, social background, education level and level of involvement. Some lead communities and shape collective goals, others perform small acts such as regular cleaning of the shared entrance and look after the small plantation in the block. While most of the people perform a certain activity, a smaller portion choose not to participate at all. The size of the radius of concern varies from individual to individual, the variety on all levels. Many studies suggest the spatial rigidity of the mass housing. They are met with proposals on re-thinking of the spaces, introducing features allowing their variability, which suggests to enrich the spectrum of their possible use. Thinking of variability is the key, the more so when the district shift to an era with the focus on personalization and individuality. But it is not only about the variability of spaces. The original aim of the district did not count on social variability and people expressing themselves in spaces. A person was expected to act generically and therefore produce generic social patterns that could fit the rigid spaces. This position of the inhabitant has since been re-configured. Making the spaces fully variable must contain as much of the physical as the social aspect. The architectural variability is a subject to many architectural projects. Usually they are centered around functional adaptability and spatial elasticity. They introduce multifunctional integrated furnishing, possibility to add or remove volumes within the spatial module or circular lay-outs. These studies are an important contribution for the future strategies for mass housing. However, when we speak about social variability, we are facing a much bigger challenge - how do we design spaces with such variability, that it is possible for everyone to use?

201

RADICAL INCLUSIVITY - THE FUTURE EXPERIMENT Post-modernism ultimately urges everyone to see the world as it is, it rejects the grand visions, and by that it rejects forcing the entities to reconfigure themselves during the process of using the space. At the same time, spaces could also not have to be elements with fixed position - belonging to a certain realm, or with fixed function. In both cases - the space and the social entity - the problem of interface emerges. Most of the times, we are surrounded by defined spaces and act as defined entities. If the interface acts as an agent of inclusiveness, it allows the spaces and entities to change and redefine their use and purpose according to the current convenience. Rowe and Koetter in their book Collage City write about fragment urbanism and local narratives as integral to post-modern urbanism (1983). Locality and fragment thus constitute the definition factors that transform the whole (the space), yet the time constant is not easily changeable. In the next era, these definitions might fluctuate in time. Practically it means: how do we design a space that is absolutely multifunctional and can be used by anyone? The key would be to ask an infinite sequence of the same question during the process of designing: this space can be used as ‚x‘, and how else? It can be used by ‚y‘, and whom else? In a real world with real spaces and real people, there will be a limit, an end of this sequence. Yet it fosters an approach of not to cease after defining one of two possible ways of using or a selected group of people that could use the space. Nawratek states that for example a multistory housing block „is not only an attempt of multiple capitalization of the same plot of land, but it can also be a successful attempt to satisfy claim of many people of the same place (2015). It would allow to manipulate the space across time. The stretching the time factor would be one the techniques allowing the radical inclusivity the same space being used by different users for different purposes at different times - is the point of liberation from the boundaries of space and time. A this concept requires a use of a different logic of space and time, it would be a subject to a revolutionary change. Radically inclusive architecture can be architecture of the new era. It can be the era of postdefinition, where spaces do not need a stable definition in form of a function as well as people would not have a constant need to use spaces only for a specific use. Architecture that is freed from the expectations to stable consistent affiliation (not only a function, but also to generate profit or look good).

202

THE POST-POST-ERA Many scholars attempt to pronounce post-socialism fading from the daily experience. It is about time to engage with such inquiry. What was post-socialism and has it reached its destination, is it really in the past? What is its legacy and what do we know about the new era? After the 1989, many claimed that post-socialism was the liberation from the »deadly illusion«. It was an announcement of something, that has ended. One might wonder, what is that that begins after the end? Ozren Pupovac asks, is there something that post-socialism can claim as its own beyond the simple fact of negation of its anteriority (2010)? According to Pupovac, it is also not a question of the haunting past, but also of a haunting future (ibid) - as it tries to run ahead of itself an before it can project into a certain shape, its own historical essence, it has already passed the moment. It is of floating nature as it attempts to caricature the past. It is obsessed with liberalization, privatization and Europeanization. Yet claim of the new paradigms seem somehow illusory. As discussed, the post-socialist period was the phase of reinvention of the self - yet it implies that the self is in the process of becoming and therefore it is not here yet. The own self-consciousness is what is there to come afterwards, in the post-post-era, one might predict. Or maybe this interrogation and demand for the essence to present itself to us is a sheer mis-conception. After posing questions, post-socialist consciousness is frantically pointing to »what no longer is« and »what is not yet«, shifting back and forward as and „endless game of displacement“ (ibid). Post-socialism is thus notoriously presenting itself as ignorant of its present. One of the central thoughts of the Communist Manifesto describes primary instruments for acquiring a breath of new life - the processes of transition (1848). As the entire postsocialist era is marked as a transition, a shift, it is possible, that the essence we are waiting for is only in the process of becoming. The chaos of restoration, pushing the masses to the edge of social existence, is perhaps the »cost the has to be paid« on the way to reaching the destination. The reduction of the human to the animalistic exploitation of capitalism is the kind of position one has to be subjected to in order to experience redemption in the future. Perhaps the state of unconsciousness is saving and it is a choice, as it is only the chaos that is linking the human to the presence and in order to prevent the sense and actuality of the situation. „The past has ceased to throw its light upon the future“ (De Tocqueville 1945), skipping the presence. The begin of the new era could be marked, perhaps, as a radical claim of presence, »entering the light of the future«. For modernism (and communism) it was a radical claim of an attitude towards the history in order to

