The Fever Dream of Socialist Architecture in Eastern Europe

THE FEVER DREAM OF SOCIALIST

ARCHITECTURE IN EASTERN

EUROPE

IS IT WORTH PRESERVING OR NOT?

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I want to express my gratitude towards my supervisors Dr Giovanna Piga and Dr Tulika Gadakari for the support of while making this paper and opportunity they gave me to follow my area of interest To my family for being patinaed during the process and to my friend Dominika for keeping motivated to complete my work.

ABSTRACT

This paper presents and questions the purpose of the Soviet architecture and their preservation plan and a point of the well-being of the mono towns in Eastern Europe during the socialist regime The heritage of the 30-year-old dictatorship has scared the minds of the residents of these countries and even though they look at the big grey structures they have accepted the reality of history and continued to live with them throughout the years.

By conducting research about the economical state of the countries and the priorities in architectural aspect we can find one of the core reasons why some countries decide to revive the buildings of the socialist regime and for others is simply not possible However, the well- being side of the paper needs to conduct an interview to gather insight of the problems from the actual point of the people living in the buildings nowadays.

The economy, the ethics and the heaviness of history is getting in between the importance of the architecture in that era. This article will present research of the potential problems which hold the restoration of the buildings from that era and some solutions for taking care of them. Moreover, it will debate the significance and what weight they hold for the future. So, as a temporary solution to a fast-developing society, the problems are not only piling up with memories, the buildings are starting to deteriorate and slowly become one with the ground. So, should we save them?

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 1 Literature review diagram

Fig. 2 Methodology Explanation Diagram

Fig. 3 Ideology analysis

Fig. 4 Darnytsia neighborhood, Kyiv, prefabricated panel construction. (Pshenychnogo, 1964)

Fig. 5 Domostroitel’nyi kombinat No. 1 (Ukr. Domobudivel’nyi kombinat No. 1) Kyiv, Ukraine. (Pshenychnogo, 1960)

Fig 6 Elevations of Panel Blocks (denisdubrovin- stock adobe com)

Fig 7 The “1300 Years of Bulgaria” monument after completion (Nonument )

Fig 8 The “1300 Years of Bulgaria” monument before the demolition (vili45stock adobe com)

Fig 9 The park after the demolition of the monument (Google Earth, 2023)

Fig. 10 The monument “Founders of the Bulgarian States” (Haytov)

Fig. 11 Interior picture of the monument (mitzo bs- stock.adobe.com)

Fig. 12 Airal view of the monument (Marin- stock.adobe.com)

Fig. 13 Highlight of disruption (WZMH Architects)

Fig. 14 Disrupted parts (WZMH Architects)

Fig. 15 Plan of execution (WZMH Architects)

Fig 16 The end of a monument (Zandersone/LETA)

Fig 17 Memento Park (Május, 2017)

Fig 18 Abandoned monument of Stalin, Mogodai, Romania (Michalek, 2000)

Fig 19 Proposal for “1300 Years of Bulgaria” monument (Aleksandrov)

Fig 20 Proposal for “1300 Years of Bulgaria” monument (Bonev)

GLOSSORY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

INTRODUCTION

This paper questions and presents the purpose of Soviet architecture and the plan to preserve its key elements, focusing on the well-being of the precast concrete blocks and monuments that celebrate socialist ideas in Eastern Europe The legacy of the 30-year dictatorship remains a heavy burden on the minds of the inhabitants of these countries, but nevertheless, they look at the big gray structures, accepting the reality of history and continuing to live with them over the years.

By conducting research on the economic status of countries and their architectural priorities, one of the main reasons why some of these countries choose to revive buildings from the socialist regime, while for others it is simply impossible, is revealed However, to get a full picture of the problems from the real perspective of the people who live in these buildings today, it is necessary to conduct interviews that will reveal today's perspective and challenges.

