We Are New Belgrade

Dissertation by Luka Kreze# w1129281

Dissertation Tutor: Dr. John Bold

Photos in colour by Luka Kreze

London, January 2013

University of Westminster School Of Architecture and the Built Environment

Module Number: 4ARC740

Superblocks of New Belgrade on Jurija Gagarina Street

New Belgrade urban landscape as viewed from the rooftop of one of the skyscrapers

This dissertation focuses on the city of New Belgrade in Serbia, its architecture, and most importantly, its people. I was three years old in 1991 when Yugoslavia broke up, too young to re-member living under socialism, and much too young to remem-ber the spirit of that time. But yet still, throughout my life it seems that this spirit has somehow lingered on within my own environment long after the socialist state of mind had disap-peared. It is the architecture that has become one of the rare remaining traces of the former country and a mesmerizing testi-mony to almost forty years of socialism. The architecture of New Belgrade has inspired many of the post war cities in the former Yugoslavia, among which are many cities in my home country of Slovenia. Hence one of the reasons why I decided to proceed with this subject must be my desire to re-establish a connection with the environment I grew up in and discover its background, but the main motive most certainly lies in the fact that, apart from some standard statistical analyses, there has been little investigation into the quality of life within the neighbourhoods of New Belgrade.

In its three chapters this dissertation constantly puts the people of New Belgrade and their opinions in the spotlight instead of the numbers and the statistics. And for this reason during the summer of 2012 I travelled to Belgrade as well as Zagreb and Ljubljana several times with the simple goal of having as much one-to-one contact with the people of this cities as possible. Sev-eral interviews were conducted, which allowed me to draw con-clusions about the experience of living within the socialist city from the personal testimonies of inhabitants, and not just from the theoretical background. New Belgrade today is perhaps only a modern district of Belgrade, however from its history it was bound to become much more than that. For this reason the first chapter attempts to reveal the story behind New Belgrade and its buildings, its theory and science, stories behind its construction, and its politics. It also describes the unfulfilled dream of the socialist party to create a modern new capital for the newly born Yugoslavia, a city built on a tabula rasa of a former swamp. By going through a series of master plans, Chapter One briefly focuses on the planning principles behind the city which were during the initial stages marked by a constant battle between Stalinist fixation on monumentality and

Le Corbusian functionality, whilst in the later stages they were influenced predominantly by a rather unique application of the Athens Charter principles. Testimonies of people who lived in New Belgrade in the years of its slow construction reveal their experiences of life in a city where the urban fibre was practi-cally nonexistent and where distances between settlements were enormous, whilst the vast open areas in between were covered in dust. The interviews not only describe how people coped with alienation but also with some other flaws such as lack of trans-port connections and the underprovision of any kind of ameni-ties, schools, leisure facilities, and more.Chapter Two focuses on life in New Belgrade after the construc-tion ceased, however, it distances itself from historical facts and sets as its focal point the dialogue between the city and its users. The chapter identifies the elements of the Athens Charter in relation to New Belgrade and uses them not only as a frame-work, but also as a point of comparison between theory and the state of reality, as acquired through residents’ testimonies. In-terviews reveal the perception of the New Belgrade urban land-scape through the eyes of its dwellers, their fascination with its openness, yet rejection of its visual and material qualities. They also focus on the absence of amenities as one of the greatest flaws of this city ever since its conception, which very much lim-ited social life to the private sphere. This chapter compares the reality of the situation in New Belgrade to Le Corbusier’s ideals as described in the Athens Charter.Chapter Three attempts to reveal the reasons why people are so drawn to a city that clearly fails in so many ways, and deals with the spiritual experience of New Belgrade’s architecture. The question arising in Chapter Three is: why does identification with a place occur and what is necessary in order for a sense of belonging to develop? In addition the effect of the urban lifestyle and individuality on spirit of togetherness is observed in com-parison with socialist times. Towards the end the last chapter the influence of nature is examined in relation to the sense of belonging.

This dissertation through its three chapters attempts to present three crucial aspects in relation to the city of New Belgrade, its history, physical reality, and the reasons for the emotional con-nection of the people of New Belgrade to both.

5

Abstract

Table Of Contents

Chapter One: History, Theory and Politics Behind Planning of New Belgrade

Chapter Two: The Physical Realm

Chapter Three: The Sense of Belonging

Conclusion

Bibliography

Appendix: Interviews

Interview 1

Interview 2

Interview 3

Interview 4

Interview 5

Interview 6

Interview 7

Acknowledgements

5

7

11

25

61

81

91

97

98

102

105

106

108

110

113

116

Contents

1

Construction on one of many empty blocks of New Belgrade

Chapter One

History, Theory and Politics Behind the Planning of New Belgrade

Buildings of New Belgrade during the years of construction surrounded by vast empty areas

“This grand, stunning city, and the life within it, will not only pave the way, but will be reminiscent of Sun shine clear and bright over the nations of Yugoslavia, the Bal-kans and rest of Europe. It’s strength will be apparent from great distances, just as the powerful voice of this very Communist Party can be heard from far away… And so our battle is more than justified and noble, as we are fighting to give joy and happiness to our working masses, while providing the strength and power to our new-born republic”

Vlado Zečević, Secretary of Built Environment of Socialist Federative Re-public of Yugoslavia, 1948

New Belgrade is a city conceived on grand ideas that were never brought to life. It is a city designed with a clear vision that has, through the years, been moulded and shaped to fit the ever-changing social, political and economic paradigms. It is a place of contradictions, transformations and irony, which has, in a way, resulted in a fairly unique example of inconsistency in design and has become a “fascinating landscape testimony to changing concepts and practices in urban design and urban policy over the last 60 years.” (Waley, 2011, p209)

The modern city of New Belgrade is located on a historically crucial site. The former swamp area at the confluence of the Riv-ers Danube and Sava was, from the mid 18th century until the First World War and with the emergence of monarchy, a border between the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian empires.

The vast empty land was for decades seen as an attractive site for the expansion of Belgrade, especially during and between the world wars. At that time several relatively diverse master plans were suggested, ranging from rather traditionalistic planning suggestions and garden city examples, to the predominantly modernist planning of the late 1930’s.

Most of these master plans focused primarily on monumentality as the main point of concern, however, apart from the erection of modernist pavilions for the Belgrade Fairground, there is no evi-dence of habitation on this very site prior to the post-war period.

In one of the interviews Bogdan, who has lived in Belgrade his entire life, remembers: “In 1938 the fairground was built in the middle of an empty area next to the old Sava Bridge, today Branko’s Bridge in New Belgrade. This was a place where the most important innovations of that time were presented, even television. This fairground was seen as a place where people from the East and the West would meet, exchange information, contacts and make new friendships, the centre of Europe in a way. So I can see how this through time could evolve into a capi-tal, which is one of the most important European centres.” (In-terview 2)

The Second World War and its consequences, however, resulted in a change of socio-political concepts, which influenced every-day life in the Balkans for decades to come. New values and new order were the results of the transition from a monarchy to a republic and, more importantly, from capitalism to socialism. This political and economic shift was accompanied by certain much more tangible and realistic consequences of the war. It was under these post war conditions and its housing crisis that the long lasting idea of a new city was eventually realised. In fact, all the ingredients were there for the dream to become real-ity. The unlimited amount of land, with no previous record of habitation was more than a perfect foundation for a city built on a blank slate – a city, which would not only erase the memories of the capitalist past, but also represent an “important symboli-cal window to the socialist future of international significance.” (Blagojević, 2005, p3)

Over the years to come the planning of New Belgrade was con-stantly driven by the notion of centralisation: “Unlike Petržalka, New Belgrade was not intended to be a residential district and unlike Nowa Huta, industry was not its Raison-d’etre” (Waley 20011, p210)

The new capital of six republics, built on a land that belonged to no historical city, would be the nation’s new economic and cul-tural hub and the centre of political power for the new socialist republic. Although the propaganda behind the planning of the city might have seemed somewhat demagogic, the stories of the people who actually experienced the years of planning are rather

13

Emptiness during the years of construction

surprising. In fact, quite ironically, many of them do not even recall the plan of a great capital: “I have not heard about this plan. Some of the administrative buildings that were built did function for some years, however, I really had no idea that there was a bigger plan behind this.” (Interview 5)

Nevertheless, the foundations of New Belgrade were built on the promise of happiness and joy. Moreover, the Communist Party assured its nation it would fight a battle against any kind of anti-humanism as a force which “kills anything that is human in a person, to present a man either as an animal or an object.” (Zogović, 1948, 54) Not only did the government promise to fight any attempt to equate a human with a machine, but also any in-terpretations of a human as an antisocial being. These words can only be interpreted as a declaration of an open battle against any kind of depersonalization in socialist architecture. The new capi-tal was envisaged to become a key example for all future social-ist cities to be built in the Balkans. Its streets and its buildings would represent a symbol of victory over Nazism and Fascism, radiating the strength of the new republic, of its Communist Party and its people through monumentality and planning.

Changed post-war political paradigms also meant a shift in the government’s attitude towards culture. The strong political in-fluences of The Soviet Union resulted in, as was presented at the 5th Congress of the Communist Party, “a battle for new socialist culture and art and a battle towards any bourgeois reactions.” (Zogović, 1948, p55) The post war Yugoslavia was in a fairly unique position compared to some other socialist countries, having its strong modernist movement adopted from the pre-war period to-gether with the influence of the pro-Stalinists in the Yugoslavian architectural world weakening year after year, in a similar man-ner as the political ties between the countries were weakening. In this limbo the disputes within the architectural spheres were fierce. Stalinist architecture was strongly based on eclecticism as a source of monumentality, while the Modernists argued that ”modern monumentality originates in the strength of the work-ing masses, not in distances between the contrasting classes” (Mohorovičić in Maksimović, 1948, p75).

However, the split between the political support from the East

and, especially in the 1950’s, the reliance on financial support from the West, was bound to result in Yugoslavian architectural expression that would become something rather unique. As Mi-los Perović describes this fascinating situation:

“This permanent choice between the two culturally, politically, economically and socially opposite worlds and the meddling of high party representatives in issues of cultural development as the most sensitive part of public life, had a great influence on all as-pects of culture.” (Perović, 2003, p147)

The Master Plan of New Belgrade from 1946 and 1948 by Nikola Dobrović, Belgrade’s chief architect, was the first to address these rather contradictory needs. He proposed a radial plan with the railway stion as its central point. Even though the govern-ment buildings were located on the best sites in relation to the Old City, the point in which all the important lines met was the new railway station. This was “decisevly set as a reference datum of no particular societal hierarchy” (Blagojevic, 2005, p3).

The overall modernist plan was based on the majority of Le Cor-busier’s main ideas for the Ville Radieuse regarding excessive greenery, circulation, and on some of the concepts of the Athens Charter such as functional zoning and decongestion. Although the architect’s interpretation of the modernist ideas about living, leisure, work, and circulation would deviate from Le Corbusier’s ideas in some aspects, his plan did in fact start to introduce the more orthogonal grid, which in future master plans prevails and informs the concept of housing.

Even though Nikola Dobrović’s plan was never implemented, many architectural writers often ignore its significance. It is indisputable that his plan established concepts of the Athens Charter and functional zoning, different interpretations of which shaped the future New Belgrade. More importantly it was Dobrović’s plan that pinned down the main government build-ings and consequently set the main axis of orientation, around which most of the future master plans are oriented.

The construction of the National Assembly Building and “Hotel

15

Master plans by Nikola Dobrovic from 1946 (left) and Branko Petricic from 1957 (right)

National Assembly Building during construction

Jugoslavia” started in 1948, while Nikola Dobrović’s plan was succeeded by an even more orthogonal plan by Vido Vidović In the same year construction of housing began according to the plans of the same architect. The first housing estates were built in the western area of New Belgrade, located far away from Old Belgrade, leaving vast empty areas of sand and dust between the housing settlements, government building and the Old City centre. Stories of people who have experienced the “pre-urban” era of New Belgrade speak for themselves:

“In the beginning it really was a dormitory, as there was nothing else to do here. Shops, community cen-tres, post offices, banks and so on were only built to-wards the end of the 1970s in the majority of neigh-bourhoods” (Interview 5)

Their testimonies reveal the fact that New Belgrade was, particu-larly in the initial years, suffering from severe underprovision of services of any kind, while its settlements at that time were a clear sign of what became the greatest pathology of New Bel-grade in the future as well: incompleteness, emptiness, and lack of connections.

It is at least ironic if not fascinating that throughout its entire history, the era that shaped the city the most, was one of absolute standstill of construction, the era of “status quo” - the 1950’s. Political arguments between Yugoslavia and The Soviet Union culminated in a split between these two nations. The break-up ul-timately resulted in again altering the political, social, and espe-cially economic conditions, which prevented the construction of housing during the times when the housing crisis had reached its boiling point. Following the break-up Yugoslavia implemented a self-management system throughout the federation, a system where every business or factory relied solely on itself. Within the self-management system the government only monitored the in-dustry, whilst being replaced by workers in the decision-making position. The result of this was the migration of workers from the countryside into the cities.

As the housing crisis escalated with every passing day due to this migration, people would be forced to live in elevators, hall-

ways, and laundrettes. Strict socialist housing policy, which once banned any kind of private ownership, was mitigated in order to encourage construction, whilst illegal construction spread across the otherwise empty canvas of the city. Socialism was obviously not working, as the system based on collectiveness would push people “back into the private spheres” (Le Norman, 2006, p15). The construction plans as conceived after the war were clearly too ambitious for this new economic situation and their realisations were, needless to say, impossible within the non-existence of modern building techniques.

And so in 1950 Yugoslavian architects gathered at a conference in Dubrovnik where they eventually distanced themselves from the examples of Soviet architecture, whilst the idea of collectiv-ist design was replaced with standardisation. A variety of master plans for new Belgrade were proposed in the early 1950’s, gradu-ally moving further and further away from the initial concept of the new capital, reinforcing the impression of New Belgrade becoming a “dormitory city” (Le Norman, 2006, p14) and with only the National Assembly Building as the sole artefact of the origi-nal plan.

The master plan of 1957 by Branko Petričić was very much fu-elled by the ideas of the new social order and self-management. It introduced a strictly orthogonal grid, where functional zoning was perhaps not omitted entirely but was, as a result of the over-all lack of concept and nonexistence of services, almost wholly limited to the provision of housing. What the plan eventually introduced within its rigorously square grid of 400m by 400m were settlement units. Settlement units (mikro rajoni), as had emerged in most Soviet cities, were a socialist interpretation of housing estates or neighbourhoods, which are an integral part of most modern master plans. In theory a self - management system was believed to be a perfect environment for such units, since each unit was in fact an independent self-sufficient cell, governed by its local centre.