203

affirm novelties that seemed to be impossible to perform within the historical presence. For post-socialism it was a radical claim of antagonism towards the predecessor, and seeking for its essence. For the unnamed post-post-era it could be a radical claim of the essence bound to its presence. From the two-valued modernist logic to current societies functioning on multi-valued logic, we can observe redefinition of values and minimization tendencies which might suggest a turn to essentialism. The essence that overcomes the space and time. Radically inclusive, beyond divisions and definitions.

204

205

REFERENCES Adler, Nancy (2005) The Future of the Soviet Past Remains Unpredictable: The Resurrection of Stalinist Symbols Amidst the Exhumation of Mass Graves; Europe-Asia Studies, Issue 57. Ashworth, G.J.; Tunbridge, J.E. (1996) Dissonant Heritage: The Management of the Past as a Resource in Conflict; John Wiley and Sons New York. Ashworth, G. J.; Graham, Brian (1997) Heritage, Identity and Europe; Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Issue 88; p. 381. Augustinos, M.; Innes J.M. (1990) Towards an Integration of Social Representations and Social Schema Theory; Journal of Social Psychology Vol. 29; p. 31-213. Bell, Daniel (1978) The cultural contradictions of capitalism; Basic Books Publishers New York. Berman, Marshall (1982) All that is solid melts into air: The experience of Modernity; Penguin Books New York Bernstein, R. (1985) Habermas and Modernity; Oxford; p. 5. Bertens, Hans (1986) The Postmodern Weltanschauung and its Relation with Modernism in Approaching Postmodernism; edited by Douwe Fokkema and Hans Bertens; John Benjamin Publishing Amsterdam/Philadelphia. Blockland, Talja et. al. (2016) Creating the Unequal City: The Exclusionary Consequences of Everyday Routines in Berlin; Ashgate Publishing Limited. Bodnár, J. (2001) Fin de Millénaire Budapest. Metamorphoses of Urban Life. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 222 p. Boltanski, Luc; Thévenot, Laurent (2006) On Justification: Economies of Worth; Princeton University Press. Bourdieu, Pierre (1999) Site Effects: In The Weight of the World: Social Suffering in Contemporary Society; Stanford University Press, p. 9-123. Boyer, Christine (1996) The City of Collective Memory: Its Historical Imagery and Architectural Entertainments; MIT Press Cambridge; p. 2-4. Brath, Jozef (1993) Revitalizácia a humanizácia urbanistických priestorov v nových obytných súboroch (Revitalization and humanization of urbanistic spaces in new residential complexes); Projekt Vol. 35 No. 6; p. 24. Breakwell, Glynis M. (1986) Coping with Threatened Identities; Methuen & Co. London. Buechler, Steven M. (2000) Social Movements in Advanced Capitalism; Oxford University Press. Bunschoten, Raoul; Chora (2000) Urban Flotsam: Stirring the City; Art Data; p.76 Burawoy, Michael; Verdery Katherine (1999) Uncertain Transition: Ethnographies of Change in the Post-socialist World; Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Buyandelgeriyn, Manduhai (2008) Post-Post-Transition Theories: Walking on Multiple Paths; Department of Anthropology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge; p. 235-246. Caaba, Cosmin Ciprian (2011) Communist Heritage Tourism and Red Tourism: Concepts, Development and Problems; Cinq Continents, Vol.1 No.1; p.29—39. Caldwell, Melissa L. (2004) Domesticating the French Fry: McDonald’s and Consumerism in Moscow; Sage Journals Vol.