Economics, ethics, and the burden of history come into play, determining the importance of the architecture of the time. This article presents an examination of the potential problems that plague the restoration process of socialist-era buildings and offers solutions for their care. Furthermore, their significance and weight for the future will be discussed. With society's development, the problems linger in time and memories and in the buildings, which begin to crumble and gradually descend into the objectivity of the earth. The question remains - should we save them?

Many have split opinions on how the problem of deteriorating structure can be maintained. Taking into consideration all the factors above we hope to find a way to preserve, repurpose or even relocate the monuments, in search of a better solution. Some structures have lost their connection to the present time, which puts them at greater risk of demolition. Moreover, for the residential block’s preservation and maintenance is crucial in these circumstances to save hundreds from losing their homes.

LITERATURE REVIEW

During the twentieth century, the architectural environment of Eastern Europe witnessed a tremendous upheaval, primarily driven by socialism's ideological currents Following World War II, the establishment of communist governments across the area launched a new age of architectural planning, defined by utopian ideals of urban growth and a break from preexisting architectural traditions. Historians, architects, urban planners, and cultural theorists have all expressed interest in studying communist architecture in Eastern Europe. (Figure 1)

The emphasis on communal life, public ownership, and the visual embodiment of socialist ideas defined socialist architecture (Verdery, K , 1996) Researchers have investigated not just the physical manifestations of socialist architecture, but also the political reasons and socioeconomic implications that underlay these structures

The initial idea for the one of the main ideologies in socialist architecture was first designed in USSR and after testing the model of the panel blocks it was mass spread in the rest of the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc. The role of a symbolic Soviet materialthe concrete panel - in the formation of urban residential architecture in the late Soviet era The dominance of the concrete panel is made possible by the economic system that supports its production and use However, the same economic context brought the architectural profession and the construction industry to a standstill in the 1970s and 1980s. (Malaia, 2020)

Topic Needs

Fact Check

Strategy

Fig. 1 Literature review diagram

Literature

Results

Researcher

Celebrating the existence of the communist party and its greatness had been shown to evoke respect and feed the propaganda spreading in the states That is how the monuments came to existence, which their well thoughted position in the cities and its heaviness not only in terms of material, but also of emotional connection They bear a tremendous load of historical memory and ideology, yet they are also architecturally significant and contribute to the urban fabric. (Sokołowicz, M. E., Nowakowska, A., & Ciarkowski, B , 2023) Such monuments have a limitless potential for separating people, not just on political, but also on artistic or emotional grounds. These factors determined their fate in terms of shall they be preserved or destroyed Unfortunately, many monuments have been lost with time. (Vasileva A., 2017)

What comes next, delving into the issues of post-socialist change, economic transition, and identity and social structure reconstruction. The following raises concerns about socialism's legacy and the influence of transition on individual and societal identities (Verdery, K., 1996) The notion of continuity and change in post-communist urban settings, emphasizing the persistence of some architectural and urban planning components from the Soviet era alongside new dynamics. This insightful investigation highlights the complex interaction between history and present, both conventional and creative. (Dmitrieva, M., & Kliems, A 2010) From this research we can draw up a solution for dealing with the problems left from the socialist era. By seeing examples of different countries in Central and Eastern Europe that have been prospering in the last 20 years, we can see a pattern of restoration and decision making.

This multidimensional investigation of the architectural, political, and societal facets of this key time in the region's history is presented in socialist architecture in Eastern Europe.

METHODOLOGY

The process in which the document is structured is divided into three main phases. It begins with a comprehensive overview of the origins of the socialist movement, after which the analysis deepens into the ideology it adopted and the challenges that arose during this period The final phase is a summary of potential solutions, enriched with relevant illustrations and examples. This comprehensive approach is designed to offer comprehensive and innovative responses to persistent and complex problems arising from the socialist era (Figure 2)

ChoosingTopic

In the first stage, called "The Idea of the Regime" , we embark on a journey starting with a compact introduction to Soviet architecture. This introduction is followed by a contextual immersion in the historical background of Eastern Europe during the socialist regime We then focus on uncovering the architectural and urban planning features that were characteristic of Soviet-era structures. In this context, we clearly examine the concept of monocities and monuments, highlighting their key role during the socialist era

In addition, we focus on the inspiring and distinctive features of these structures, creating a basic overview of their functions and significance. We analyze how this period of dictatorship shaped and changed the mentality and outlook of the inhabitants, providing a deeper understanding why some future decisions are made.