There have in fact been some successful realisations of settle-ment units in New Belgrade, mostly due to Petričić’s develop-ments of Blok 1 and Blok 2 which succeeded as self-sufficient communities, with adequate facilities and local centres. The

19

Sand and dust between the blocks of New Belgrade

broader reality was, however, that most developments did not only fail in terms of uniformity and lack of identity, but most importantly they failed to provide the necessary facilities within the settlement units such as shops, community centres, laun-drettes, newsagents. The absence of facilities that are essential for the internal economic activity and functioning of the micro-regions ultimately diminished their function solely to housing, whilst lack of connections between settlements and the city cen-tre resulted in the alienation of some particular neighbourhoods:

“The biggest problem was the traffic or to be more specific, the nonexistence of traffic. Public transport in New Belgrade was not functioning until long after I moved to this neighbourhood. It was quite hard to travel to the Old City. If for example you wanted to go to Zeleni Venac market you would have to walk from Blok 23 to Mihaila Pupina Street, which is about two miles away. Then you could take a bus across Branko’s Bridge or walk an additional mile, all of this only to buy some groceries.” (Interview 5)

The isolation of regions resulted in no interaction between the settlements even in the 1960’s when the situation improved and construction continued. Together with insufficient provision of necessary facilities inside the settlements and the underpro-vision of cultural facilities throughout the city, New Belgrade remained economically, politically, and culturally dependant on Old Belgrade at least until the 1990’s when social, political, and especially economic paradigms changed again.

Deviation from any sort of plan and lack of control over con-struction on a large scale resulted in inconsistency, simplifica-tion of forms as well as uniformity. The 1960’s and especially in the 1970’s produced architectures where “residential com-munities were as a rule submerged in enormous open parking areas that isolated them totally from other residential zones. Individual buildings were identical, depersonalized, supposed to house thousands and thousands of unknown tenants. The result was rigidity, isolation, coldness and monotony, causing numer-ous psychological problems.” (Perović, 2003, p153)

Whilst this chapter has introduced us to the story behind the city of New Belgrade it has also given us some basic theoretical back-ground. It has presented the flaws, which very much stigmatised the city image in the eyes of many potential visitors, but it has also revealed the historical reasons for these evident drawbacks of the city. On the basis of these facts our only logical conclusion should be that the lives of its inhabitants were severely affected by these drawbacks.

The historical facts most certainly left us unconvinced that New Belgrade ever lived up to the promises and expectation as a city in the sun. The previous quote by Perovic reveals an opinion many visitors share about New Belgrade prior to their visit, in-cluding myself. However, negative bias towards New Belgrade, although rather popular and common is so bold and pessimistic that further research and justification is more than necessary. New Belgrade is, nevertheless, a multilayered city and its notori-ously criticised visual aspect is only one of the layers.

The chapters that follow may shine a completely different light on the matter. In order to gain a fuller understanding of this ex-traordinary city we shouldn’t limit ourselves merely to a single point of view. In the following pages it is crucial for us to dis-tance ourselves from the theory, as well as the history, by focus-ing primarily on emotions. And so the primary aim of the next two chapters will be to unveil the mystery behind the spiritual connection between the city and its inhabitants.

21

Construction of the New Belgrade neighbourhoods

Chapter Two

The Physical Realm

Children at play in one of the New Belgrade neighbourhoods

As the visitor becomes immersed in the architecture of New Bel-grade for the very first time, he/she becomes at last aware of its full potential and its incredible power. Its buildings are one of the rare remaining traces of the former country and a mesmeris-ing testimony of almost fifty years of socialism. The architecture witnessed today between the banks of Rivers Danube and Sava, after so many decades, still radiates the epoch of a time long gone and, like a good book, makes our ears thirsty for the stories of a nation that no longer exists. And so with every breath we make New Belgrade fills our lungs with anticipation, encourag-ing us to explore the unexpected and listen to its stories with our eyes wide open.

Chapter One attempted to reveal the story behind New Belgrade and its buildings, its theory and science, the stories behind its construction, and its politics. However, just as it is unfair to judge a book by its cover, it is wrong to judge this city solely on the basis of books, let alone photos, historical facts, master plans, statistics or other critics’ opinions.

Architecture is only alive when there is a constant dialogue pres-ent between the building and the observer. In his seminal book “Eyes of the Skin” Juhanni Palasmaa identifies the phenomenon of this rather spiritual event:

“I lend my emotions and associations to the space and the space lends me its aura, which entices and emancipates my perceptions and thoughts.” (Palasmaa, 2005, p12)

Architecture speaks many different languages when trying to address the viewer whilst materiality, shapes, colours, mass, delicacy and vegetation are only a few of the languages in which architecture is fluent. So the focal point of this chapter shall be this very dialogue between the city and its users. On the one hand the interviews will reveal the perception and emotional ex-perience of the New Belgrade urban landscape in the eyes of its dwellers. On the other hand, it is essential that we gain a deeper understanding of the planning strategy and architectural logic behind this extraordinary city in order to assess whether it ulti-mately succeeded or failed. By looking deeper into the planning

approaches of the Athens Charter we shall, in each of the sub sections, try to identify the languages the city speaks when ad-dressing its inhabitants.

The inconsistency in the planning of New Belgrade and the rea-sons for it have already been described in Chapter One. Conse-quently the city of New Belgrade that we see today hardly re-sembles the original plans. Many elements of the Athens Charter have, however, remained intertwined with the design strategies of numerous consequent master plans, some of them in a more obvious fashion than others. Classifying these elements will al-low us to use the notions of the Athens Charter not only as theoretical framework, but also a point of comparison between the theory and state of reality, acquired trough resident’s testi-monies, whilst the occasional comparison with Zagreb and Lju-bljana should only deepen the assessment of quality regarding the built environment in New Belgrade.

And so this chapter will focus on the following elements in rela-tion to the city of New Belgrade: Space, Sun and Greenery, Lei-sure and Amenities, Transport, and finally Materiality and the Quality of the Dwelling.

27

Private gardens amidst the New Belgrade superblocks

Space, Sun and Greenery

Quite possibly the most inspiring feature of the city of New Bel-grade is its openness. The experience of crossing the Brankov Bridge is a rather unique event. As the visitor moves away from the relatively congested city centre with very few wide avenues and even fewer buildings above five storeys, he all of a sudden finds himself in an entirely different world where streets become boulevards and where parks are found on every corner of every neighbourhood. In one of the interviews conducted in New Bel-grade Ljiljana and Bogdan talk about this particular sensation:“From the moment we arrived to New Belgrade we knew very clearly that we are never going to return back to the Old City. There was simply so much space here, streets were wide and you could breathe the air. “ (Interview 2)

There is a good reason, however, why in New Belgrade the houses suddenly become skyscrapers as soon as one crosses the bridge. It is because implementation of this sort of vertical construction solves two problems at once quite efficiently – it decreases the congestion in a city whilst at the same time it increases its den-sity. Openness is probably the most obvious of the ingredients adopted from the Athens Charter in the planning process of New Belgrade:

“Urbanism is a three-dimensional, not a two-dimen-sional science. Introducing the element of height will solve the problems of modern traffic and leisure by utilizing the open spaces thus created.” (Le Corbusier, 1973, p98)

If one were to take a look at the basic massing of the neigh-bourhoods in New Belgrade, one would very soon realise that, in fact, most of them share some very distinct characteristics. A standard neighbourhood unit usually consists of several build-ings of around fifteen storeys high, set apart from each other at distances great enough as to not to cast shadows onto one another. Beneath them are typically two or three low-rise build-ings of maximum height up to four or five storeys. These build-ings either spiral as several continuous S-shaped blocks, creat-

ing large courtyards in between or are constructed as individual long strips of low-rise housing. As a result the spaces in between are very often fairly bright green areas and public spaces. The Athens Charter stresses the importance of openness as well as sunlight and greenery that come as positive side-effects of this type of construction:

“The health of every person depends to a great ex-tent on his submission to the “conditions of nature”. (Le Corbusier, 1973, p55) “The sun which governs all growth should penetrate the interior of the dwelling” In addition to that the Charter finds it crucial that the air quality is assured by the abundance of vegetation. (Le Corbusier, 1973, p55)

In Le Corbusier’s view a combination of the following ingredi-ents: vegetation, space and sun is the key to a healthy and happy living environment, hence these particular ingredients should, as such, be treated as the three raw materials of urbanism: “Let us bear in mind that the sensation of space is of a psycho-physio-logical order, and that the narrowness of the streets and the con-striction of courtyards create an atmosphere as unhealthy for the body as it is depressing to the mind.” (Le Corbusier, 1973, p55)

In reaction to this the boulevards of New Belgrade do, as a mat-ter of fact, receive a lot of sunlight primarily because the housing developments are positioned far away from the street edges. An-other reason is that the width of the boulevards is much greater compared to the narrow alleys in the city centre, just as advised by the Charter. And so especially in the summer New Belgrade might indeed give a visitor an impression of a city in the sun, as promised in the 1940’s by the state officials and city planners. Ljiljana sees the element of openness not only as one of the great benefits that the city of New Belgrade has to offer in comparison to the Old City, but also the main reason she would not even contemplate moving back there. “Our block is quite close to the river so we would go for a walk every day and enjoy this openness we did not know before. My husband used to live in Strahinjica Bana Street in the city centre, now more commonly known for its party scene. He simply cannot imagine life there with thou-

29

Vertical construction in New Belgrade

sands and thousands of people on the street every day drinking and making noise. You cannot even breathe normally because the place is so crowded.” (Interview 2)

The predominantly vertical construction of New Belgrade is even today quite surprisingly well-perceived by the people in the Blocks and even among young mothers such as Ljubica:

“I got used to the look of my environment very early on. I accepted it, since I have lived in such environ-ment my entire life. It even seemed quite interesting to me. Large, high- rise buildings seemed extremely impressive to me ever since I was little. Even elevator rides excited me when I was a little girl. “ (Interview 1)

After several similar answers it could be deduced that this un-conditional acceptance of high-rise construction might have its origins in the childhood memories of the residents, however, it is also possible that on a sub-conscious level people, to a certain extent, connect the dots between the high-rise construction and it’s previously described positive side-effects such as openness.In one of the interviews Bogdan, who is generally rather dis-pleased by the visual image of the city, admits his appreciation for the monumentality of buildings and open spaces: “One of the rare positive aspects is probably that this sort of environment might seem quite imposing to many. I quite like the openness, grandiosity etc.” (Interview 2)

Openness, however, should not be equated with emptiness. Open-ness, as previously stated, is the result of high-density vertical construction, planned with the aim of freeing the ground. Empti-ness, on the other hand, is what happened in New Belgrade in the 1950’s and is the consequence of absence of urban fibre, the result of which is isolation of some particular neighbourhoods and alienation of the residents.

Although the New Belgrade of the 21st century is a somewhat open city, new developments have started to fill the free space between existing urban fibre in recent years. As a matter of fact it could be argued that the city built on the ideals of com-munism and with the hands of the volunteers failed to “fully

produce and constitute a new revolutionary space” and instead created a perfect “contextual and spatial framework for a differ-ent hybrid concept of social and spatial structuring of the town.” (Dimitrijevic in Eric, 2009, p117) In “Differentiated Neighbourhoods of New Belgrade” Dubravka Sekulic describes her experience of the transition era as she remembers it from her student years:

“For us, New Belgrade was not only a part of town, but a very strong experience. A town created as a com-prehensive idea – we simply had a feeling of driving through utopia. It was exciting to constantly discover free spaces of utopia that were rather inspiring. And then - almost overnight it started to materialize (…) Empty spaces we used to daydream about were filled rapidly. Impersonal construction started to sprout. And we started to wonder, to ask ourselves.” (Sekulic in Eric, 2009, p135)

The city of New Belgrade has, especially over recent years become a playground where Serbian-Neo Capitalism, ideology based on public sale of national wealth, corporate power over state power, and excessive consumption is slowly transforming the city and where urban is rapidly violating the once even more abundant natural sphere. This process, however, has not stayed unnoticed by the residents: “Nowadays they build these new glass palaces between old cubes, they build new multicoloured buildings and keep worsening the situation further and further. Sometimes I think that whoever is behind these projects must really hate people.” (Interview 2)

The three previously identified raw elements as prescribed by the Athens Charter are also the main planning ingredients in most of the other post war cities and housing developments throughout former Yugoslavia. In none of them, nevertheless, is the discrepancy between the Old City and these new develop-ments as pure and obvious as in New Zagreb, where many parts of the city seem almost intact and unaffected by the transition period of the 1990’s. In comparison to New Belgrade, where shopping malls and other temples of global consumerism sprout like mushrooms, in the case of New Zagreb the manifestation of capitalism is much more gentle. Greenery plays an important

31

View from New Zagreb skyscraper reveals the abundance of greenery beneath it and the city centre in the background

part in Vladimir’s life. It is one of the main reasons why he enjoys living in New Zagreb and so when asked to compare his former life in the city centre to the life in New Zagreb the answer resembles the answers of so many people in New Belgrade:

“It is horrible there (the city centre). There is no openness, no air, too much traffic and no greenery. To me the old city centre is more of a concrete jungle than this new part of town, if that makes sense. New Zagreb as you can see is a town in greenery. Every-thing is open and bright. Overall this is a great place to live, it truly has soul and the parks are everywhere as you can see.” (Interview 6)

In the Athens Charter Le Corbusier stresses the importance of greenery by placing it unexpectedly high on his list of priorities. He sees nature as direct or indirect extensions of the dwellings and just as important as the dwelling itself. When seeking justi-fication he goes back in history to see how the traditional cities he loathes so much were built: “The fact that the most expensive apartments are situated in the environments that best mimic the natural ones is proof that if means allow him man will seek habitation in nature.” (Le Corbusier, 1973, p14)

Robert Fishman in his book “Urban Utopias in the 20th Cen-tury” identifies how Le Corbusier’s ideas sometimes become even more radical, up to the point when he urges the architects and urbanists to “forsake mere decoration and prepare to under-take great works” in order to “create a complete environment in which man, nature, and the machine would be reconciled.” (Fishman, 1982, p189)

If we use Le Corbusier’s previously mentioned categorisation of nature as direct or an indirect extension of the dwelling, which is based on whether the natural environment penetrates the urban form or not, we can conclude that New Belgrade’s neighbour-hoods enjoy an abundance of both. Comparisons between differ-ent periods of the New Belgrade history in relation to greenery, however, reveals that the discrepancies in the quality of natural environment have been quite evident through the years. Valerija has lived in New Belgrade since the 1960’s and so when she

shares her memories with us, sitting on the bench amongst wil-lows and poplars, we can hardly believe that she is describing the very same place: “This very place where we stand right now was covered in sand. It looked like a desert on one hand and a concrete jungle on the other. Nothing was green except some accidental bushes every now and then” (Interview 4)

However, as the years went by Belgrade became greener and greener as well, in fact it currently boasts around 20.000 trees of around 90 species. The largest of the parks is the Friendship Park, which has throughout its history been planted by lead-ers of even some of the most diametrically opposed political sys-tems in the world such as Nasser, Nehru, Nixon, Ford, Thatcher, Mubarak, Indira Gandhi, and Queen Elizabeth II as well as sev-eral celebrities such as the Rolling Stones in 2007.