206

4; p. 5–26. Chow K., Healey M (2008) Place Attachment and Place Identity: First-year Undergraduates Making the Transition from Home to University. Journal of Environmental Psychology; p. 362-372. Crinson, Mark (2005) Urban Memory: History and Amnesia in the Modern City; Routledge. Deaux, Kay (1993) Reconstructing Social Identity; Sage Journals, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin; p. 4-12. De Certeau, Michel (1984) The practice of Everyday Life; University of California Berkeley Press. De Tocqueville, Alexis (1945) Democracy in America, Knopf New York, Vol. 2 Nr.4, p. 331. Dixon, John; Durrheim, Kevin (2000) Displacing Place-identity: A Discursive Approach to Locating Self and Other; British Journal of Social Psychology Vol. 39 No.1; p. 27-44. Dumitrescu, Mikaela (2001) Modernism, Post-modernism and the Question of Identity; Reperes Theoretiques, Dialogos 3; p. 11-12. Fearon, James D. (1999) What is identity (as we now use the word)?; Stanford University / http://www.stanford. edu/~jfearon/papers/iden1v2.pdf Fominaya Flesher, Cristina (2010) Collective Identity in Social Movements: Central Concepts and Debates; Journal Compliation Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Gamson, William (1992) Social Psychology of Collective Action; Frontiers in Social Movement Theory, D. Morris, C. M. Müller. New Haven: Yale University Press; p. 53–76. Gifford, Robert (2002) Environmental Psychology: Principles and Practice; Optimal Books Canada, Edition 3. Giuliani, Maria Vittoria (2003) Theory of Attachment and Place Attachment; In: M. Bonnes,T. Lee, M. Bonaiuto: Psychological Theories for Environmental Issues; Ashgate Publishing Limited; p. 137-170. Gleason, Philip (1983) Identifying Identity: A Semantic History.;The Journal of American History, Vol. 69 No. 4; p. 910931. Goffman, E. (1963) Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity; Englewood Cliffs New Jersey, Prentice Hall. Gross, Kamil (1965) Úvaha k Petržalke zajtrajška (Refletion on Petržalka of Tomorrow), Magazine Projekt Vol. 7, p. 69-70 Gross, Kamil (1965) K prestavbe Petržalky (Towards Rebuilding of Petržalka), Magazine Project Vol.4, p.71-73. Habermas, Jürgen (1985) Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne: Zwölf Vorlesungen (The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures); Massachusetts Institute of Technology 1987 Edition. Halpenny E.A. (2010) Pro-environmental Behaviours and Park Visitors: The Effect of Place Attachment; Journal of Environmental Psychology 2010; p. 409-421. Hannemann, Christine (2003) Eine Technologie für Alles; Archivthese Vol. 33 No. 2; p. 16-21. Hanzalík, Marián (1993) Revitalizácia a modernizácia obytného prostredia (Revititalization and humanization of the residential environment); Projekt Vol. 35 No. 6; p- 10-13. Harvey, David (1991) The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change; Willey-Blackwell. Haumann, Sebastian; Harnack, Maren; Berkemann, Karin; Tvrtkovic, Mario; Wolf, Tobias Michael; Herold,

207

Stephanie (2015) Community Spaces: Conception, Appropriation, Identity; Institut für Stadt- und Regionalplanung Universitätsverlag TU Berlin. Hewison, Robert (1987) The heritage industry; Methuen Publishing Ltd. Hirt, Sonia (2012) Iron Curtains; John Wiley & Sons Ltd., First Edition. Horkheimer, Max; Adorno, Theodor W. (1972) The Dialectic of Enlightenment: Philosophical Fragments; Stanford University Press, 2002 Edition. Hruška, Emanuel (1959) Námet k socialistckej výstavbe Bratislavy (An idea for socialist building of Bratislava); Magazine Projekt Vol. 6-7, p.104 Hummon, David M. (1993) Community Attachment: Local Sentiment and Sense of Place; In: I. Altman and S.M. Low, Place Attachment; Plenum Press London and New York; p. 253-278. Humphrey, Caroline (2002) The Unmaking of Soviet Life: Everyday Economies after Socialism; Cornell University Press. Hunt, Scott; Robert Benford (2004) Collective Identity, Solidarity and Commitment; In: Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, edited by David Snow, Sarah Soule and Hanspeter Kriesi; Blackwell Oxford; p.60-433. Hutchinson, Ray; Haynes Bruce (2012) The Ghetto: Contemporary Global Issues and Controversies; Westview Press. Inalhan, Göksenin; Finch, Edward (2011) Change and Attachment to Place; In: Facilities Change Management edited by E. Finch; Wiley-Blackwell; p.155-174. Jacobs, Jane (1961) The death and Life of Great American Cities; Vintage; Reissue edition 1992. Janto, Juraj (2016) Komunitný rozvoj na sídliskách (Community Development in the Mass-Housing Districts); Etnografické rozpravy Vol. 13 No.1; Department of Ethnology, Slovak Academy of Sciences Bratislava. Kachlík Jaroslav (1993) A sme tam kde sme boli alebo humanizácia ako prázdna fráza (And we are where we were before: huanizatio as an empty phrase); Project Vol. 35 No. 6; p. 40-41. Kalekin-Fishman, Devorah (2013) Sociology of Everyday Life; Current Sociology Review 61; p. 714–732. Kirschbaum, Stanislav J. (2006) A History of Slovakia: The Struggle for Survival; Palsgrave Macmillan; citing Vladimír Mináč in Návraty k prevratu (Return to the Revolution), p. 190. Kleibl, Martin (2014) Petržalka – Prekvapivý sprievodca mestskou časťou (Petržalka - Surprising guide across the city district); Premedia Bratislava. Lamont, Michèle (2000) The Dignity of Working Men: Morality and the Boundaries of Race, Class, and Immigration; Russell Sage Foundation New York. Lamont, Michèle; Molnár, Virág (2002) The Study of Boundaries in the Social Sciences; Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 28. Lanfant, M. F. (1995) Internationalization and the Challenge to Identity in International Tourism: Identity and Change; edited by M. F. Lanfant, John B. Allcock, and E. M. Bruner; Sage Journals London; p. 24-43. Le Corbusier (1929) The City of Tomorrow and Its Planning; Edited by Frederick Etschells, Dover Publications, 2013 Edition. Ledeneva, Alena V. (2006) How Russia Really Works: The Informal Practices that Shaped Post-Soviet Politics and Business; Cornell University Press Edition 1.