The second stage shifts focus on examples throughout Easter Europe, starting from the panel precast blocks and moving to the monuments of the socialist regime These examples are a crucial part of the era and except the emotional impact they are the only visible trademark of the countries from the regime To understand on deeper level the reason for the fate of some of these ideological buildings and monuments we dive into the economical, sustainable, emotional state and the question of identity, which forms the decision to resuscitate or allow the gradual decay of socialist-era edifices

This section by itself is divided in two, a study of the introduction of prefabricated housing and their impact on the urban environment and a study of society's dual feelings towards monumental structures.

The final part of the main body is named “Escaping the Stigma” and explores the possibilities of restoration and is it worth, decision drawn from the research done previously. We shall not forget the found problems and ethical awareness but consider compromise or reposition What significance does this architectural legacy hold for the future? As we conclude our exploration, we are left to contemplate the path forward and the indelible mark that Soviet architecture leaves on the landscape of Eastern Europe and the world at large

PART1

THE IDEA OF THE REGIME

“Q: What is the definition of socialism?

A: The longest and most painful route from capitalism to capitalism. ”

Verdery, 1996

BACKGROUND

To understand the function of architecture in the Eastern Blocs and USSR we need to go back to creating the ideology, the framework of the socialist regime. The history of socialism and the radical execution after the WWII are one of the reasons why the regime succeeded in spreading so fast and efficiently in Eastern Europe with the help of Russia. Eastern Europe is the realest example of where socialism affected countries from their mindset to the structures built to showcase power through monumentality

The common link between the countries in the “Eastern Bloc” is the central planning economy, as all of them differ in dynamics. A central plan would create a scheme where the targets are exactly calculated, with that they would know how much material and expenses they need to produce the quantities wanted. (Verdery p.20) However, as the whole socialist regime, everything would work perfect in theory, but in reality, nothing was how it should be As in the economic matter if the government has calculated and demanded a certain amount of product produced a year and supply them with the needed materials, the materials are never enough for completing the task

f we think of the everyday life of the workers and architecture, the same started applying to it as well. After the spread of socialism in Eastern Europe a new way of urban planning needed to be established

Soviet-era structures frequently have distinct architectural and urban planning aspects inspired by the ideology and restrictions of the time. As discussed before, the socialist regime has one thing in common in each country with its centralized planning in terms of the economy. Moreover, in the sense of architecture and urban planning we can see some common threads.

THE IDEOLOGY IN THE ARCHITECTURE

In the context of utilitarianism many buildings during the Soviet era valued efficiency above aesthetics, resulting in plain and repetitive forms (Leanch p 151-153) In this identical block structures called “Panelki” , we see a solution for the growing population after the war. The era really emphasized the construction of large residential complexes These buildings started to shape the view of the countries The use of raw concrete and powerful geometric shapes conveyed a sense of strength and togetherness in Brutalist architecture in the eastern countries

Leanch mentioned something about new way of planning and restrain in creativity Because of the emphasis on group identity put by the socialist ideology, there was little variance in architectural design and little expression of individualism. Building components and designs were often standardized, allowing for more efficient construction procedures And in terms of the urban feel the apartment complexes were primarily structured in rectangular blocks with restricted differences in height and form, containing shared spaces for social interaction and leisure such as courtyards and parks.

These characteristics reflect communist philosophy and practical issues of the period, resulting in a distinct architectural and urban planning legacy across the former Soviet bloc

Monotowns, played a key role under the communist regimes of the former Soviet Union and other socialist nations. These cities were usually built or refurbished for a single industry or business As the central economy was the government's focus, the specialization of the towns enabled effective resource and output utilization.