Ljubica remembers her childhood years mostly as years of life in nature. The way she speaks about her early days with enthu-siasm in her voice, idealism in her words and optimism in her eyes, reassures us that childhood memories and the abundance of open green space have left a strong mark on her and her perception of the living environment. And even though she dis-agrees with the fact that authorities today intentionally neglect the importance of open green spaces by leaving them abandoned or swallowed by the uncontrolled sprawl of commercial construc-tion, her answers always lead back to the pleasant memories of childhood:

“Then there were parks that were taken care of, so we would run around, play on the swings and slides. I have to admit we had a somewhat incredible child-hood. I would say those were the easier times - in way carefree and better times. And for this reason these blocks are all my life.” (Interview 1)

33

New Belgrade - a town in greenery

Left: New Belgrade landscape as viewed from the top of one of the skyscrapers.Creativeness of children in the absence of leisure facilities

Leisure and Amenities

The Athens Charter sees the open space as an integral part of the functioning of a city. As stated before the land that was freed due to vertical construction should ideally allow activities con-nected to leisure, education, culture, sports and to some extent commerce, to fill the empty spaces created between the housing.

Le Corbusier identifies the purpose of these facilities as places that ultimately should “meet the collective activities of youth and to provide a favourable site for diversions and games during the leisure hours.“ The urbanists henceforth must “assure city dwellers of living conditions that will safeguard not only their physical health but also their moral health and the joy of life that results from these.” (Le Corbusier, 1973, p66)

And so he finds it absolutely crucial that the number of daily working hours meets the amount of free time for each worker, to be more precise, time devoted exclusively to a “refreshing exis-tence amidst natural elements.” (Le Corbusier, 1973, p67)

Le Corbusier divides “free time” activities into three categories: daily - which are spent within the vicinity of a home, weekly - which are spent out of the city and finally yearly - which are spent abroad. Depending on these categories Le Corbusier then lists the facilities, which shall in every city become the “realms of freedom and creativity for those who spend their working hours taking orders.” (Le Corbusier, 1973, p67) These facilities include: parks, forests, playing fields, stadiums, beaches, lakes and rivers as well as youth clubs, reading rooms, game rooms and cultural facilities such as museums, galleries and theatres. To be honest not many of these principles have ever been imple-mented within the construction of New Belgrade, in fact the un-derprovision of amenities has been the greatest flaw and cancer wound of this city ever since its conception. Chapter One already described the unbearable living conditions in the 1950’s and 1960’s when residents were left no choice but to travel many miles merely to buy necessities. Schools were almost non-exis-

tent whereas Local Centres were rare. Leisure facilities were scarce as well, the result of which was that the quality of free time was rather mediocre. When asked whether their typical day could be in any way compared to what Le Corbusier had in mind, the answers of the interviewees would almost unanimously re-veal that hours of hard work were almost never repaid by an equal amount of leisure.

“My block wasn’t really a pleasant environment to live in as you can imagine. There was no place for pleasure here, because there were no other facilities built except housing. You would work during the day, return home and then go to rest. Even if you weren’t tired and wanted to indulge yourself in a certain ac-tivity you had no option to do that. New Belgrade re-ally was a large dormitory back then.” (Interview 4)

Still, as time passed the situation improved slightly at least when it came to some leisure facilities such as playgrounds and sports facilities. Ljubica, however, describes the circumstances today as once again critical and so she weeps for the old times: “Situ-ation now is much worse. There are no benches to sit on, no playgrounds for children, which really bothers me as a young mother. There used to be swings, basketball fields, football fields and all sorts of things.

The authorities today focused only on taking care of that one park a few blocks down the road, however, all the other blocks are left abandoned. It was considerably greener when I was younger. Now the kids play in the doorways and hang out in pas-sages because they have no other place to go.” (Interview 1)

Ljijana and Bogdan are of similar opinion when it comes to as-sessing the quality of the urban furniture in New Belgrade:

“To be honest the neighbourhoods are not especially well looked-after. Sports facilities are in horrible con-dition, benches are broken and the older concrete benches are extremely uncomfortable to sit in. Over-all the prediction that the architects of this neigh-bourhood had about how people will use the outdoors

37

Playgrounds of New Belgrade

furniture was completely wrong.” (Interview 2)Nevertheless the inhabitants agree that one of the rare positive side effects of the transition into neo-capitalism and the emer-gence of the private sector is that nowadays they are offered plenty of opportunities when it comes to culture and especially shopping. “I have so many other things today that I can enjoy. Most importantly I have everything I need on my doorstep now, transit, shops, market, groceries, cafes, parks etc. Compared to the life in a desert in the 1970s this is wonderful.” (Interview 4)

Today’s situation seems quite similar in Ljubljana, although Marija describes that she has never really experienced anything nearly as harsh as people in Belgrade did when they settled into these new neighbourhoods: “The conditions here were perfect for raising a child, lots of playgrounds and greenery. Now the condi-tions are even better. The community centre offers a variety of classes and activities such as learning a language, gymnastics, computer lessons, drawing classes, sculpturing etc. There are so many opportunities for everyone, to exercise, learn and meet people, you only need to be active” she says as she explains how in fact the leisure opportunities almost fall from the sky in her Ljubljana neighbourhood. (Interview 7)

39

Primary school amidst the blocks of New Zagreb

Streets separating the blocks of New Belgrade

Transport

New Belgrade obeys many rules of the Charter when it comes to transport. The most obvious adaptation is without any doubt the city’s strongly orthogonal grid of wide boulevards which follow Le Corbusier’s ideals of geometry and perfect form:

“The city of to-day is dying because it is not geometri-cal. The result of true geometrical lay-out is repeti-tion. The result of repetition is a standard.” (Le Corbusier, 1929, p175)

Without the standard there is no perfect form and the system does not function efficiently. The orthogonal grid of new Bel-grade is set in such a way that the distances between the main crossroads are great enough as to allow uninterrupted journeys and relatively high velocities, so commuting in New Belgrade runs a lot smoother than in the adjacent city centre.

As discussed previously the majority of New Belgrade is con-structed so that vertical construction frees the ground, whilst at the same time it increases population density. This notion is crucial when it comes to traffic.

Increasing density without increasing the congestion means that people do not need to travel as far to work as they would in a city with primarily low-rise buildings and the same number of inhabitants. Another important aspect is the separation of traf-fic routes from pedestrian routes, and the introduction of green belts, which not only separate the housing from main boulevards but, to some extent, also create a safer living environment for the children. Ljubica describes her childhood experience in rela-tion to traffic:

“Streets separate blocks. This is very important. Es-pecially when we were little, we weren’t allowed to cross the streets. Streets are wide and dangerous. We felt safe in our own neighbourhood, plus our parents were reassured if they knew we were playing in front

of the building.” (Interview 1) If we don’t take into account the fact that there is no under-ground transport in New Belgrade whatsoever, apart from pe-destrian traffic (strangely enough subways were implemented in New Belgrade even before the first ones were built in the Old City centre) and that the main means of transport is still the tram (which Le Corbusier strictly rejected as inappropriate for the modern city) New Belgrade has, together with some develop-ments in Zagreb, succeeded to quite a high extent in achieving the standards of the Charter, whilst various developments in Lju-bljana don’t share the same principles, mostly because planning principles there were never based on an orthogonal grid.

43

Visual image and materiality of the superblocks

Materiality and the Quality of the Dwelling

“Well I think it is obvious that these buildings are not pleasant for the viewer’s eye. Most of them, especially in our block 22 are reminiscent of tombs, mausole-ums. I would even argue that the quality of construc-tion is quite disappointing.” (Interview 5)

The term concrete jungle gets tossed around a lot when it comes to describing the city of New Belgrade. It is important, however, that we establish what the term in fact means. Concrete jungle as many perceive it is a large urban area mostly populated with predominantly high-rise unattractive concrete buildings, mostly paved open spaces and very scarce greenery. Even though the primary aim of this dissertation is not to relativise whether New Belgrade is a concrete jungle or not, it is important that we ask ourselves this question, nonetheless. The interviews did reveal that when it comes to an assessment of the visual image of the buildings, materiality and the quality of dwellings, the answers do in fact reveal a high level of disappointment amongst the inhabitants.

Building techniques and the planning ideology behind the con-struction of New Belgrade have been explained in the beginning of Chapter Two. As these observations were merely theoretical it is crucial that we take a look at the other side of the coin.“It is like living in a city of cubes, nothing to kill the monotony, no interesting details, at least I see it this way” explains Ljiljana, who sees the aesthetics of her neighbourhood as “disappoint-ing.” (Interview 2)

One of the most surprising conclusions that can be drawn from the interviews, however, is that none of the interviewees implied that there is any sort of correlation between the visual aspects of New Belgrade architecture, its materials and health issues or even happiness. Ljubica illustrates her relationship with the architecture:

“Architecture did not affect our happiness. Don’t get

me wrong, I do not like the visual image of these buildings, perhaps you could say they are even ugly, inhumane, cruel. I admit, the buildings are in fact too tall” (Interview 1)

Nevertheless, concrete, as the main construction material re-mains notoriously unpopular. Valerija, who has lived in the city ever since it was built, describes her first experiences with the material:

”It was ugly. That is what bothered me. There was concrete everywhere, the buildings, the benches, the paths, the garages and the playgrounds. I was used to living in a house before I came here so it was quite a shock to me. The concrete is such a cold material, it makes the environment gloomy, and so we decided to fix that. We would put flowers on the balconies and those who lived in the ground floors would create little gardens in front of their doors.” (Interview 4)

Furthermore, based on several similar answers, it seems that concrete performs even worse when it comes to its physical char-acteristics, not only its aesthetic value. Milorad remains firmly unconvinced about the choice of concrete as the material: “Let me tell you one thing: in thirty or forty years time all of these buildings will end up under a bulldozer and be demolished. You cannot live with concrete slabs above you and concrete slabs beneath you. It is not pleasant. Concrete heats up in summer and cools down in winter. It transmits temperature and humid-ity. You can hear everything that is happening above you and below you. It is a horrible material to live in. I am grateful that we received these apartments, don’t get me wrong, but I cannot give them kudos for creating a quality place to live. “ (Interview 5)

When it comes to the quality of the dwelling unit, however, opin-ions seem to differ, as the flats vary in size. Materiality still seems to be one of the greatest flaws, nevertheless, room ar-rangement and privacy appear to be often-occurring issues as well: “Buildings are made entirely out of concrete, and concrete is hell. During the summer it will heat up to the degree where if you touch it, it is almost as hot as the hot plate. On the other

45

Interior view of a New Belgrade apartment

hand, during the wintertime it is freezing cold. I am rather un-satisfied with flats as such as well. The arrangement of the rooms is just silly. The rooms are very small, so I would not even count them as rooms. It almost seems that when they built these flats their logic was to take one regular sized room and split it in half in order to make two. To be honest this is a flat for two. I cannot imagine our son still living here with us. With the exception of one room merely sliding or harmonica doors separate the entire flat. My husband in a way prefers this sort of arrangement, while I am not so keen about it. A person needs privacy every now and then. These sorts of flats do not allow you to isolate yourself from others. It is almost impossible to fall asleep in one room while someone is doing something else in the other rooms. We can also hear every sound coming from flats around us, every sentence, every footstep, we can hear our neighbours watching the telly etc. “ explain Ljiljana and Bogdan who not only experi-ence problems with the materiality of their apartments, but also find the size of the rooms and the general arrangement of the flats particularly disturbing. (Interview 2)

Nevertheless, I need to admit, with a hint of remorse that prior to my first encounter with this city my opinion was strongly in-fluenced by the prejudice and expectations of a concrete jungle. But aren’t the inhabitants of the city the ones who should decide what their city truly is or isn’t?

And so even though the interviews did in fact support my preju-dice, as most of the answers presented materiality and lack of aesthetic value as main faults in the otherwise quite extraor-dinary system that New Belgrade most certainly is, residents demonstrated an unconditional acceptance of their living envi-ronment despite its evident drawbacks:

“I got used to the look of my environment very early on. I accepted it, since I have lived in such environ-ment my entire life. We had a wonderful childhood here so most of us continued with our lives in New Belgrade” (Interview 1)

says Ljubica who has lived in the New Belgrade blocks ever since she was born. She is not alone in this opinion. Vladimir, who has

lived in New Zagreb since the 1970s shares her view:“If you are asking me whether I am satisfied with the look of the buildings I would have to say no. But I would not say that it bothers me either. You see, through all these years we slowly got used to this type of architecture. I believe that the reason why I got used to it is because I lived in these buildings ever since they were built and I am almost certain that I look at these buildings in a different way than you do, for example.” (Interview 6)

And so at the end of this chapter it is important that we ask ourselves why is it that people have through the years devel-oped such a positive relationships with their neighbourhoods, regardless of the fact that they openly acknowledge the obvious weaknesses? One of the possible answers to this question could be that some of the drawbacks of the neighbourhoods are out-weighed by some remarkable benefits that this type of construc-tion allowed and were described in the first part of Chapter 2.

We need, however, in the next chapter to approach this phenom-enon from a different point of view, because it just might be that the reason for this rather odd relationship between the city and its dwellers does not lie in the mainly visual aspects that were described in this chapter, but that the answer is perhaps hidden to our eyes.

Juhanni Pallasmaa seeks for this answer outside the realm of the visual. He does not perceive architecture as an isolated and self-sufficient artefact.

In his opinion architecture “gives a conceptual and material structure to societal institutions, as well as to the conditions of daily life (…) Architecture strengthens the existential experience, one’s sense of being in the world, and this is essentially a strength-ened experience of self. Instead of mere vision, or the five classical senses, architecture involves sev-eral realms of sensory experience which interact and fuse into each other.” (Pallasmaa, 2005, p41)

51

Blocks of New Belgrade

Skyscrapers of New Zagreb in blocks Sopot (left) and Zaprudje (right)

Fuzine neighbourhood in Ljubljana

Chapter Three

The Sense of Belonging

Brass band rehersing in the New Belgrade neighbourhood courtyard

While Chapter One described the historical background, which most certainly influenced the relationship between the city of New Belgrade and its residents, and whilst Chapter Two focused on their experience of the physical environment, the last chapter sets as its focal point the mysterious phenomenon of the sense of belonging, present in most New Belgradians, in spite of some apparent negative aspects of the city they live in.