208

Legewie, Heiner (2006) Review Jörg Strübing (2004) Grounded Theory. Zur sozialtheoretischen und epistemologischen Fundierung des Verfahrens der empirisch begründeten Theoriebildung; Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung Vol.7 No.1. Lenzerini, Federico (2011) Intangible Cultural Heritage: The Living Culture of Peoples; European Journal of International Law, Volume 22, Issue 1; p. 101-120 / https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chr006 Lewicka, Maria (2008) Place Attachment, Place Identity, and Place Memory: Restoring the Forgotten City Past; Journal of Environmental Psychology; p. 209-231 Light, Duncan (2000) An Unwanted Past: Contemporary Tourism and the Heritage of Communism in Romania; International Journal of Heritage Studies, Vol. 6 No. 2, p. 145-160. Lofland; Lyn H. (1973) The World of Strangers: Order and Action in Urban Public Space; Basic Books Inc. Publishers New York. Manning, Paul (2007) ‚Our beer‘: Ethnographic Brands in Post-socialist Georgia; American Anthropologist New Series Vol. 109, No. 4; p. 626-641. Manzo, Lynne C. (2005) For Better or Worse: Exploring Multiple Dimensions of Place Meaning; Journal of Environmental Psychology Vol. 25 No. 1; p. 67-86. Marx, Karl (1848) Communist Manifesto; New Edition 2014, International Publishers Co. Massey, Doreen (1995) Places and their Past; History Workshop Journal Vol. 39; p. 92-182. Matei, Sorin (2004) The Emergent Romanian Post-Communist Ethos From Nationalism to Privatism; Journal Problems of Post-Communism, Vol. 51 Issue 2. Maxim, Juliana (2009) Mass Housing and Collective Experience: On the Notion of Microraion in Romania in the 1950s and 1960s; Department of Art, College of Artsand Sciences, University of San Diego. Melucci, Alberto (1995) The Process of Collective Identity; Social Movements and Culture, edited by Hank Johnston and Bert Klandermans; University of Minnesota Press Minneapolis; p. 41-63. Melucci, Alberto (1989) The Symbolic Challenge of Contemporary Movements; Social Research 52; p.781-816. Michalik, M (2016) Comparison of standardized apartment size in different countries; http://teatrnn.pl/leksykon/ node/4351/mieszkanie_w_prl_normatyw_mieszkaniowy Mitscherlich, Alexander (2008) Die Unwirtlichkeit unserer Städte: Anstiftung zum Unfrieden (The Inhospitability of the Cities: An Encouragement to Disquiet); Suhrkamp Verlag. Moravčíková, Henrieta et. al. (2011) Bratislava atlas sídlisk (Bratislava Atlas of Mass-Housing); Slovart. Moravčíková, Henrieta (2011) Concentrated Response to the Issue of Prefabricated Mass Housing: Bratislava 1950 – 1995; International conference on Mass housing, Edinburgh college of Art, Edinburgh, 7. 9. Najafi Mina, Shariff, Mustafa Kamal Bin (2011) The Concept of a Place and Sense of Place in Architectural Studies; International Journal of Human and Social Sciences; p. 187-193. Nawratek, Krzysztof; Horton-Howe, Alexander (2015) Radical Inclusivity: Architecture and Urbanism; Dpr-Barcelona. Nikolaeva, Natalya (2015) An Alternate History of Social Housing / http://www.academia.edu/18384478/An_ Alternate_History_of_Social_Housing