Monotown development included the building of houses, schools, healthcare facilities, and cultural amenities for workers, all of which contributed to urbanization and population expansion Workers were frequently transferred to mono towns to support industry, where they received employment stability and social benefits. This contributed to the state's economic aims by ensuring a constant workforce This led to the development of previously underdeveloped regions, contributing to a fairer distribution of industry and infrastructure across the country.

Of course, the idea seems good on paper, however the execution came with restraints for society and growing propaganda was a way to reach people’s minds As monocities were constructed to demonstrate the effectiveness of communist planning and industrialization. They became emblems of development and the ability of the state to care for its inhabitants. However, when the regime and the economy started to crack… (Verdery p. 3135)

The psychological impact of a 30-year-old dictatorship on citizens may be substantial and diverse Long-term dictatorships frequently rely on fear and brutality to keep control Residents may be constantly afraid, which leads to self-censorship, restricted political activity, and a reluctance to voice dissident viewpoints

Propaganda and state-controlled media are extensively used by dictatorships to sway public opinion Residents may adopt official narratives and ideologies over time, influencing their ideas and morals.

During the communist era, the dominating architectural style in Eastern Europe was socialist realism. To create a feeling of stability, authority, and communist principles, this style stressed colossal and neoclassical architecture Government buildings, monuments, ealist architecture. party, monuments, sculptures, and were frequently carefully erected in

Ecircumstances, adopting restricted ultiple generations may have grown Younger generations may be more tions may bear repression-related cision of whether the ex-communist igure 3)

most popular ideologies, the panel cialist architecture. Moreover, the

PART2 THE STUDY CASE

THE INVASION OF THE “PANELKI”

As discussed previously, the socialist ideology the government needed to introduce a 5year plan The time after the war was introduced as a rehabilitation period During that period, the Soviet Union relied on the old methods to build standard brick projects, to provide for the growing population. The gradual construction approach proved to be slow, and the rapid change of population changes began evolving into a housing crisis The government needed to find innovative faster and affordable way of building, to meet the expatiations of the crisis

As a need of new measure, the panel blocks were introduced and the production and building of these structures the perfect fast solution for the problem. However, for the blocks to be built fast they could not be built enterally on site, that is why the solution was a prefabrication of the concrete façade panel and then to be put together on site However, the idea of the panel blocks was not new.(Figure 4) From Le Corbusier to the “Ba-uhouse” idea of the berlin architectural school, the panel blocks appeared in Holland, Germany, and France in the 1920s’ .

The first designs of prefabricated buildings were called experiments. They were based in Moscow and finished construction by the end of the Stalin era. (Ogorodnikova, 2012) The architect Vitaliy Lagutenko developed one of the most used designs of K-7 blocks experiment, which not short later went into mass production and placement. (Ogorodnikova, 2012) These experiments became a standard way of building in the Soviet Union and a trademark for Eastern European appearance. The individual construction was pushed back, and the panel blocks were the main emphasis of serial construction until the fall of the regime. Moreover, the shortage of housing was solved by the precast concrete “Panelki. ”

But is the fast construction being the only advantageous reason of their success? Of course, we can’t say the same now a days, but one of the reasons why prefabricated concrete was used because it was believed to prevent repairs and make maintained easier

As in USSR there was no private owning, there were no private contractors and only the government had the permission to build multi story buildings and from the period from 1956 to 1965 13 million apartments were constructed, implementing the new method (Malaia, 2020). However, a widespread problem arose. Monotomocy started to be an eyecatching feature As the prefabricated blocks continued to develop new versions were introduced, which allowed more visual variety, up to 30 different sections were designed by the architecture institute However, the factories would only produce a few at the time, which did not help with the problem of identical appearance that was rising in the Soviet cities.(Figure 5) At the same time, architects were having difficulties constructing under the Soviet building code, determining the apartments' dimensions and sizes (Figure 6)