It is crucial that we approach this very fragile topic carefully and from many aspects. In Chapter Three we will treat the concept of belonging as a decisive variable in the equation of New Bel-grade. We will do so by looking at the role of the community and neighbourhood as key factors in the process of identification of the dwellers with the city. And so our goal will essentially be to determine whether belonging occurs in the dwellers due to their emotional experience of the community, their experience of the neighbourhood, both or perhaps neither of them.

In her seminal book “Urban Bonds” Talja Blokland identifies the notion of community as something rather intangible. For her the community is not a physical entity, but instead refers to the experience and desire for “pleasant, warm and congenial togeth-erness”. (Blokland, 2003, p62) Prior to my visits to the socialist cities of former Yugoslavia it was my strong belief that due to the nature of socialism, as a system strongly based on equality, the sense of belonging most people experience has its roots in the bonds between the residents, whilst those bonds fuel the spirit of community. The testimonies revealed, however, that in reality very few deep and meaningful relationships developed between residents, at least in the past. Vladimir who has lived in New Zagreb’s neighbourhood of Zaprudje for 40 years quite vividly describes his own personal experience of the community:

“If you are asking about relationships, friendships I have to disappoint you. These relationships were based merely on saying hello and goodbye to someone when you met them on the street. Certain groups did meet and hang around, however, these relationships were strictly defined by one’s occupation and took place at set locations such as community centres or clubs.” (Interview 6)

In his testimony Vladimir points out that the relationships were not based on interaction or affection, but instead primarily origi-nated from regular encounters between residents. Encounters, however, do not constitute groups on their own, because groups put down their roots in interpersonal bonds and “bonds based on affection derive from sympathy and shared interests.” (Blokland, 2003, p78)

Physical nearness and regular encounters in isolation cannot re-sult in deep meaningful relationships between people. However, if it is shared interests that constitute bonds, how come is it then that meaningful relationships developed so rarely within an environment such as New Belgrade, where the differences between residents were much smaller compared to some other more heterogeneous neighbourhoods around the world?

The answer might lie in the fact that, when it comes to the forma-tion of a community and the quality of interpersonal relations the neighbourhood as such plays a very important role. First of all, however, it is crucial that we are fully aware of the relation-ship between the neighbourhood and community because:

“The neighbourhood is not, never was and can never be a community. Instead it serves a practical and symbolic purpose as means to form and perpetuate many different communities.” (Blokland, 2003, p207)

What we can deduce from the previous statement is that a neigh-bourhood as a built form, in a way, presents the framework or - perhaps even more suitable - formwork around which the com-munity is later on formed and shaped. One of the many ways a neighbourhood can achieve successful formation of a communi-ty is to provide spaces suitable for quality interaction. It needs to be said that the quality interaction cannot be in any way equated with the physical encounters simply because encounters as such are impersonal, whereas interaction could lead to affection. The quality spaces, which the neighbourhood should provide would allow people to discover and pursue their numerous mutual in-terests and activities. With all this in mind it can be concluded that one of the key reasons why social relations in New Belgrade were, at least until recently, relatively rare or at best limited to

63

A group of elderly residents resting in the shadow of a tree in New Zagreb’s neighbourhood Zaprudje

Child playing in the courtyard of one of New Belgrade blocks

the privacy of the apartments, lies in the fact that neighbour-hoods failed to offer suitable spaces for interaction outside the dwelling.

“Those were our little rituals where we would meet in each other’s flats drink coffee, smoke cigarettes and chat. This was simply because there was not much to do outside” explains Valerija who admits that these relationships did not have much to do with the com-munity spirit, but were mostly just acquaintances made at the workplace. (Interview 4)

These girls did, however, all live in the same neighbourhood as her and so even though actual relationships never developed amongst them, a certain type of attachment did develop as the spirit of togetherness was rather strong nonetheless. This could be attributed to the fact that the women who all lived in the same neighbourhood either worked at the same job or shared an expe-rience of being married to, for example, a husband who was in the military, which meant that there was a high level of equality amongst them.

Attachments such as these can sometimes occur even without interaction. In fact “we may feel attached to others and focus our actions on them even if these others are not concrete indi-viduals to us.” (Blokland, 2003, p71) It is, however, important to know that these types of attachments do not constitute bonds.

And so in the absence of true deep meaningful relationships some other forms of relations emerged in the neighbourhoods of New Belgrade, such as latent neighbourhoodism, which de-veloped mostly between close neighbours as a direct result of proximity. In such cases people spent time with their neighbours “because they valued good neighbourly relations, rather because they were fond of them or felt they needed a relationship. They considered a good neighbour to be somebody friendly and help-ful in emergencies and with minor things.” (Blokland, 2003, p81)

These sorts of relationships were not just coincidental though, since the belief of everyone being in the same boat was very com-mon. The phenomenon of neighbourhoodliness was hence recip-

rocal as “what happened to one person one day, could happen to the other the next” (Blokland, 2003, p82) Among the reasons why people relied on one another much more than they do today were also the fact that vital things such as shops, transport links and amenities were virtually nonexistent, whilst in the 1950’s the economic situation only enhanced this spirit of togetherness. Equality seems to be an important factor when we talk about the sense of belonging in relation to the communities of the socialist cities. Valerija remembers:

“I would say that there was perhaps a bit of this spirit of togetherness present, but I believe that was be-cause we were all the same. We were all families of military men and at work we were all health care workers. These were the only two worlds that I knew, so even when I was home I would only be in the com-pany of girls I already knew from the workplace. To-day there are more heterogeneous environments” (Interview 4)

Vladimir from New Zagreb expands her thoughts on equality by focusing on the importance of work and above all the fact that everyone who wanted to work was offered a job: “Back then ev-eryone was a worker, to be more precise everyone was employed. Every family had at least one, two or sometimes even three em-ployed members. This is a very important fact because it influ-ences the general feeling of the neighbourhood and community quite a lot, I would say.” (Interview 6)

The situation today is to a large extent different for many rea-sons. Not only does it seem that the urban lifestyle, which came to Serbia hand in hand with capitalism in the 1990’s, changed some habits people shared in the past, which ultimately pushed the social life more and more towards the private sphere, but has this individualization in some ways also changed the communi-ties? In a way has individuality overcome the sense of the com-munity and equality, at least what was left of it from the former system? Ljubica describes the current situation:

“Now the times have changed, this equality disap-peared and the spirit of togetherness vanished in a

67

A game of football in one of New Belgrade’s neighbourhoods

way. My block was a block where only military fami-lies lived. My father was a military officer. In some other blocks most of the people came from the coun-tryside in pursuit of a better life, so you could re-ally feel this positive energy between them, empathy I would say. Our generation is already so urbanized that this togetherness is not leading our lives any-more. Activities have changed, technology and trans-port changed our lives, children play video games in their tiny flats or go to the cinema, very few stay outdoors and play in greenery. I try to keep my two children away from the computer as much as pos-sible and instead go downstairs with them to play in the nature.” (Interview 1)

From interviews conducted in New Belgrade, New Zagreb, and Ljubljana we could conclude that people did in fact feel a certain level of belonging to their specific community, however no actual bonds developed amongst the residents. The feeling of belong-ing did not originate in attachments to particular members, but could be described as some sort of ethereal sense of affinity, which had its roots in the notion of the equality of the general population.

On the other hand it seems that people experience a much stron-ger sense of belonging to their built environment, perhaps not to its tangible physical characteristics such as materiality and shape, but some spiritual connection most definitely exists be-tween them and their surroundings.

We need to already start considering the importance of the neigh-bourhood as a physical environment when we talk about nostal-gia as a source of belonging. Many testimonies reveal that when it comes to the notion of identification with the environment it is absolutely crucial at which point in their lives the residents moved to New Belgrade and how much time they spent there. Pleasant childhood memories very often blur the unpleasant ex-periences that the citizens might have had with their environ-ment throughout the years of their residency. People who have lived in New Belgrade have often developed a much stronger bond to their environment simply because of the nostalgic mem-

ories of more carefree times. But what role does the neighbour-hood have in all of this. The neighbourhood is “a circumscribed built environment” that people use not only practically but also symbolically.” (Blokland, 2003, p213) When it comes to nostalgia this notion is essential simply because “virtually all stories of the past include references to location.” (Blokland 2003, p205) Not only because location helps people remember, but also because people who have lived in a neighbourhood for a longer period of time share a similar experience:

“Many people’s memories were of their childhood – those childhood years believed to be happy that people recalled with nostalgia. The minimal role repertoire and high neighbourhood use among children meant that they had acquired most of their experiences in the neighbourhood. Nostalgia automatically came to be associated with location.” (Blokland, 2003, p206)

Ljubica is a perfect example of a person who looks at her envi-ronment through the prism of memory and nostalgia:

“Back when I was still a child, blocks seemed phe-nomenal to me. We would play hula-hoop, dodge ball, and volleyball from morning until evening. I most certainly did identify with my environment, not only with the people, but also with the block as such.” (Interview 1)

It could be argued that nostalgia makes people members of a special kind of community where everyone shares a sense of be-longing to the group. The reason for this does not only lie in the fact that they share a pleasant experience from the past, but also because of feelings of equality, duration of residency and higher extent of neighbourhood use compared to newer residents. In a way nostalgia and collective memory provide “a framework for categorising other long time neighbourhood residents.” (Blokland, 2003, p198)

One of the important aspects, which we need to take into account when we speak about this categorisation in relation to New Bel-grade is that, as a result of the implementation of the orthogo-

69

Identification with the block on the walls of New Belgrade buildings

nal grid and the attempt to create micro-regions in 1957, New Belgrade neighbourhoods at least to a certain extent remained closed units. As they were surrounded by traffic routes from all four sides the streets actually separated blocks, which created a rather unique living environment, especially for the children:

“We mostly made friends with other children from our block, perhaps even our building. We did not re-ally play with the children from other blocks. Streets separate blocks. This is very important. Especially when we were little, we weren’t allowed to cross the streets. Streets are wide and dangerous. We felt safe in our own neighbourhood, plus our parents were re-assured if they knew we were playing in front of the building. So yes, there was a certain level of separa-tion between the blocks. I hung out with kids from my block because I would see them every day. Of course not everyone I knew was from my block simply be-cause every block did not have a school, so we would for example share the primary school. (Interview 1)

We have seen that physical separation of the blocks plays an absolutely crucial role when it comes to identification with a particular neighbourhood. If we also take into account the length of residency and the period of life when people moved to the neighborhood, we can conclude that those individuals who have lived in a particular neighborhood unit from their childhood have fully adapted to their environment and have identified with it through their childhood experiences. Members of peer groups have created closed communities in which they all connect their identity with the neighborhood.

Peer groups have developed between members of a certain age and Petar and Boris, who are both eight years old, are part of one. When they were asked about whether they identify with their environment or perhaps feel in any way attached to their block they answered: “Yes, we do. We love our block. We feel at home here. We know each other by where we come from. If you say Boris from Block 45 everyone will know that this is me. We ha lived here ever since we were born and our parents, they lived here even before that.” (Interview 3)

It seems, however, that once individuals grow older this attach-ment to the particular environment in a way becomes even stron-ger. Many residents who have spent a large proportion of their lives in New Belgrade would not contemplate moving to the Old Town even if they had an opportunity. Ljiljana who is the mother of twenty-seven year old Marko describes this phenomenon:

“Our son, he was born in New Belgrade, not in this particular block, but we moved here when he was very little. This was a very exiting experience for him. This is not a particularly tall building and be-cause we lived in the third floor, he was able to walk downstairs for the first time and come back at his will. A brand new world opened to him there. He en-joyed this environment very much, he bonded with it so much that now when he is older he would never consider living anywhere else but New Belgrade. (Interview 2)

On the other hand the older population, which has spent a small-er part of their lives there accepted their environment, but only identified with some particular aspects of the neighborhood. In one of the interviews Bogdan was asked whether identification with his environment happened on the level of a city, particular buildings, relationships or something else:

“I would say none of these, perhaps all together. I don’t think that you identify with buildings. The place I identify with is my whole world. It is what I see, what I remember, what I feel and who I meet. It is the little things that eventually pile up and form something bigger. For example where I buy my ice cream, where I buy my newspaper, where I read, the trees that surround me etc. In my block I got quite attached to two specific trees in front of my window, which they cut down a couple of months ago. It made me very sad, that they bothered someone.” (Interview 2)

Finally, greenery seems to play an extremely important role in the lives of the people, not only in New Belgrade, but also in Zagreb and Ljubljana. This, however, does not come as a sur-

71

Tree most definitely is the “best friend” of the New Belgrade blocks

prise since the abundance of greenery in New Belgrade truly is impressive. Testimonies of people in fact reveal that greenery might be one of the crucial factors when it comes to the feeling of belonging in adults. Ljiljana shares her feelings and attach-ment in relation to greenery:

“I guess I also have certain paths among the trees in the park where I often go for a walk and I regard those paths as my own and so on. I don’t know if this is identification, it certainly is an emotional con-nection between me and for example a certain place, view, scene. I would say that young people identify with their peers more than my generation did. I am not sure to what extent they find themselves emo-tionally attached to, for example, beautiful views of nature.” (Interview 2)

In one of his most important publications, “The City of Tomorrow and Its Planning” Le Corbusier emphasizes the absolute impor-tance of greenery in relation to identification with the modern urban landscapes. In his view trees are essential as they prevent the individual being overwhelmed by the artificial environment. The physical landscape exceeds the scale of a man several times in New Belgrade, not only due to the height of the structures, but also due to the distances between them. For this reason the following words of Le Corbusier seem absolutely essential to our understanding of why most of New Belgradians don’t perceive their city as a concrete jungle, despite their strong rejection of visual and material qualities of the built environment.

“As a man finds himself alone in vast empty spaces he grows disheartened. Architecture is able to make great play with contrasts, to harmonize simple ele-ments with complex ones and small with great, to blend the forcible with the graceful. The vast build-ings which the town planning of the future will bring about would crush us if there were no common mea-sure between them and ourselves.” (Le Corbusier, 1929, p237)

Le Corbusier then continues by saying that since we are all chil-

dren of nature only a tree, as an element of familiarity and hu-man scale can modify “a scene that is too vast, and its casual forms contrast with the rigid forms which we have conceived and made by the machinery of our epoch.” (Le Corbusier, 1929, p237) For New Belgradians nature is simply an element of soothing that protects them from the otherwise rather brutal surround-ings. Nature is this city’s last hope and salvation from deper-sonalization, as its presence diminishes the role of the harsh concrete landscape to the one of the backdrop.