209

Nora, Pierre (1996) Realms of Memory: Rethinking the French Past; Columbia University Press New York, Vol. 1; p. 3-9. Ocakci M.; Türk Aydın T. (2012) Urban identity. The Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Urban Planning; edited by Ersoy M.; Istanbul Ninova; p. 226-228. Otto, Judith Emily (2008) Representing Communism: Discourses of Heritage Tourism and Economic Regeneration in Nowa Huta, Poland; Dissertation of the Graduate School of University of Minnesota / https://conservancy.umn.edu/ bitstream/handle/11299/56305/Otto_umn_0130E_10022.pdf?sequence=1 Özdemir E. (2010) The Concept of Identity and Theoretical Approaches; Bilim, Toplum; p. 9-29. Peirce, Charles Sanders (1878) Deduction, Induction and Hypothesis; Popular Science Monthly; p. 470-482 / source:http://www.commens.org/bibliography/journal_article/peirce-charles-s-1878-deduction-induction-andhypothesis# Petríková Dagmar (1999) Sociálna participácia v sídelnom prostredí (Social participation in settlement environment); Životné prostredie Vol. 33 No. 2; p. 79-81. Polletta, Francesca; James Jasper (2001) Collective Identity and Social Movements; Annual Review of Sociology Vol. 27 No. 1; p. 283–305. Proshansky, Harold M.; Fabian, Abbe K.; Kaminoff, Robert (1983) Place-identity: Physical World Socialization of the Self; Journal of Environmental PsychologyVol. 3; p. 57-83. Child; In: C. S. Weinstein & T. G. David Spaces for Children, the Built Environment and Child Development; Plenum Press New York; p. 21-40. Pupovac, Ozren (2010) Present Perfect, or the Time of Post-socialism, for: Sarajevo Notebook magazine; https://www. eurozine.com/present-perfect-or-the-time-of-post-socialism/ Raban, Jonathan (1998) The Soft City; The Harvill Press, New edition. Rausing, S. (2002) Re-constructing the ‘Normal’: Identity and the Consumption of Western Goods in Estonia; Mandel & Humphrey; p. 43-127. Relph, Edward (1976) Place and Placelessness; Pion London Rowe, Colin; Koetter, Fred (1983) Collage City; MIT Press Massachusetts. Simandan, Dragos (2011) On Time, Place and Happiness; New Zealand Geographer Vol. 67 No. 1; p. 6-15. Šimko, Dušan; Mládek, Jozef (1993) Petržalka - Životné prostredie a jeho humanizácia (Petržalka - Living environment and its humanization); Slovenský národopis Vol. 41; p. 2. Simmel, Georg (1955) Conflict and the Web of Group Affiliations; Free Press New York. Simmel, Georg (1903) The metropolis and Mental Life; Edited by Donald Levine in ‚On Individuality and Social Form‘; Chicago University Press. Slančíková Timravá, Božena (1914) Ťapákovci; Tatran Edition 1985; p.13. Snopek, Kuba (2015) Belyaevo Forever: Preserving the Generic; Strelka Press. Snow, David (2001) Collective Identity and Expressive Forms; University of California, Irvine eScholarship Repository / http://repositories.cdlib.org/csd/01-07.