As architect D. Iaroslav said in one of his interviews, the code was referred to only when they were trying to find a way around it After the fall of USSR every decision and solution for the problems were irrelevant and the future governments need to deal with mass produced building and the deterioration of them

LOVE AND HATE RELATIONSHIP OF THE MONUMENTALITY OF THE REGIME

For this section we will take for example 2 monuments in Bulgaria, both build in the same year of 1981 with same idea of celebration, but with different future fate To judge the Bulgarian architecture, we need to acknowledge the past in which context they were designed After the end of the communism the monuments were left without a background story. The public vision of them changed and reached constants, one imprinted political disapproval and the other of revival of socialist customs However, nowadays the positions over how they are seen by the young and old population varies. One position is of cool art, disconnected of political weight (Vasiliva, 2017) and another position denial of the political past growing into negative disruption and deterioration We must acknowledge the present misunderstanding of the monument art and design or pure indifference of the history, story, or future of the monuments after the regime (Vasiliva, 2017)

The two examples, celebrate a milestone during the socialist era – the 1300th anniversary of the establishment of the Bulgarian State. The first example is in the heart of Sofia, the capital of Bulgaria. This is a case of a monument not liked by the city's citizens and unfortunately ended up with its demolition

A team of sculptors, several architects and a structural engineer designed the monument as an elevated highlight in the massive new urban complex open areas It is important to acknowledge that the monument was built at the same time as the garden surrounding the complex, compatible with the main building on site, the Palace of Culture, and representing the period’s method of building and choice of material The idea behind it is presenting the concept of the country's historical development and the shape of the 32meter-high monument outlining the part, present and future with three spiral sections extruding from the concrete and steel base. (Figure 7) Moreover, the monument epitomizes the views of the Bulgarian modernist disposition in the late 20s The public view of this construction was negative, both before the fall of communism and after. The reasons for that are various. From a widespread public dissatisfaction caused by the Bulgarian communist leader Todor Zhivkov to general problems with its appearance, which was affected not long after completion by rapid change because of which the cladding collapsed (Figure 8) The appearance of the monument was affected even more after the shift of regime in 1990s, neglecting the already falling façade and lack of repair. The monument was declared hazardous, the structure was closed, and the granite covering was removed in 2009. Later the whole cladding was removed, transforming the structure, but not losing its feel and impressiveness. Further damage was done when the surrounding park was renovated The monument lost its connection to the site Because of its uncaring fate the structure was excluded from the planning of the new park. The aesthetic connection started missing between the park and the monument Now the only link is purely holding on to the past socialist regime, which is viewed with an emotional impact and political denial This connection led to even more deprivation of its value

The political weight of socialist monuments affected in bigger risk of demolition. Such as our example the monument “1300 Years of Bulgaria” was deconstructed on 3rd July 2017

The second example finished construction in the same year of 1981, and was from the monuments build for the celebration of the 1300th anniversary of the foundation of Bulgarian State, evoking on the hill Ilchov Bair in Shumen, Bulgaria.(Figure 10) This monument became a well-known local emblem, loved by the citizens of the city and widely protected against demolition This mass construction was well planned from the position in the city to the well-built connection with the rest of the city. The monuments in socialist countries were built in central position in the towns and cities to showcase prosperity and power. In this case, the monument was not in the heart of the city but with a good connection to the main street of Shumen, allowing easy access by foot and car The location chosen allows the monument to be seen from most districts in the city, and it is noticeable in Shumen’s skylight. The harmony between the site, the monument and the city are well established Moreover, for the connection of the anniversary the monument has 1300 steps walkable path referring to the 1300 years of Bulgarian State existence. The building gradually starts growing in the view site as a series of rising volumes, gradually growing in height, and drawing the visitor into the core: a perfect scenography for engaging visitors in the historical drama within the monument The space makes you feel small in the massive core of the monument leaving you with amazement and respect of the history lesson presented (Vasileva 2017). (Figure 11 & 12)