“It would seem that the tree is an element essential to our comfort, and its presence in the city is a sort of caress, a kindly thing in the midst of our severe creations.” (Le Corbusier, 1929, p237)

Although we have covered many aspects of life in relation to the sense of belonging and attempted to find a reason behind this rather odd relationship between the city and its dwellers, it would be unjust to expose only one. One thing is certain nonethe-less. In the city of New Belgrade as well as New Zagreb nature plays an absolutely crucial role in covering up some negative aspects of the life in a concrete city. For this reason let us finish this chapter with an extract from the interview with Vladimir who has lived in a New Zagreb skyscraper for almost forty years, as his emotional testimony describes the pure essence of the importance of nature in the lives of people in the cities such as both New Zagreb and New Belgrade:

“These three trees I found abandoned and started taking care of them years ago. Now they grew im-mensely over the last years. You might wonder why I am telling you this story. The trees are right next to my garage, as you can see. Every time I come home I park my car in the garage, take the chair out, sit down for a beer and enjoy how quiet this park is. My son would come often and sits down for a conversa-tion or to drink a beer with me. For him this feels almost like a holiday.” (Interview 6)

73

The view of Friendship Park and New Belgrade in the background from Branko’s Bridge. Greenery of New Belgrade alleviates the harshness of the concrete infrastructure

The view of Friendship Park and New Belgrade in the background from Branko’s Bridge. Greenery of New Belgrade alleviates the harshness of the concrete infrastructure

Stunning view of New Zagreb skyscrapers amidst the abundance of grenery

Looking down from the top of a New Zagreb skyscraper

Conclusion

A typical New Belgrade neighbourhood

In order to understand the city of New Belgrade we first covered its historical background and the planning principles behind the city. We experienced the pre-urban New Belgrade from the 1940’s to 1960’s and the life during the years of construction, as well as life in the socialist New Belgrade after the construc-tion ceased. We then compared this experience to the experience of the present New Belgrade.

We researched the success of applying the particular planning strategies of the Athens Charter in relation to the city of New Belgrade, such as the notion of openness, greenery, deconges-tion, and ideas about traffic and transport, as well as people’s experiences of these qualities. We have discussed the importance of providing services for the life in a city and attempted to il-lustrate the experience of living in the absence of such services. We validated the prejudice we had had about the city prior to our visit as the residents demonstrated an overall rejection of the visual image of the city’s built environment, and the material-ity of its building. Despite the rejection of the visual image and materiality, the inhabitants throughout the entire dissertation, nonetheless, demonstrated a surprisingly strong acceptance of their living environments.

This was the turning point after which the true goal of this dis-sertation was revealed at last. As the cause for this uncondi-tional acceptance of the living environment could not be found in the tangible qualities of the city it was crucial for us to focus on the realm of the intangible. Past this point our goal became to seek an answer to the spiritual connection between the dwell-ers and the city. We took a look at the notions of community and neighbourhood in relation to belonging, which gave us some understanding of the relationships between the dwellers and their attachments to their environment. Childhood experiences of New Belgrade’s urban landscape and the memories associated with these experiences proved to be of vital importance for the development of belonging to this particular place.

This helped us to not only understand that one of the most im-portant factors for attachment to a city is the period of life in which the residents moved to the city, but also that different generations developed a sense of belonging in relation to differ-

ent aspects of a city. Thus whilst childhood experience and the experience of the community seems to be crucial for belonging regarding younger people who have lived in New Belgrade their entire lives, the roots of this belonging within the older popula-tion can be found in the spiritual relationship with nature and experiences of the natural realm.

To what extent, however, is the sense of belonging specific to the city of New Belgrade, since many would argue that this phenom-enon is no more specific to neighbourhoods of New Belgrade than it is to the social housing estates in the United States or the UK? First it is important to take into account the fact that those living in social housing estates very rarely have the opportunity of an alternative lifestyle and so their acceptance of the environ-ment does not originate in belonging but in the necessity and inability to exit. As Blokland explains, in neighbourhoods like these “neither practical nor symbolic use of the neighbourhoods occurs” and so they accept their environment simply because of the low rent and the fact that “everybody needs to live some-where.” (Blokland 2003, p158) On the contrary, people living in New Belgrade often refused to live anywhere else even if they were offered an opportunity. Ljiljana explains:

My mother left him (Marko, the son) a flat in the Old City when she passed away. Instead of living there he would sell this flat and buy one in New Belgrade. That is how much he felt a part of the new city. He loves this part of town.” (Interview 2)

And so with every interview it seemed that the phenomenon of belonging in the residents of New Belgrade is in fact city spe-cific. Ljiljana, however, highlights the fact that that some correla-tion between this emotion and the character of the Serbians as a nation might exist as well. When asked why people in Slovenia experience the belonging to a place on a rather different level compared to Serbians, she answered: “This is simply because you Slovenians are different. I would say it is because you don’t have this, how can I put it, certain emotion, sentiment. You don’t relate to the “place” on the same emotional level as we do.” (Interview 2)

83

Concrete megastructures of New Belgrade

Left: New Belgrade landscape as viewed from the top of one of the skyscrapers.Back alley in one of New Belgrade neihbourgoods along the Jurija Gagarina street

Nevertheless, one critical factor still needs to be examined in order for us to obtain an overall answer as to why the residents accepted the city of New Belgrade as their own.

The apartments in New Belgrade were distributed amongst peo-ple according to the size of the family, occupation and merits, but most importantly they were free:

“We had nothing then, so we were incredibly thankful for the life they gave us. My late husband was a mili-tary officer so we basically received this flat for free. You cannot be dissatisfied with what you are given for free, and so even though some things bothered us, we were grateful. Socialism offered us a good liv-ing standard. To own a flat is something most young people cannot even dream of today. Back then it was totally different.” (Interview 4)

For many these flats were, especially during the times of the housing crises, gifts from above. They not only saved them from a life of misery, but were also an opportunity for a fresh start and the symbol of a new modern life. And so for this reason relatively strong gratitude developed among the people of New Belgrade despite the evident drawbacks of the city:

“Another thing you need to know is that getting an apartment was one of the most joyous occasions in our lives. It was a long wait before we were given the apartments. For most of us these flats were unreal, meaning that they exceeded our expectations. They were often bigger than we deserved or expected.” (Interview 5)

Not only were the people grateful for the living environment they were offered, but were also grateful for the living standard the system gave them. Valerija remembers: “Living standard out-weighed the drawbacks of living in this concrete jungle. The way of life was much better, we would travel every year to places that we cannot even imagine travelling to today. It was luxury and it still is luxury, but back then we could afford it because the loans were so cheap or you could pay the instalments. Because of these

things we did not mind that our living environment did not offer us the leisure opportunities. And so yes, I do look nostalgically at my past, life was better in many aspects.” (Interview 4)

New Belgrade is a mysterious city, and as such very hard to explain. It is a city of many layers, colours and languages. As a city of contrasts New Belgrade only works as a whole entity and will as such disappoint anyone who remains fixated on its visual weakness. On the contrary, it will open its heart to those who will open their hearts back and listen to what it has to say. In our attempt to fully understand why this city works the way it does and to understand the mystery behind the unique bond between the residents and the city, it’s component parts first needed to be taken apart, it’s ingredients extracted and afterwards studied thoroughly in isolation. However, as we have learned, in the case of New Belgrade the relationships between the components are more important than the components as such. In fact these re-lationships are absolutely crucial, because many of components do not function in isolation.

Perhaps there is no definitive answer to the question as to what makes this city so different from any other, which is a rather extraordinary phenomenon. I know now, that I will never fully understand the city of New Belgrade, at least I will never under-stand it’s secret. And so although there is something about this city, that made me feel at home when first seeing it, perhaps searching for its secret would only ruin the magic behind it.

87

Opennes is one of New Belgrade’s most inspiring features

Bibliography

Artificial lake and skyscrapers of New Zagreb in the background

References

Blagojevi L. (2005): Back to the Future of New Belgrade: Func-tional Past of the Modern City in: Vienna: AESOP Congress 2005, Book of Abstracts, Technische Universität Wien, Vienna

Blokland, T. (2003) Urban Bonds: Social Relationships In An In-ner City Neighbourhood, Cambridge, Blackwell

Buurmans. (2006) Exploring the Public City, Krakow, Politech-nika Krakowska

Erić, Z. (2009) Differentiated Neighbourhoods of New Belgrade, Belgrade, Museum of Contemporary Art

Fishman, R. (1982) Urban Utopias In the Twentieth Century: Ebenezer Howard, Frank Lloyd Wright, and Le Corbusier, Cam-bridge, MA, MIT Press

Le Corbusier (1973) The Athens Charter, New York, Grossman Publishers

Le Corbusier (1929) The City of Tomorrow and It’s Planning, New York , Payson and Clarke,

Le Norman, B. (2006): Paradise Spurned: Housing Policy and the Limits of Utopian Planning in Belgrade, 1950-1967, Confer-ence of the European Association for Urban History, Stockholm

Lefebvre, H. (1974): Urban Revolution, Belgrade, Nolit.

Maksimović, B. (1948) transl. Kreze, L: Ka Diskusiji O Aktuel-nim Problemima Naše Arhitekture, Arhitektura, No. 11/2, Za-greb, Sekcija Arhitekata Saveza Društva Tehničara FNRJ

Owen, G. e. (2009): Architecture , Ethics and Globalization, Abingdon, Routledge

Pallasmaa, J. (2005) Eyes of The Skin: Architecture and the Senses, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester

Perović, M (2003): Srpska arhitektura XX veka, od istoricizma do drugog modernizma, Belgrade, Arhitektonski fakultet Univer-ziteta u Beogradu

Stojanović, B. (1948) transl. Kreze, L: Konkursi Za Dom Central-nog Komiteta KPJ I Zgradu Predsjedništva Vlade FNRJ, Arhi-tektura, No. 8/2, Zagreb, Sekcija Arhitekata Saveza Društva Tehničara FNRJ

Tafuri, M., Dal Co, F. (1976): Architettura Contemporanea, Vene-zia, Electa Editrice

Zečević, V. (1948) transl. Kreze, L: Govor Ministra Građevina FNRJ Vlade Zečevića na Svečanosti Prilikom Otvaranja Radova Na Izgradnji Novog Beograda, Arhitektura, No. 8/2, Zagreb, Sek-cija Arhitekata Saveza Društva Tehničara FNRJ

Zogović, R. (1948) transl. Kreze, L: O Jednoj Strani Borbe Za Novu,Socijalističku Kulturu I Umjetnost, Arhitektura, No. 11/2, Zagreb, Sekcija Arhitekata Saveza Društva Tehničara FNRJ

Waley, P. (2011): From modernist to market urbanism: the trans-formation of New Belgrade, London, Routledge

Illustations

All photos were taken by Luka Kreze in 2012 except the follow-ing pages: 12, 14, 16, 18, 20 and 22 (www.images.google.com)

95

Monumentality of the New Belgrade megastructures

Other Readings

Blagojevic, L. (2007) Novi Beograd: Osporeni Modernizam, Beo-grad, Zavod Za Udzbenike I Nastavna Sredstva

Blake, P. (1993) No Place Like Utopia: Modern Architecture and the Company We Kept, New York, W.W. Norton

Bugaric, B. (2010) Urbanity 20 Years Later, Ljubljana, AnnalesChoey, F. (1978) Utopia: Urbanism and Reality, Beograd, Grad-jevinska Knjiga

French, R.A., Hamilton, F.E. (1979) Socialist City: Spatial Struc-ture and Urban Policy, Chischester, John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Groat, L., Wang, D. (2002) Architectural Research Methods, Danvers, MA, John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Holston, J. (1989) The Modernist City: An Anthropological Cri-tique of Brasilia, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press

Kasabova, K. (2008) Street Without a Name: Childhood and Oth-er Misadventures in Bulgaria, London, Portobello Books

Kovacevic, M. et. Al (1961) Novi Beograd, Belgrade, The Direc-tion for the Construction of Novi Beograd

Kovacevic, P. et. al (1968) Novi Beograd 1948 – 1968, Belgrade, Opstinska Skupstina Novi Beograd

Linke, A., Jovanovic, S. (2012) Socialist Architecture: The Van-ishing Act, Zurich, Codax

Lynch, K. (1960) The Image of the City, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press

Lynch, K. (1981) Good City Form, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press

Lokmer, V. (1989) Prica o Prijateljstvu, Zagreb, Skupstina Ops-tine Novi Zagreb

Kolacio, Z. (1978) Vizije I Ostvarenja, Zagreb, Mladost

Krevs, M. et. al (2010) Chalenges of Spatial Development of Lju-bljana and Belgrade, Ljubljana, Univerza v Ljubljani

Kulic, V., Mrduljas, M. (2012) Modernism In Between: The Medi-atory Architectures of Socialist Yugoslavia, Berlin, Jovis Verlag

Markovic, D. (1977) Centri Mesnih Zajednica, Belgrade, Jugo-slavija Publika

Mitrovic, M. (1975) Modern Belgrade Architecture, Belgrade, Jugoslavija

Pesic, Z. (1975) Prostori Decijeg Boravka I Igre U Naselju, Beo-grad, Jugoslovenski Institut Za Urbanizam I Stanovanje

Proshansky, H. et. al (1970) Environmental Psychology, New York, Hold, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.

Ristanovic, S. (2009) Novi Beograd: Graditeljski Poduhvat Veka, Belgrade

Scott, J. (1998) Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes To Improve the Human Condition Have Failed, New Haven, Yale Uni-versity Press

Smith, P. (2003) The Dynamics of Delight: Architecture and Aes-thetics, New York, Routledge

Spasic, A. (1967) Beograd: Novi Beograd, Belgrade, Export Ex-press

Vidmar, S. ed. (2012) Nedokoncane Modernizacije – Unfinished Modernizations, Maribor, UGM

Zeisel, J. (2006) Enquiry By Design, New York, W.W. Norton

1

Appendix

Interviews

Interview 1

Ljubica, age 35 Mother of two, a nurse.Block 63, New Belgrade

Some would describe the blocks of New Belgrade as a relatively monotonous environment. How have You experienced it?

I have lived in these blocks my entire life actually, even now I live a bit further down the road in a block of flat is a bit lower, only about 5 or 6 storeys. Back when I was still a child, the blocks seemed phenomenal to me. We would play around from sunrise to sunset. There were parks that were taken care of, so we would run around, play on the swing and slides. I have to admit we had a somewhat incredible childhood. I would say those were the easier times, in a way carefree and better times. Somehow these blocks are all my whole life.