210

Strauss, Anselm L.; Hildenbrand, Astrid; Hildenbrand, Bruno (1994) Grundlagen qualitativer Sozialforschung: Datenanalyse und Theoriebildung in der empirischen soziologischen Forschung, Fin München Skoček, Iľja (1965) Problémy bývania (The problems of dwelling); Projekt Vol. 7 No. 6; p. 119. Steiner, Eugen (1973) The Slovak Dilemma; Cambridge University Press, p. 66. Svetko, Štefan (1957) Progresívny systém tradičnej výstavby v sídlisku Februárka v Bratislave (Progressive System of Traditional Construction in Februárka Housing Estate in Bratislava); Projekt Vol. 3 No. 5; p. 3-5. Tajfel, Henri (1981) Human Groups and Social Categories; Cambridge University Press. Tajfel, H.; Turner, J. (1986) The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior; Psychology of Intergroup Relations ed. by S. Worchel; Nelson Chicago; p. 7-24. Taylor, Verta; Nancy Whittier (1992) Collective Identity in Social Movement Communities: Lesbian Feminist Mobilization; Frontiers in Social Movement Theory, edited by C. M. Mueller and A. D. Morris. Yale University Press New Haven; p. 29-104. Teige, Karel; Dluhosch, Eric (2002) The Minimum Dwelling; MIT Press. Todorova, Maria (1999) Imagining the Balkans; Oxford University Press New York. Tőkés, Rudolf L. (2000) ‚Transitology’: Global Dreams and Post-communist Realities; Central European Review Vol. 2(10): http://www.ce-review.org/00/10/tokes10.html Tuan, Yi-Fu (1977) Space and Place: The perspective of Experience; University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. Turner, J. C. (1982) Towards a Cognitive Redefinition; In H. Tajfel, Social Identity and Intergroup Relations; Cambridge University Press; p. 15-40. Verdery, Katherine (1999) The Political Lives of Dead Bodies: Reburial and Post-socialist Change; Columbia University Press New York; p. 112. Vidler, Anthony (1992) The Architectural Uncanny: Essays in the Modern Unhomely, MIT Press Cambridge; p. 177-185. Weinwurm, Friedrich (1931) Das heutige Schaffen; Sborník modernej tvorby úžitkovej, Praha; p. 37-38. Williams, Raymond (1960) Border County; Chatto and Windus; p.11. Wilson, M.; Mackenzie, N. E. (2000) Social Attributions Based on Domestic Interiors; Journal of Environmental Psychology Vol. 20; p. 343-354. Young, Craig; Kaczmarek, Sylvia (2008) The Socialist Past and Postsocialist Urban Identity in Central and Eastern Europe: The Case of Lodz, Poland; European Urban and Regional Studies Vol. 15; p. 53-70. Zapletalová, Jaroslava; Zeman, František; Nižnanský, Viktor (1988) Problémy kvality komplexnej výstavby (Problems with the quality with building of complex estates); Architektúra a urbanizmus Vol. 22 No. 4, p. 240. Zarecor, Kimberly Elman (2011) Manufacturing Socialist Modernity: Housing in Czechoslovakia 1945-1960; University of Pittsburgh Press. Žbirka, Jaroslav (1993) Rehabilitácia obytného prostredia; Magazine Projekt Vol. 35 No. 6; p. 2.

211

Weblinks http://www.teraz.sk/magazin/bratislava-petrzalka-vystavba-vyrocie/41952-clanok.html https://spectator.sme.sk/c/20461455/most-slovaks-own-their-residence.html https://www.bratislavskenoviny.sk/zivot-v-meste/50206-v-petrzalke-pokrstili-cokoladovymi-dukatmi-najdrahsieschody-v-strednej-europe https://bratislava.sme.sk/c/6402508/panelstory.html https://www.authenticslovakia.com/bratislava-tours/post-communist-bratislava-tour/ https://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowTopic-g274924-i1156-k6160203-Petrzalka-Bratislava_Bratislava_Region.html https://www.lonelyplanet.com/slovakia/bratislava/attractions/petrzalka/a/poi-sig/1339550/360690 https://www.thecrowdedplanet.com/bratislava-communist-architecture-a-diy-tour/ https://www.petrzalka.sk/samosprava/historia/ https://www.bratislavskenoviny.sk/zivot-v-meste/10213-aj-petrzalka-by-mohla-lakat-turistov http://www.fb03.uni-frankfurt.de/45503391/Introduction-from-Katzenstein-1996---The-Culture-of-National-Security. pdf https://www.aktuality.sk/clanok/365445/viete-kto-je-muz-z-fotografie-o-jeho-cine-nevedela-ani-rodina/ http://www.ipsnews.net/2007/08/albania-forget-communismor-sell-it/ https://www.bratislavskenoviny.sk/zivot-v-meste/10213-aj-petrzalka-by-mohla-lakat-turistov https://bratislava.sme.sk/c/20441868/v-utrobach-petrzalskeho-metra-byvaju-vystavy-a-koncerty.html http://www.wikiwand.com/sk/LĂşky_VII https://www.archinfo.sk/diela/interier/obnova-panelovych-domov-ich-architektonicky-dispozicny-a-urbanistickypotencial-diplomova-praca.html https://www.kompot.sk/eshop/muzi/tricka/panelove/ https://yao-wu-dglx.squarespace.com/new-gallery-87/xjelgul7hxi97ufsqm4vaibjtn9m8u https://www.facebook.com/photo. Catalogue of housing blocks and apartments:https://www.akebyty.sk/hladat/bytovky/bratislava-petrzalka-lukyjasovska-LC283 https://www.upn.gov.sk