Outside of the city center, bigger than the usual monuments, the monument of the “Founders of the Bulgarian States” breaks the common view of a socialist monument The structure tells a story with its heavy figures of concrete and granite. Cut inside the big concrete cube of the monument is the courtyard split into different angle blocks creating fluent inside spaces, with perfect paradox of the inside concrete core and the outside green hill of the site. This design presents the history of Bulgaria in the constrain of the socialist building ideology (Vasiliva, 2017)

The public opinion of the monument is positive, a result of different connection to the building rather than the stigma of the socialist regime and political views Unlike many other monuments constructed in that era, this example has been well presented and maintained to this day It is part of the everyday life of the citizens and hosts various public activities Of course, just like the “1300 years of Bulgaria” monument in Sofia, it has been a focus of criticism mainly because of the political history and the heavy memories connections However, Shumen’s citizens have overcome this burden and accepted the monument as something beyond pain and history.

PART3

REVIVAL AFTER THE FALL

THE DECISION TO THRIVE OR FALL

To understand the driving force of the question of preservation we need to analyze the bullet points that might influence the decision and options we have in terms of keeping the structures alive.

The preservation factor depends on many variables: Economic Factors, Sustainability, Well-being of Residents, Ethical and Historical Considerations.

ECONOMIC FACTORS

Whether socialist-era buildings in Eastern Europe should be rehabilitated or demolished is influenced by economic concerns Many factors influence the decision, including the cost of renovation, the possibility for economic development, and the availability of funds. The cost of maintenance is a crucial factor in deciding whether to rehabilitate socialist-era structures Many of these structures are likely to be in poor condition and restoring them to usable shape might be expensive. (Donovan D. Rypkema) Some Eastern European nations, such as Poland and the Czech Republic, had made great economic growth and had merged with Western Europe by the late 1990s and early 2000s. Others experienced longer-term economic issues, such as corruption and political instability (Kliems A , p) Decision makers examine whether the restored facility, such as housing, jobs, or cultural facilities, can generate money or economic growth for the local community. This is related to the agenda of the post-socialist governments Eastern European nations saw significant architectural changes and shifting agendas during the post-socialist era that began in the late twentieth century Several Eastern European nations prioritized modernization and urbanization to catch up with Western norms. This includes building new infrastructure, commercial and residential buildings, and transport networks Post-socialist cities developed with an emphasis on modern architecture and avant-garde design.

WELL-BEING OF RESIDENTS

The well-being and quality of life of residents in socialist-era apartment buildings in Eastern Europe are crucial, and they have a considerable impact on the overall living conditions and social dynamics within these structures Developing livable and sustainable urban environments requires ensuring inhabitants' well-being. Apartment complexes were widely constructed during the communist era with the goal of providing housing for all residents, emphasizing social fairness and inclusion. Ensuring the well-being of residents contributes to the achievement of these goals by providing affordable and adequate housing to a diverse range of people Apartment dwellers can cultivate a sense of community Apartment dwellers can cultivate a sense of community. Due to high population densities in many socialist-era buildings, residents may endure congestion, limited personal space, and a lack of privacy. These diseases may damage the well-being of individuals and families

Socialist-era buildings may have a societal stigma due to their associations with harsh prior administrations This can impact the communities' reputation and the quality of life for residents.

ETHICAL AND HISTORICAL CONSIDERATIONS

The maintenance of socialist-era architecture may be considered as an ethical duty to remember and honor the region's historical events and sociopolitical beliefs. These constructions can serve as a reminder of the past, preserving collective memory for future generations. Such as our monument case studies the monument of “Founders of the Bulgarian States” in Shumen, become part of the identity of the city. Nowadays, you cannot go to Shumen and not see the monument’s presents on the hill The structure might have been and still is part of a difficult past, however it shifted the perception of the city and its shape, spreading roots into the citizen’s identity that became inseparable part Whereas, if we get the example of the “1300 Years of Bulgaria” monument, shown by the research the character was missing, the whole structure was overshadowed by the rest of the complex and later when some renovation was done on the urban space the monument lost connection with the site.