Do You still experience the environment in the same way now that You are older?

The situation now is much worse. There are no benches to sit on, no playgrounds for children, which really bothers me as a young mother. There used to be swings, basketball fields, football fields and all sorts of things. The authorities today focus only on taking care of one park a few blocks down the road, however, all the other blocks are left abandoned. It was considerably greener when I was younger. Now the children play in the doorways and hang out in passages because they have no other place to go.

Would You say that when You were younger You felt a certain belonging to Your block, to be more precise, did You identify with it to a certain level?

Yes, most certainly I identified with it. Not only with the people, but with the block as such. There were more children hanging out together, I would say there were around 30 of us. We would be sneaking and lurking around, playing all the time. In fact, there were work campaigns organised every now and

then, so we would, for example, collect paper around the block in exchange for lollipops or ice cream. We were all the same in a way. Those times were different, somewhat special.

Now the times have changed, this equality has disappeared and the spirit of togetherness vanished in a way. My block was a block where only military families lived. My father was a military officer. In some other blocks most of the people came from the countryside in pursuit of a better life, so you could really feel this positive energy between them, empathy I would say. Our generation is already so urbanized that this togetherness is not leading our lives anymore. Activities have changed, technology and transport has changed our lives, children play video games in their tiny flats or go to the cinema, very few stay outdoors and play in the greenery. I try to keep my two children away from the computer as much as possible and instead go downstairs with them to play in the green areas.

But You must admit, New Belgrade is, to some extent, a con-crete jungle. Does this brutal architecture bother You in any way? Would You say life would be happier in an environment that would give a less cruel impression?

I would disagree with that impression. I got used to the look of my environment very early on. I accepted it, since I have lived in such environment my entire life. It even seemed quite inter-esting to me. Large, high rise buildings have seemed extremely impressive to me ever since I was little.

Even elevator rides exited me when I was a little girl. Now that I am a mother I look at this aspect of architecture differently, these high rise buildings seem enormous to me, I would never live in these particular sorts of blocks now, mainly because of my situation as a mother.

It is much more convenient for a family with children, more nat-ural. But as I said even these tall buildings seem impressive to me, they have a certain quality, whether it is materiality or size it is hard to say. I believe that if you look at the world optimisti-cally, then you can make it work. And people back then looked at the world with positive eyes, for most of them this was all they

98

had. They were very hopeful about the future.

On the other hand, if you are a negative person, you will find something bad in every aspect of life. I believe it is all a matter of what kind of person you are. But also, these buildings are too large to ever be demolished, they will stay here forever so I believe that we have to accept this situation and make it work for ourselves.

Don’t get me wrong, I do not like the visual image of these build-ings, perhaps you could say they are even ugly, inhumane, cruel. I admit, the buildings are in fact too tall. I heard stories that life in tall building can affect the blood flow, apparently because of gravity. Some people say you shouldn’t live too far away from the ground, that living in a house is healthier, I don’ know. Life in skyscrapers most certainly differs from life in the countryside, however, I would not say that this can in any way affect the happi-ness. Depression does not have origins in the built environment. The problems of people who suffer from depression originate somewhere else. You are the only one who can give meaning to your own life. It is not in any way whatsoever connected to the buildings. Suicides happen everywhere in the world.

We had a wonderful childhood here, so most of us have continued with our lives in New Belgrade. The architecture has not affected our happiness. I don’t believe that architecture can affect the way children are raised and what they achieve later in life. This is strictly the role and responsibility of the parents. Hundreds of successful people were brought up in these blocks.

What about the flats as such, are You satisfied with their stan-dards?

This is debatable, back in time when people moved in everyone was happy about the flats. This was mostly because we were all happy to receive a flat, no matter how good or bad it was. We were thankful, however, now that the times have changed, you slowly start to spot the flaws. The ceilings are very thin and low, you can hear neighbours talking, watching television, some of the walls that separate flats are only partitions, and so the level of privacy is not very high. But some flats have a number of very

positive characteristics, which you won’t find even in some of the most expensive apartments in the old city of Belgrade. For example, as I have said, these all used to be military flats. So some of the flats on the top floors, were reserved for military pi-lots and used to have large balconies and terraces, where people would create gardens, build swimming pools etc.

Would You say that, because You have lived here Your whole life You look at New Belgrade and its buildings with different eyes compared to people who have moved here recently?

It is quite hard to answer this question. People move to New Bel-grade for different reasons, some of them because of the price, some because, their relatives left them these flats, and some because of the location. The location is very nice, especially over recent years when several new amenities have been provided. Shops, markets and similar facilities are around the corner, transport is not as bad as well.

However, to answer your question more specifically my husband, for example, has not lived here his entire life. Before we moved to New Belgrade, his family lived in a house in Zemun. There he lived a lifestyle that was diametrically different to what he found in New Belgrade. Zemun, whilst still a part of the urban Belgrade, feels more like the countryside. It is really beautiful there, so it was quite hard for him to settle here. It took him quite a while before he got used to the constant noise of the blocks. But eventually he did.

I wouldn’t say people who moved here recently look at this place much differently, perhaps they are a bit more nervous in their interactions, but whether this is the result of the living environ-ment or not, I wouldn’t know.

What about the young people? How do they cope with this en-vironment?

Every block is specific, so we can talk about certain level of iden-tification. For example block 45 down the road is famous for its musicians. Some of the greatest artists of our generation grew up in these blocks. There certainly is a lot of creativity

99

in this environment, which would not be born anywhere else in Belgrade. It is a quite inspiring place to live in, I would say. But as anywhere in the world, even here you can expect to be surrounded by all sorts of people. So yes, you can expect drug addicts and hooligans as well. Problems occur on an everyday basis, but if we use the example of Zemun again, even there you can find gangsters of the so-called “Zemun Clan” and Zemun is supposedly a quiet place to live. I believe it is much more impor-tant how you raise your children and then this will influence how they understand and use their environment.

But if we go back to more positive topics: lets finish with creativ-ity within the block that I was telling you about before. Even though it is really hard to explain and transfer this to you, there certainly is this special spirit of creativity in the block, a certain alternative movement that I really like and think is very healthy. It is a one of a kind experience.

This is exactly what I would like to find out, this feeling of the community. Can You feel this sense of togetherness in the community?

A lot has changed, indeed. People have changed as well. Many new people moved to New Belgrade to be honest, on the other hand, there are a lot of retired people living here as well. It was different before, we were together, and relationships were more sincere, more often. Perhaps it is the times that are living in that is to blame, I wouldn’t know for sure. But I know that when I still lived here I had no relationships with any of the new people from the block, which was almost impossible when I was younger. I have good relationships with my neighbours, however, the times when you would ask your neighbours to look after your flat, wa-ter your plants, wipe the dust for you etc. while you are away are gone. Trust is gone to a certain extent, people don’t have confidence in others anymore.

These sorts of relationships perhaps still apply to older genera-tions, but younger generations don’t share this feeling anymore. It might be that because of the current economic situation, peo-ple shut themselves off from the external world, stay in their little environments, takes care of themselves.

To what extent do the blocks differ from each other?

I wouldn’t say they differ much, external looks perhaps, the height, materials. The lower blocks of flats are perhaps of higher quality, but overall I don’t see much difference. I believe this was the whole point, to build for equality. I know from what my mother told me that across the road there was a field with bar-racks and people lived there. When the workers with the ma-chines came to build the new blocks they evicted those people and gave them flats in there. Perhaps new blocks are better, but I wouldn’t say that the difference is worth mentioning. To be honest, all of these blocks seem quite well built. A lot of money was invested in them.

Are You at all familiar with the original plans of what New Belgrade was supposed to become? Perhaps You were taught at school about some of those concepts?

No not at all. New Belgrade has been a huge dormitory ever since I can remember.

Does this bother You?

It doesn’t bother me, no. I got used to it. This is my area, the area I grew up in. I am raising my family here now so I somehow identify my life with New Belgrade.

The fact that all those plans failed does not really affect me. Those were different times anyway. I truly like New Belgrade. I like the Old City too as there are some fabulous areas there as well. I like to walk the streets in the city centre, the green neigh-bourhoods such as Zvezdara, Dorcel, don’t even get me started on Dedinje. I wouldn’t say that if offered I would not switch to living in the Old City, however, I am bound to New Belgrade through my childhood.

As I said New Belgrade has always been my home and now it is the home to my family. My family is what is most important to me. I have all my friends here, all my relatives live here, uncles, aunties. All the people that I know are here and we spend a lot of time together. When you know the people it is easier to figure out

100

how the place works, so it is easier for you to function within it. You experience things completely differently. Somehow you feel at home. It does not actually matter where you are and what this place looks like.

Another thing is that if you ask people who are older these same questions they will probably say that this environment is hor-rible, at least I can imagine they will. They unfortunately look at these things with different, pessimistic eyes. I see myself as an optimist, but also I had a wonderful childhood here, so this might be the reason why our views differ.

So what was a typical day like when you were a child?

We would play hula-hoop, dodge ball, and volleyball from morning until evening. We would be running around chasing each other, eating ice cream. Our favourite one was the one that had two sticks, so you could split it in half and share it. We were very gen-erous to each other. There was one store in the entire block, so you could only buy the more necessary things. My mom would, however, buy me this ice cream and I would share it with friends. Now things are different. Shopping malls ruined this charm. You buy things that you don’t need.

How did You interact with children from Your neighbourhood / other neighbourhoods?

We mostly made friends with other children from our block, per-haps even our building. We did not really play with the children from other blocks. Streets separate blocks. This was very im-portant. Especially when we were little, we weren’t allowed to cross the streets. Streets are wide and dangerous. We felt safe in our own neighbourhood, plus our parents were reassured if they knew we were playing in front of the building. So yes, there was a certain level of separation between the blocks.

In primary school rivalry between Block 63 where I lived and adjacent Block 62 was extremely fun. But as I said, I hung out with kids from my block because I would see them every day. Of course not everyone I knew was from my block simply because every block did not have a school, so we would for example share

the primary school. Some of my friends were also from other blocks.

101

Interview 2

Ljiljana and Bogdan, age 62 and 64Retired university professors Block 22, New Belgrade

How did You deal with this brand new lifestyle during Your first years in New Belgrade?

My husband and I we moved to New Belgrade 35 years ago from the Old City. He used to live in Dorcel and I lived in Zvezdara, both beautiful parts of Belgrade, however, from the moment we arrived to New Belgrade we knew very clearly that we are never going to return back to the Old City. There was simply so much space here, streets were wide and you could breathe the air. Of course it took us time to adjust to this new way of life.

And so we would go back to the city centre for a walk almost every day, we would stroll down the Knez Mihailova street or go buy groceries as there were almost no shops opened around our block. But with every day we would be drawn more and more to New Belgrade. Our block is quite close to the river so we would go for a walk every day and enjoy this openness we did not know before. My husband used to live in Strahinjica Bana street in the city centre, now more commonly known for its party scene as “The Silicon Valley”. Now he simply cannot imagine life there with thousands and thousands of people on the street every day drinking and making noise. You cannot even breathe normally because the place is so crowded.

What is Your opinion about Your living environment?

I would have to say the condition of the buildings is rather bad. The façade is crumbling and quite large pieces of it are falling off on a regular basis. Buildings are made entirely out of concrete, and concrete is hell. During the summer it heats up to a degree that if you touch it, it is almost as hot as the hot plate. On the other hand, during the wintertime it is freezing cold. It is a hor-rible material to live in. Even the aesthetics of the neighbour-hoods is disappointing. It is like living in a city of cubes, nothing

to kill the monotony, no interesting details, at least I see it this way. Nowadays they build these new glass palaces between old cubes, they build new multicoloured buildings and keep worsen-ing the situation further and further. Sometimes I think that whoever is behind these projects must really hate people. One of the rare positive aspects is probably that this sort of en-vironment might seem quite imposing to many. I quite like the openness, grandiosity etc.

So if I understand correctly You are generally displeased by the visual image of Your living environment?

I don’t like it one bit. It is grey and boring.

But are you satisfied with the interior of the apartment?

I am rather dissatisfied with flats as such. The arrangement of the rooms is just silly. The rooms are very small, I would not even count them as rooms. It almost seems that when they built these flats their logic was to take one regular sized room and split it in half in order to make two. To be honest this is a flat for two. I cannot imagine our son still living here with us. With the exception of one room the entire flat is separated merely by slid-ing or harmonica doors. My husband in a way prefers this sort of arrangement, while I am not so keen on it. A person needs pri-vacy every now and then. These sorts of flats do not allow you to isolate yourself from others. It is almost impossible to fall asleep in one room whilst someone is doing something else in the other rooms. Of course this is not the only problem. We can also hear every sound coming from flats around us, every sentence, every footstep. We can hear neighbours watching the telly etc. We quite like the fact that we have a balcony since this is in a way the place where you can hide if you want to. We have a tiny little stove on the balcony as well so we use it for cooking as long as it is not too hot outside.

Do You know anything about the original plans for New Bel-grade to become the new political, economic and cultural cen-tre of Yugoslavia?

I was not familiar with that detail. This is probably why they built

102

the general assembly building. It seems interesting to me though because I know quite a lot about what was happening in this very place before the 1940’s but somehow I don’t have a clue about these plans. If you want I can tell you a story, because I think it is quite interesting perhaps even ironic how things evolved through time.

Please do.

In 1938 the fairground was built in the middle of an empty area next to the old Sava Bridge, today Branko’s Bridge in New Bel-grade. This was a place where the most important innovations of that time were presented, even television. This fairground was seen as a place where people from the East and the West would meet, exchange information, contacts and make new friendships, the centre of Europe in a way. So I can see how this trough time could evolve into a capital, which is now one of the most impor-tant European centres.

Can you describe the life in the neighbourhood?

The neighbourhood is relatively alive, children still come out and play, however, I would say much less than they used to. They play basketball or tennis against the walls, some older kids practice parkour and some other unusual activities as well. They play on top of what they call “garages” which are this concrete struc-tures in front of the entrance. To me, these garages seem quite inappropriate to be playgrounds. A lot of kids get injured.

Some older people sit on the benches and talk to each other, but I would say children and youngsters are the ones that give the neighbourhood most of its vibrancy. To be honest the neighbour-hoods are not especially well looked after. Sports facilities are in horrible condition, benches are broken and the older concrete benches are extremely uncomfortable to sit on. Overall the pre-diction that the architects of this neighbourhood had about how people will use the outdoors furniture was completely wrong. I would never go out and relax on this kind of furniture. This is why my husband and I usually catch the sunrays on our balcony.