212

Media Tri kvality Petržalky: čo sa môže zvyšok Bratislavy naučiť od miesta, ktoré domáci milujú a cudzí sa k nemu správajú vlažne - Three qualities of Petržalka: What can the rest of the Bratislava learn from the place that is loved the locals and judged by the others https://magazin.novelido.sk/bratislava/tri-kvality-petrzalky-co-sa-moze-zvysok-bratislavy-naucit-miesta-ktoredomaci-miluju-cudzi-sa-nemu-spravaju-vlazne/ Petržalka je vlasťou vulgárnosti - Petrzalka is the motherland of vulgarity https://dennikn.sk/538805/petrzalka-je-vlastou-vulgarnosti/ Petržalka ukrýva mnoho skrytých zaujímavostí - Petržalka is hiding a lot of hidden curiositieshttps://refresher.sk/22714Bratislavska-Petrzalka-ukryva-mnoho-zaujimavosti-o-ktorych-si-nevedel Trasa pre metro ešte nezarástla - The corridor for the subway is still not overgrownhttps://bratislava.sme. sk/c/6486830/trasa-pre-bratislavske-metro-este-nezarastla.html Takto sme budovali sídlisko s najhoršou povesťou: Hniezdo výtržníkov a chuligánov - That’s how we have built the district with the worst reputation: The nest of roughs and hooligans https://www.topky.sk/cl/10/1521259/Takto-sme-budovali-najvacsie-sidlisko-s-najhorsou-povestou--Hniezdovytrznikov-a-chuliganovPetržalka je fenomén - Petržalka is a phenomenonhttp://www.petrzalcan.sk/petrzalka-je-fenomen Centrálna zóna Petržalky: mesto sa pýta obyvateľov - Central zone of Petržalka: the city is asking the inhabitants https://www1.pluska.sk/regiony/bratislava/ako-ma-vyzerat-petrzalka-mesto-pyta-ludi-ti-rozhodnu Petržalka je fascinujúci mestský priestor - Petržalka is a fascinating urban spacehttps://www.tyzden.sk/lifestyle/41268/ chytre-mesto-petrzalka-je-fascinujuci-mestsky-priestor/ Petržalka je plná kvetov - Petržalka is full of flowershttps://bratislava.dnes24.sk/petrzalka-je-plna-kvetov-vdakamestskej-casti-aj-obyvatelom-su-ulice-sidliska-krajsie-275101 Betónová džungla, ktorá má vlastnú romantiku - Concrete jungle with its own romancehttps://www.sme. sk/c/2427466/petrzalka-betonova-dzungla-ktora-ma-svoju-vlastnu-romantiku.html Petržalka ako pamiatka: kdeže hrdosť, skôr záťaž - Petrzalka as heritage: far from pride, more like a burden https://bratislava.dnes24.sk/opraste-spomienky-na-detstvo-pamatate-si-este-aka-bola-petrzalka-pred-tridsiatimirokmi-263702 Oprášte spomienky: pamätáte si na Petržalku pred 30 rokmi? - Recall memories: do you remember Petržalka 30 years ago?https://bratislava.dnes24.sk/opraste-spomienky-na-detstvo-pamatate-si-este-aka-bola-petrzalka-predtridsiatimi-rokmi-263702 Óda na Petržalku, prečo sa tu ľuďom dobre žije - Ode on Petržalka: why do people live here well? https://dennikn.sk/532127/oda-na-petrzalku-preco-sa-ludom-na-zaznavanom-sidlisku-vlastne-dobre-zije/ Dušu Petržalka má, na srdce stále čaká - Petržalka already has a soul, still waiting for its heart https://zurnal.pravda.sk/fenomen/clanok/462350-dusu-petrzalka-ma-na-srdce-stale-caka/ Panelákom treba pomôcť a dožijú sa 102 rokov - By helping the panel houses, they could reach 102 of age https://www.aktuality.sk/clanok/273051/nebojte-sa-panelaky-nam-tak-skoro-nezburaju/ Bratislava je laboratórium panelákov - Bratislava is the laboratory of panel houseshttps://bratislava.sme. sk/c/6417883/bratislava-je-laboratoriom-panelakov.html Paneláky naše - čo s vami? - Dear panel houses, what to do with you?

213

http://www.petrzalskenoviny.sk/petrzalka/05/2014/panelaky-nase-co-s-vami-1-po-desiatich-rokoch/ Prvé paneláky sú často lepšie ako dnešné byty - The first panel houses are often better than today’s apartments https://style.hnonline.sk/vikend/456808-prve-panelaky-su-casto-lepsie-ako-dnesne-byty Pá, pá, paneláky? Ten čas ešte nenastal - Gooydbye panel houses? The time has not come yet https://spravy.pravda.sk/regiony/clanok/208414-pa-pa-panelaky-ten-cas-este-nenastal/ Životnosť panelákov v Bratislave sa skončí v roku 2090. Desaťročia pred tým padne ich cena - Durability of panale housing in Bratislava is up to the year 2090. Decades before their prices should fall http://www.tvnoviny.sk/ekonomika/1907438_zivotnost-panelakov-v-bratislave-sa-skonci-v-roku-2090-desatrociapred-tym-padne-ich-cena Stavali sme panelály, ochránime ich? - We have built panel houses, will we protect them?https://kultura.sme. sk/c/7150964/stavali-sme-panelaky-ochranime-ich.html Kde bolo tam bolo...v Petržalke bolo - Once upon a time…there was in Petržalka https://evavaskova.blog.sme.sk/c/400899/kde-bolo-tam-bolo-v-petrzalke-bolo.html