From these points we see a tendency for ethical decision-making, meaningful community contact and involvement The perspectives and preferences of local inhabitants and stakeholders should be considered during the decision-making process.

SUSTAINABILITY

Structures from the Soviet era may lack adequate documentation and building records, making it harder to understand their initial plans and materials Some Soviet-era buildings include toxic substances that are harmful to one's health and the environment, such as asbestos. It may be costly and difficult to securely remove these things during repair. In terms of the materials and demolition, it will be hard to recycle so much waste And from the side of social sustainability, the decision of relocating most families living in the residential blocks will be impossible or with great economical value

SOLUTIONS TO CONSIDER ESCAPING THE STIGMA

We have to acknowledge the options of repositioning and repurposing. Depending on the type of the structure, different final advise can be proposed.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO DESTROY?

To destroy comes last in the decision-making process. That is when the project is impossible or too expensive to maintain. This needs to be planned very well to ensure low cost, the welfare of the people on site, where the material will go after demolition and how the site will be used afterwards. In the case of the panel residential blocks this is a hard decision to make As mentioned before the cost of demolition of one of these blocks needs to include the rehoming of many families and providing new housing. As most of the blocks we built on the terms of governmental ownership and community, the council needs to find funds either to repair the damage accruing or maintain the blocks If the site is beyond repair, then the hard decision to demolish this building is made. In many cases in Eastern Europe these buildings are used until the day the block is declared unhabitable and dangers to live in.

WZMH Architects has kept the concept of prefabrication and came up with a solution for partially destroyed blocks from the war in Ukraine, with a thought of the future. Using modular blocks to replace the damaged parts, they provide new living environment, with reduction of carbon to 20 to 40% and strengthening the structure. ( Cano, 2022)

(Figure 13, 14 & 15)

In recent years, the governments have been funding external maintenance because of the lack of insulation which was never in the plans of the initial designs. However, this does not include the structure of the buildings Hidden in the walls the bones of the panel blocks are out of the mind of the maintenance plan and who knows when it will give in.

As for the monuments, even with a firm demolition decision, it can take time until the plan is executed. They are the target of emotional connection and sentimentality. Some people might keep the bad memories up to heart, yes others are proud carriers of the socialist ideality. This conflict makes the conclusion of the monuments harder. Just like our examples earlier, some have unanimous consent to keep being maintained and exist, or to be destroyed. (Figure 16)

RELOCATION

Relocation is another option for collecting and reviving the monuments. This does not apply to the blocks as it is impossible to move such a big and unstable structure, so is not recommended.

Instead of demolishing the monuments they can be moved to a place where they can act as a exhibit of the past We can see many examples where whole parks are created to display the fallen monuments, such as Memento Park in Budapest, Hungary. (Figure 17) The park houses many statutes, including a statute of Stalin, once located in primary areas of the city Usually called graveyards for socialist monuments, relocating structures is a better decision than wiping them out of existence.

In the worst case of relocating the end up in a socialist dump, like one of Stalin’s Monument, currently abandoned in the suburbs of Mogosai, Romania, relocated from Bucharest. (Kliems, p. 22) (Figure 18) In the instance of our already demolished monument of “1300 Years of Bulgaria” one of the considerations was to be moved to another location in Sofia, this planed that the structured needed to be dismantled completely which at the end meant to be destroyed. After many tries and protests the only solution for the monument's fate was to be destroyed

REPURPOSING

Even though this option gives a lot of freedom in the design process and the budget, Eastern Europe is not as popular as in other western countries. The possibilities are endless if there is a plan Considering our case studies and many more, we can draw at least a few ways to repurpose a Soviet block or monument.