Would you say that feeling of belonging is an important part

of living in this environment? Why does it often happen that younger people identify with the blocks to a much greater ex-tent than some older people?

I would certainly agree that belonging is probably an integral part of a young persons life here in New Belgrade. For example our son, he was born in New Belgrade, not in this particular block, but we moved here when he was very little. This was a very exiting experience for him. This is not a particulary tall building and because we lived on the third floor, he was able to walk downstairs for the first time and come back at his will. A brand new world opened up to him there. He enjoyed this envi-ronment very much, he bonded with it so much that now when he is older he would never consider living anywhere else but New Belgrade. My mother left him a flat in the Old City when she past away. Instead of living there he would sell this flat and buy one in New Belgrade. That is how much he felt a part the new city. He loves this part of town.

If I understand correctly You probably would not agree with the premise that living in a concrete environment such as New Belgrade can affect persons happiness, health, success in life?

No certainly not, at least in the long term. Children will always find a way if they are creative, smart and if they are brought up well. Many successful people have come out of these blocks over recent years, some of them are my son’s generation. For example Saša Djordjević, famous Serbian basketball player, he is a child of the Blocks. He started playing basketball when he was still little right here in these block. He has turned out to be very successful.

There are many Serbian films that were filmed here in Belgrade, for example Rane (Wounds), 1 na 1 (1 on 1), Absolutnih Sto etc. All these films tell different stories of young people who live here. Some stories are tragic but some are stories of people who found happiness in what for some would be a desperate situa-tion. Sometimes this belonging is exactly what saved them and eventually helps them to enter the real world.

103

But again, why is this emotional connection so often associ-ated with youth?Perhaps it is the influence of the American hip-hop culture, which did leave an evident trace in behaviour of young people here in regard to gangs, blocks and belonging to the peer group. But I believe this phenomenon is more than anything simply an emotional connection to “your” place. You identify yourself with a place you feel you belong to, a place where you come from. For example, as I said I come from Zvezdara. I love Zvezdara. I still feel that Zvezdara is my home. This is where my high school was, it is where my mother would take me to buy my first shoes, materials for knitting etc. Zvezdara is where my life began.

Ok, I can understand this, but in Slovenia for example I lived in one street almost my entire childhood, in the years that I believe, were crucial for my further development. I can hardly speak of any sort of emotional connection to that particular place.

This is simply because you Slovenians are different. I would say it is because you don’t have this, how can I put it, certain emo-tion, sentiment. You don’t relate to the “place” on the same emo-tional level as we do.

But would You say that this identification occurs on the level of the city, buildings, relations etc.?

I would say none of these, perhaps all together. I don’t think that you identify with buildings. The place I identify with is my whole world. It is what I see, what I remember, what I feel and who I meet. It is the little things that eventually pile up and form some-thing bigger. For example where I buy my ice cream, where I buy my newspaper, where I read, the trees that surround me etc. In my block I got quite attached to two specific trees in front of my window, which they cut down a couple of months ago. It made me very sad, that they bothered someone.

I guess I also have certain paths amongst the trees in the park where I often go for a walk and I regard those paths as my own and so on. I don’t know if this is identification, it certainly is an emotional connection between me and for example a certain

place, view, scene. There are of course things and scenes that disgust me: abandoned dogs, buildings that are falling apart, holes in the streets, broken benches, litter everywhere. I would say that young people identify with their peers more than my generation did. I am unsure to what extent they find them-selves emotionally attached to e.g. beautiful views of nature.

104

Interview 3

Petar and Boris, age 8Primary school studentsBlock 45, New Belgrade

How would you describe life in the blocks?

It is good, we really like it. I live in a 5 storey building over there and he lives in this skyscraper. But we spend most of our time outside playing so it is great.

What does your day look like? Do you play with children from your own block or do you have friends in other neighbourhoods as well?

Well we are from the same block so we spend most of the time together, but we have friends from everywhere, from other build-ings as well, even in other blocks. We usually meet on the basket-ball court, someone is always there so you always have someone to play with. We play football, basketball and, so on.

Would you change anything in your block?

Perhaps it would be nice if someone took care of the buildings and the environment. The ground seems very dirty to me and I don’t like that. Buildings seem dirty as well.

Could you say you are attached to your block?

Yes, we are. We love our block. We feel at home here. We know each other by where we come from. If you say Boris from Block 45 everyone will know that this is me. We have lived here ever since we were born and our parents, they lived here even before that. They said that it was always very nice.

Is there any rivalry present, to be more precise, are there any disputes between the blocks? Do you ever fight with children from other blocks?

No, we don’t. (Boris) Well very rarely, sometimes, almost never, never... (Petar) We don’t fight. But the older guys they fight all the time.

But have you ever experienced any sort of problems in this block that would make you feel scared?

No, never. I don’t think I have ever had or saw any problems in my block. I feel very safe.

105

Interview 4

Valerija, age 82PaediatricianBlock 21, New Belgrade

Block 23 was one of the first ones to be built in New Belgrade and You say You have lived here from the very first day it was built. Could You please describe me the situation that awaited You when You moved to New Belgrade?

It was horrible. This very place where we stand right now was covered in sand. It looked like a desert on the one hand, and a concrete jungle on the other. Nothing was green except some accidental bushes every now and then. There were no benches to sit on, no paths, no shade to rest and escape from the sun. Buildings were surrounding us but between them everything was empty, a big unused empty desert where the shops were as rare as hen’s teeth. New Belgrade sure is a bit chaotic today with all the shopping malls and banks everywhere, but at least life is easier now in that respect.

But You probably did not live amongst sand for very long, am I right? How would You describe Your living environment once You settled in New Belgrade?

You are right, things did change, however, I would not say that much has changed in relation to the quality of living environ-ment.

So what bothered You the most about it?

It was ugly, that is what bothered me. There was concrete every-where, the buildings, the benches, the paths, the garages, and the playgrounds. I was used to living in a house before I came here, so it was quite a shock to me. Concrete is such a cold mate-rial, it makes the environment gloomy, so we decided to fix that. We would put flowers on the balconies and those who lived on the ground floor would create little gardens in front of their doors. I lived in a house in Zemun before, so this lack of greenery quite

bothered me, I would have to say.And so this decoration helped to keep this neighbourhood more people friendly for quite a while, however, today I started to no-tice that people just don’t care about decoration anymore.

My block wasn’t really a pleasant environment to live in as you can imagine. There was no place for pleasure here, because there were no other facilities built except housing. You would work during the day, return home and then go to rest. Even if you weren’t tired and wanted to indulge yourself in a certain activity you had no option to do that. New Belgrade really was a large dormitory back then.

What kept You going then?

Well first you have to know that we had nothing then, so we were incredibly thankful for the life they gave us. My late husband was a military officer so we basically received this flat for free. You cannot be dissatisfied with what you are given for free, and so even though some things bothered us, we were grateful. Social-ism offered us a good living standard. To own a flat is something most young people cannot even dream of today. Back then it was totally different.

My boss, she was planning to paint the walls in her flat, but instead she just decided to switch flats so she would not have to paint. That is how easy it was in some cases.

Living standard outweighed the drawbacks of living in this con-crete jungle. The way of life was much better, we would travel every year to places that we cannot even imagine travelling to today. It was luxury and it still is luxury, but back then we could afford it because the loans were so cheap or you could pay the instalments. Because of these things we did not mind that our living environment did not offer us the leisure opportunity. And so yes, I do look nostalgically at my past, life was better in many aspects.

How Would You compare the life in the community between Your first years here and today?

106

I would say that there was perhaps a bit of this spirit of togeth-erness present, but I believe that was because we were all the same. We were all families of military men and at work we were all health care workers. These were the only two worlds that I knew, so even when I was home I would only be in the company of girls I already knew from my workplace.

Those were our little rituals where we would meet in each other’s flats drink coffee, smoke cigarettes and chat. This was simply because there was not much to do outside. We were lot more con-nected back then than people are now, I think. We would hang out together when we found the time. Now, I think, the lives of people became much more individually oriented. But the prob-lem lies somewhere else as well. I believe that for the community to function it is extremely important that everyone is the same. We were all equal back then, financially, profession-wise and by background. As I said, every family in our block was a military family. This is probably why we felt a certain level of connection. In contrast, the community is very heterogeneous today. We are not as tight together because we differ too much.

If You were asked to compare Your life in the 1970s and now, what would You say?

Life today is good, I mean, You always have to look at both as-pects, the good and the bad. Just like the advantages of life in the 1970s outweighed it’s disadvantages and with that I mean the fact that living standard outweighed physical limitations of the living environment, I can say the same about my life now. I am not in a position practice many things that seemed normal back then, such as travelling, all because of my financial situa-tion. Sure the community is not as homogeneous and does not function as well as it did back then, at least in my age group. However, I have so many other things today that I can enjoy. Most importantly I have everything I need on my doorstep now, transit, shops, market, groceries, cafes, parks etc. Compared to the life in a desert in the 1970s this is wonderful.

I have to admit I rarely go to the city centre anymore. There are two reasons for that: the first one is that I don’t need to go there, as I have everything I need right here in my block. The second

reason is that I just can’t stand the big crowds. New Belgrade has, in the last 40 years, become a green city in a true sense of the word. I enjoy nature a lot. The confluence of the rivers and the Friendship Park are only a few minutes away, so I would much rather take a stroll trough the park than go to the Old Town.

Would You say that You are a bit disappointed by the fact that New Belgrade never became a great capital it was supposed to be? That the great dreams of the 1960’s never came to life?

To be honest, I was a bit disappointed by that. I imagined what life would be in such a community, even though many aspects of life were far from perfect. However, year after year I slowly got over this disappointment, especially now that I have been living this new modern life for so long. I cannot complain about my life, it has treated me well and I am a grateful person.

107

Interview 5

Nikola age 79, Milorad age 83, Miloš age 86RetireesBlock 22, New Belgrade

Could You picture for us life in Block 23 right after it was built?

The situation was completely the opposite to what you see today. The visual impression, I have to admit, was quite weird with sand everywhere and then skyscrapers rising out of the sand. People would make their own gardens in front of their apartments to create their own green haven, as greenery in New Belgrade was quite scarce.

The biggest problem, however, was the traffic or to be more spe-cific, nonexistence of traffic. Public transport in New Belgrade was not functioning until long after I moved to this neighbour-hood. It was quite hard to travel to the Old City. If for example you wanted to go to Zeleni Venac market you would have to walk from Blok 23 to Mihaila Pupina Street, which is about 2 miles away. Then you could take a bus across Branko’s Bridge or walk an additional mile, all of this only to buy some groceries.

Would You say that You are a bit disappointed by the fact that New Belgrade never became a great capital it was supposed to be, an economic, political and cultural centre of this part of Eu-rope? That the great dreams of the 1960’s never came to life?

I have not heard about this plan. Some of the administrative buildings that were built did function for some years, however, I really had no idea that there was a bigger plan behind this.

Would You say that You were prepared for a completely new modern lifestyle?

We all came to New Belgrade from the countryside or other smaller towns in Yugoslavia, however, I have to say the we got accustomed to this new lifestyle very quickly, even though it was

not really a urban lifestyle as there were no shops in the actual block. And so it was quite hard to get accustomed to travelling far away only to buy necessities in the nonexistence of transport opportunities. So unless it was necessary we would mostly stay in our own block.

There is no modern lifestyle without modern architecture though. How do you look at the aesthetics of concrete, which pre-vails in New Belgrade, but is especially prominent in Block 23?Well I think it is obvious that these buildings are not pleasant for the viewer’s eye. Most of them, especially in our block 22 are reminiscent of tombs, mausoleums. I would even argue that the quality of construction is quite disappointing.

Nonetheless, we have lived in these buildings from the very be-ginning. Most of us came here from the countryside looking for a better life so not only did we get used to this type of archi-tecture, but we were glad and happy to accept it. This does not mean that we do not notice the flaws in construction and design, perhaps the fact that we have lived here for so long means that we have experienced all of these flaws throughout the years. I do not know how the younger generation responds to this kind of architecture, but I am guessing it is a bit harder for them to get accustomed.

Another thing you need to know is that getting an apartment was one of the most joyous occasions in our lives. It was a long wait before we were given the apartments. For most of us these flats were unreal, meaning that they exceeded our expectations. They were often bigger than we deserved or expected. Very often they were distributed according to a person’s rank in the military and since I was a high - ranking officer I was entitled to a 3.5 room apartment. This, however, did not mean that these apartments were quality apartments. My friend here, he is from Slovenia and he is determined that people who came here from Slovenia received the worst flats of all. I would not be so sure about that.

Some say that the builders knew when they built the neighbour-hoods that these flats wouldn’t last more than 60 years. We will see what happens in the future.

108

Would you agree with the names “dormitory” and “concrete jungle” that were applied to New Belgrade very soon after it was built?

In the beginning it really was a dormitory, as there was nothing else to do here. Shops, community centres, post offices, banks and so on were only built towards the end of the 1970s in the majority of neighbourhoods. Nowadays life is much easier in that respect, you have more opportunities when it comes to leisure. However, if you have no money to do it you are basically limited to sitting in parks and playing chess, just like we are now.

We used to have our own room in the block, which was a sort of community room. Over recent years all of such rooms, bike sheds, and service rooms have been converted into apartments by private investors. We lost our room this year so we don’t really know where we are going to hang out during winter.

But if you are asking about concrete, let me tell you one thing. In thirty or forty years time all of these buildings will end up under a bulldozer and be demolished. You cannot live with concrete slabs above you and concrete slabs beneath you. It is not pleas-ant. Concrete heats up in summer and cools down in winter. It transmits temperature and humidity. You can hear everything that is happening above you and below you. It is a horrible mate-rial to live in. I am grateful that we received these apartments, don’t get me wrong, but I cannot give them kudos for creating a quality place to live.

Would You say that certain blocks differ in quality?

Well I would not know whether they differ in quality, at least not in quality of apartments. Perhaps the military blocks were built to a higher safety standard, I doubt that apartments are better though. The biggest difference, in my opinion, occurs when it comes to location. To me my block, which is Block 22, is much better than for example adjacent blocks 21 and 23. You have the marketplace here, amazing transport connections, Sava Cultural Centre and so on.

How would you evaluate the community in Your neighbour-

hood? What influences the good functioning of the community? Perhaps You could compare the situation now and when You moved in?

I believe people are the ones who create the community. But without material conditions it is quite hard for the community to function as is should. Nonetheless, there are many other factors. Today the community is quite diverse, whereas in the 1970s for example these differences were relatively small. The new system has changed a lot of things as well, it almost seems that more and more people think more and more individually. They sort of clam up and hide in their own private world.