Music Priamo z Petržalky I. - Directly from Petržalka I. (artist: Názov Stavby) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bn-T-A-Gz4U&frags=pl%2Cwn Petržalka (artist: Zvuk Ulice) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUEuUxiMWCk&t=1026s&frags=pl%2Cwn Sídliskový indián - The Indian of the Mass-housing (artist: Elán) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjj2oJxsHWs&t=121s&frags=pl%2Cwn

Art Depository of Slovak National Gallery, Liptov Gallery of Peter Michal Bohúň and Orava Gallery Online catalogue available under: Moja Bratislava (Julián Filo): https://www.webumenia.sk/dielo/SVK:SNG.K_6356?collection=66 Z mesta von (Rudolf Sikora): https://www.webumenia.sk/dielo/SVK:GPB.G_1006 Nothing special III. (Martin Kollar): https://www.webumenia.sk/dielo/SVK:SNG.UP-DK_3620 Deti na sídlisku. Petržalka (Juraj Bartoš): https://www.webumenia.sk/dielo/SVK:SNG.UP-DK_4446 Za mestom (Záboj Bohuslav Kuľhavý) https://www.webumenia.sk/dielo/SVK:GPB.O_593 Petržalka (Juraj Bartoš): https://www.webumenia.sk/dielo/SVK:SNG.UP-DK_4390 Panely (Ivan Štubňa):

214

https://www.webumenia.sk/dielo/SVK:OGD.G_1414 Univerzálne futurologické obydlie - U.F.O. (Július Koller) https://www.webumenia.sk/dielo/SVK:SNG.IM_215 Nové sídlisko (Július Koller) https://www.webumenia.sk/dielo/SVK:SNG.O_3313

Filmography Panelstory aneb Jak se rodí sídliště (1979) - Story from a Housing Estate / Prefab Story (festival name) director: Věra Chytilová Film review by Peter Zákuťanský (2008) https://www.cinemaview.sk/recenzie/panelstory-aneb-jak-se-rodi-sidliste/

Documentary film Archive of RTVS - Rozhlas a televízia Slovenska (The Radio and TV of Slovakia) / broadcast Noc v archíve (A night in the archive): (1969) Tu rastie budúcnosť - Here grows the future (1968) Druhý breh - The other bank (1970) Perspektívy bývania v socialistickej spoločnosti - The perspectives of the housing in the socialist society (1976) Najmladší obvod - The youngest region (1979) Výstavba Petržalka - Building Petržalka (1985) Služby v Petržalke - Services in Petržalka (1987) Výchova petržalských detí - Raising Petržalka’s children (1988) Špinavá Petržalka - Dirty Petržalka Documentary by Všehomír Agency, authors Zuzana Beňušková, Miroslav Bartoš (2003) Dobre nám je bývať v Petržalke? - Are we living well in Petržalka? Documentary by Protos Production, author Juraj Chlpík(2010) Identity Petržalky - Identities of Petržalka

Photography http://dontbelievephoto.blogspot.com/2014/11/skrachovana-architektura-bratislavy.html Documented by SITA Agency (2014):https://spravy.pravda.sk/regiony/clanok/307161-obyvatelia-z-jasovskej-ziadaju-ozastavenie-stavby-domino/ Documented by TASR Agency (2014):https://bratislava.sme.sk/c/7372987/stavebnici-domina-sa-stazuju-naobyvatelov-bytoviek-na-jasovskej.html Archive of Generálny investor Bratislavy (General investor of Bratislava)

215

http://www.konduktor.sk/vystavba/ https://ct24.ceskatelevize.cz/domaci/1911476-porovnejte-obrazem-panelstory-jizniho-mesta-po-40-letech © Petra Palusova

Interviews The Invention and Reinvention of the City: An Interview with Rem Koolhaas, Interview excerpt from the Journal of International Affairs spring/summer 2012issue, “The Future of the City.”; source: https://jia.sipa.columbia.edu/onlinearticles/invention-and-reinvention-city-interview-rem-koolhaas Interview with M. Beňuška in Projekt Vol. 7 No. 6 (1965); p. 127 Interviews conducted in May and June 2018

216