How would You compare life under socialism and capitalism in relation to New Belgrade?

I don’t know whether the relationships between people are better or worse, but they sure are different. What has really changed for better are the living conditions. With that I don’t mean the actual apartments but everything that surrounds them. However, If you are asking me whether life as such was better back then, I would say yes. I would still love to live in old Yugoslavia. I think that life as a whole was better back then.

109

Interview 6 Vladimir, age 72 Factory workerBlock Zaprudje, New Zagreb

How long have You lived in New Zagreb?

I have lived here for a long time, almost 40 years. In fact I moved into this neighbourhood right after it was built.

Could You describe Your experience of New Zagreb at that time?

The neighbourhood was built relatively quickly, compared to some other cities in Yugoslavia. Before the city emerged this area was covered with fields and pastures. The River Sava would overflow every now and then in the times before the levies were built. New Zagreb was built in the times after the earthquake in 1963 which affected most of Yugoslavia, especially Macedonia and Bosnia. For this reason all of the buildings that you can see around you were built to an extremely high safety standards. A part of the neighbourhood called “cans”, which are these long 6 storey buildings with shiny metal façades was built first, where-as the skyscrapers were built as an example of good modern architecture designed to impress the delegations of state and foreign officials that would visit it. This whole area was empty before New Zagreb was built.

Some other neighbourhoods such as Siget, Sopot, Sredisce and Dubrave were built in order to put the Zagreb fairground in con-text. However, we always saw our neighbourhood as the symbol of a successful attempt to spread the city across the River Sava. It was a nice neighbourhood, quite calm. It was expected that not many cars would pass through it so many streets between the buildings are quite narrow, which does cause some problems today.

One of the positive aspects was that schools and kindergartens were built not long after the flats were finished. High Schools,

swimming pool and museums were built a bit later, but my point is that the situation, when it comes to amenities, was far better than in Belgrade at around the same time. There are not many, so to say, “neighbourhood centres” here. Post office, supermar-ket and bakery are all in the same place, but it does not function as a community centre.

So how were You then satisfied with Your living environment?

I have lived in one of these tall skyscrapers the entire time. My apartment is on the 11th floor out of overall 18. The apartment units are ok, I would say. Flats are quite functional, with a rela-tively good use of space. Perhaps they are a bit small for a family, but we don’t complain. The size of 3 of the flats in one storey is around 60 square meters, whereas one is bigger, around 90 square metres.

The neighbourhood was quite empty at the beginning, there were no shops except the market place hidden somewhere amongst the “cans”. We would walk to the city centre to buy everything else but vegetables and fruit. For example if you needed a mop or a detergent, a pencil or a book, you would have to go all the way to the Old Town.

One of the drawbacks is definitely the fact that the skyscrapers have a lot of, so to say, open surfaces. Not only are they tall concrete structures, which in the summer results in problems with heat, problems occur also in times of strong winds and thunderstorms, because of the large windows. The noise of the glass jingling in the wind is quite terrifying and since the build-ing units are very far apart, they do not shelter each other in times of bad weather.

If you are asking me whether I am satisfied with the look of the buildings I would have to say no. But I would not say that it both-ers me either. You see, trough all these years we slowly got used to this type of architecture. I believe that the reason why I got used to it is because I lived in these buildings ever since they were built and I am almost certain that I look at these buildings in a different way than you do, for example. Is that right? Per-haps I am lucky because I live in a building which I quite fancy.

110

I would not, however, want to live in the “cans”. My daughter wanted to buy an apartment there and I have to say I forbade her to do that.

How would You compare the life in the Old City to this modern new life that was offered to You in the 1970s? Do You even go to the Old City nowadays or are You satisfied with what You have here?

I go to the Old City every now and then, but I have to say I most certainly avoid going if I can. I used to live in the very centre of the city when I was young. Back then the town had a certain meaning, purpose. It had a sense of a small town, with all the little, so to say, craft shops where you could buy everything you needed. If you wanted to get your shoes fixed you would go to the shoemaker’s, if you needed the meat you would go to the butchers. The city has changed a lot since then, unfortunately for the worse.

On the one hand is the city centre too crowded, and with that I mean that it became one giant promenade where people showed off their possessions and a walkway for women to be seen. On the other hand the result of this is that all these small shops that I found pleasure to visit back then are now closed, or at least very close to death I don’t go to the city centre much, I can buy the necessities here in New Zagreb, so I don’t see a reason why I would torture myself by going there, god forbid. It is horrible, there is no openness, no air, too much traffic and no greenery.

To me the old city centre is more of a concrete jungle than this new part of town, if that makes sense. New Zagreb as you can see is a town in greenery. Everything is open, bright, overall a great place to live, it truly has soul, in a way. Parks are everywhere as you can see. This park used to be named Carl Marx park, but after some time they renamed it to Vjekoslav Majer Park, after one of the great Croatian writers. In fact many poets, novelists and artists in general, as well as politicians or activists were given apartment here in this neighbourhood since many of them experienced financial troubles at some point in their lives.

So how did You end up here in this very neighbourhood?

Well, you were unable to purchase an apartment here, no one was. These buildings were built by the companies and factories, just like the one that I worked for. They built these blocks for their workers. Some of the neighbourhoods were built for mili-tary men and their families as well, such as Zapredje across the road, however, the majority of blocks for the civil population. Legend has it this was in fact done to avoid military attacks, which would most certainly occur if these blocks were built for military personnel only.

The process was fairly simple, you had to be on the list to get awarded an apartment and then apartments were given accord-ing to that list. We paid I believe 10 percent of the value of the apartment, the rest was paid by the factory and the bank. The company, however, even returned us our share in instalments over a 10-year period. Flats were distributed according to how long you have worked at the company and also according to how important your knowledge is to the company. The size of the fam-ily and some other factors would also bring you points when it came to the distribution of apartments.

Do You have any specific locations around this block that You really enjoy?

Please walk with me and I will show you. These three trees I found abandoned and started taking care of them years ago. Now they have grown immensely over the years. You might wonder why I am telling you this story. The trees are right next to my garage, as you can see. Every time I come home I park my car in the garage, take the chair out, sit down for a beer and enjoy how quiet this park is. My son would come often and sits down for a conversation or to drink a beer with me. For him this feels almost like a holiday.

Can You notice a difference in the way the community func-tioned for example in the 1970s and now?

Of course, back then everyone was a worker, to be more precise everyone was employed. Every family had at least one, two or in sometimes even three employed members. This is a very impor-tant fact because it influences the general feeling of the neigh-

111

bourhood and community quite a lot, I would say. The majority of the social life was, however, happening at the workplace. After coming home from work those who had children would perhaps take them for a walk in the park and so on, but that was more or less it.

You mentioned that according to the principles of Le Corbusier a neighbourhood should offer a worker 8 hours of leisure after 8 hours of work. Well this was not the case here in New Zagreb. Just like New Belgrade this city did not offer workers much in terms of diverse activities except the abundance of greenery. One of the rare activities which was in fact organised by the factories were the balls held in the community centre. And so after work many would go straight to their flats and spend whatever was left of their day in their own private environment. In the same manner as some other Yugoslavian cities, New Za-greb quickly got its nickname “dormitory”. This does not mean that people fell asleep as soon as they arrived from the work-place, however, they did spend the rest of the day in their flats. Nonetheless, everyone seemed more or less satisfied with their lives. That was a completely different life from the one today.

If you are asking about relationships, friendships I have to disap-point you. These relationships were based merely on saying hello and goodbye to someone when you met them on the street. Cer-tain groups did meet and hang around, however, this relation-ships were strictly defined by one’s occupation and took place at set locations such as community centres or clubs.

If you are interested about today, I have to say that I feel very sorry for the young people. All they do is hang around and drink. Their lives are quite pathetic, I would say. Most of them are un-employed and I believe they have fallen into a state of apathy. A lot of them are uneducated, illiterate. On the other hand there are some very bright exceptions here as well, but I am guessing this neighbourhood does not stand out in any way from others. Just like you can find drugs anywhere you can find smart and well raised people everywhere.

What about the structure of the population, has it changed much through the years?

I would have to say that it did change. New people came, the original “settlers” are slowly disappearing, however, the stories about people moving to New Zagreb from the Old City are not quite correct. The majority of people who move here come from the countryside and places far away, such as Slavonija. Perhaps some parents buy apartments for their children or rent the apart-ments to students, however, it is still mostly people in pursuit of a better life who move here. Another important factor that really transforms the community is the unemployment rate, which can be noticed and felt on every corner.

What truly interests me is whether You were prepared for this modern life in a modern city, considering the fact that You moved from the Old City and away from a relatively traditional lifestyle?

I don’t know whether I was prepared for a modern life when I moved here. I don’t even know what that truly means. What I know is I was prepared for a better life. The flats were functional and offered all the conditions for quality living, for a healthier life. I moved to New Zagreb at about the same time as I got my family. New living environment proved to be a perfect place for raising the family. I have to say I was reborn here. Life I was of-fered was a very cultural life, of a relatively high standard even for today and we were very grateful for it. As you can probably imagine, I did not even have time to think about whether I am ready for a modern life or not. It would be unfair. That time truly gave us the opportunity to prosper, in all aspects of life. If you were a talented and hardworking person, you would be given an opportunity to take-over a more difficult assignment.

Perhaps this question is too broad, but it is hard to avoid it: how would You compare Your life in socialism and in capital-ism?

It is hard to say. Perhaps it was better in the past, but probably because we were young back then. Also, everyone who wanted to work was offered a job. The ability to work is a very important part of a peoples lives.

112

Interview 7 Marija, age 60TeacherBlock Fuzine, Ljubljana

How long have you lived in this neighbourhood?

I have lived here in this neighbourhood for twelve years now, but I have lived in Ljubljana for 30 years altogether. First when I moved here I lived in the Bezigrad neighbourhood. And I have to tell you that I would never go back there again. Even though nowadays it is a quite popular place to live, my life there was horrible.

Could You be a little bit more specific?

Of course. As I was saying, I would never move back there ever again. Cars were parked everywhere, streets were narrow, build-ings were quite close together, neighbourhood was too dense in my opinion.

For me as a mother this was a awful location to live. There were no parks, no playgrounds and no paths, basically no place to take your child for a walk or to play. I had a somewhat good view from the apartment I have to admit. However, the view could not outweigh all the disadvantages of living there.

I love the neighbourhood where I live now. I know it might sound strange to you, after all Fuzine neighbourhood has a quite infa-mous reputation among the Slovene people. When I was looking for a flat here I was hoping for anything but Fuzine, once I saw the neighbourhood and once I saw my apartment I decided that I am never moving anywhere else again.

My son would say: “Mom, why are we moving to Fuzine, they shoot each other there.” I told him that the situation is no differ-ent anywhere else. And so we have lived here for 12 years now have and not had one problem with anyone in this neighbour-hood. If I have done only one thing right in my life, I believe the deci-

sion to move here was the one. The visual look of the buildings does not bother me at all. I have everything I need to survive here, a shop, bank, post office and vast areas where I can go for a walk with my dogs. I love living here. In comparison to Bezigrad, where there were no parks, only sidewalks and cars, this place is a paradise.

But many people see this neighbourhood in particular as one of the grimiest neighbourhoods in Ljubljana. Are You really not bothered by the visual image and materiality of Your living environment?

Not at all, even though I would not say that this neighbourhood is an achievement in the visual sense, however, it has so much to offer, that I do not even notice the visual drawbacks.

The other day I read in the newspaper that according to a certain study flats in Fuzine are of a higher quality compared to some other flats in Ljubljana, even some blocks on very popular loca-tions. I don’t know whether this is true or not, but apart from some issues with acoustic privacy, I haven’t had any major prob-lems in the 12 years I have lived here.

The apartments are terrific, very functional, rooms are fairly big and the flat offers quite a lot of privacy. All I can say is that I fell in love with it the first time I saw it.

You mentioned acoustics as an issue sometimes. What do you mean by that?

The walls between flats are adequate, the ceilings, however, are most certainly too thin. My upstairs neighbour, an older lady, she constantly complains, rings my doorbell, reports me to all sorts of institutions etc. I guess my dogs bother her. I think this is ridiculous. I can hear my other neighbour though, running around her flat in the morning before she leaves for work. She wakes me up every morning, but fortunately I am a very flexible person.

I have to say I was positively shocked when I first stepped into this neighbourhood. The greenery, amenities and the buildings

113

as such are in relatively good shape, despite the negative con-notation that this neighbourhood holds amongst the people of Ljubljana. How did You manage to tidy up this neighbourhood to this level?

Every entrance in our building has its own janitor who is paid by the occupants. The rules are set at meetings we have on regular basis. No one is allowed to leave their belongings in front of their doors so the hallways are always clean and tidied. The occupants are paying the cleaning lady and she takes care of the hallways too.

The situation is not the same in all of the buildings though. In some of the buildings the rules are much looser and abstract so the occupants of these buildings leave their shoes and bikes in the hallways. Some of the janitors are extremely hard working, they mow the lawn all the time, take care of the flowers etc.

People living on the ground floor also create their own gardens in front of their apartments and some of them are quite beauti-ful.

So do You by any chance experience a sense of community in Your neighbourhood or are relationships between the neigh-bours quite brief?

I have to admit I was quite a loner at first when I moved to this neighbourhood. But ever since I have my puppies I meet people from everywhere. I am constantly in contact with people from various buildings, even though the community is quite hetero-geneous, I have to say that I don’t choose friends by where they come from. I realised very soon that nationality or religion do not make someone a good or bad person.

So yes, nowadays I am a quite sociable person, whereas before the puppies I would perhaps only say hello to people from my hallway, my close neighbours.

Back when You were still working, what did a day in Your life look like? Did Your neighbourhood offer You enough opportuni-ties for quality leisure or was Your apartment, in a way, Your

only living environment, a place intended merely for sleeping?

No, not at all, after coming home I would cook dinner and then take my children for a walk. I spent most of my free time with my children, perhaps this is why I never engaged in relationships with the people from the neighbourhood. The conditions here were perfect for raising a child, lots of playgrounds and green-ery. Now the conditions are even better.

The community centre offers a variety of classes and activities such as learning a language, gymnastics, computer lessons, drawing classes, sculpturing all of these for only 5EUR per month.

There are so many opportunities for everyone, to exercise, learn and meet people, you only need to be active. Many young people only sit around the neighbourhood with no idea what to do with their lives. They are almost certainly unemployed and completely lost in life. I realise that the situation nowadays is horrible, to have a job is luxury. However, with a little bit of effort they could make something out of themselves instead of drowning their misery in alcohol and drugs.

114

Thanks to Dr. John Bold, my parents and grandparents as well as Maks, Nina and Tim.