Thinking about the blocks and their way of modification to serve better the societies need, one of the recommendations is for them to be repurposed for providing shelter for homeless and financially unstable people As mentioned before, the canvases of the newly insulated blocks are the perfect opportunity for art displays and graffiti designers. With the right intentions beautiful and meaningful creations can be drawn of the façades of the blocks, making them colorful attractions for the residents, and passing by people.

There are many proposals for redesigning monuments without the need for demolition. Their tops can be replaced with a much significant icon, reflecting the current time. Bigger monuments like Buzludza monument can be restored and used for cultural space, exhibitions and just like the monument in Shumen, turn into identity storing palace.

Our example of “1300 Years of Bulgaria” in Sofia received special attention from architects and chance for restoration and repurposing

Ivailo Aleksandrov, proposed a design with minimum intervention into restoring it, and focused on developing a new feel of the monument connected with the proud Bulgarian nation. The intention to escape the “ boring grey concrete” and transform the construction to reflect the national identity, allowing to mask the burden of the past (Figure 19)

Another design submitted by Boris Bonev was to wrap the structure with so called “spider webs” . His idea presents a canvas for contemporary art, event display, awareness of the climate change, and showcase of national identity. An everchanging exhibition opportunity for various messages and media, shying away from the stigma of the socialism (Figure 20)

CONCLUSION

In retrospect to the current situation of the socialist blocks and monuments we can say there is plenty of space for improvement With new problematic situations arising, such as the was in Ukraine, where many of the Soviet residential buildings are suffering the conscience and the growing hate towards Russia, there is a need of constant changing solutions As many structures fade in denial and disruption we can conclude that the reason for their fate is not only the collective negative opinion for them. There are many factors influencing the decision of the future of the architecture from the socialist era, including he economical state of the countries, the public impact and many more.

Drawing from the research, we can see that there many solutions to the problem of preservation. We have to note that if given the opportunity for more investigation we can find even more variety of dealing with the deteriorating scenery of the Eastern European architecture. Whether these plans are executed in time or not can’t be determined. However, some monuments are still left to fall down even with a clear plan of preservation Seen from the examples, the tendency is that majority of the buildings will be left without maintenance until there is emergency necessity of it Ignoring the problems building with time, in fact will either leave the structure without a chance of repair or the cost of dealing with the problem will be bigger that the actual demolition.

Coming back to the question of weather is worth saving these structures, it depends on the personal view and connection with the topic It is important to acknowledge the past and learn from it, especially for the monuments, they present the celebration of it. The emotional weight they carry is a reason for them to be maintained, allowing for the future generations to observe the history not only from books but also from the materiality of the architecture. These buildings have been part of the urban fabric for many years and without them the view and the identity of the city might change

GLOSSORY

USSR- The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics also called the Soviet Union

Eastern Bloc- The Eastern Bloc is a collection of communist-ruled socialist nations in Central and Eastern Europe.

Panelki- A panel block is a residential building constructed using conventional reinforced concrete parts (panels) prefabricated at a particular manufacturing business

K-7- A type of Soviet residential brick or panel building, usually 5 stories high

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Verdery, K. (1996). What was Socialism, and what Comes Next? Princeton University Press.

Dmitrieva, M., & Kliems, A. (2010). The post Socialist city: Continuity and Change in Urban Space and Imagery

Tuvikene, T , Sgibnev, W , & Neugebauer, C S (2019) Post-Socialist urban

infrastructures Routledge

Stanek, Ł (2020) Architecture in global socialism: Eastern Europe, West Africa, and the Middle East in the Cold War. Princeton University Press.

Sokołowicz, M. E., Nowakowska, A., & Ciarkowski, B. (2023). The ambiguous legacy of socialist modernist architecture in central and eastern Europe. Taylor & Francis.

Vasiliva, A. V., & Kaleva, E. K. (2017). RECHARGING SOCIALISM: BULGARIAN

SOCIALIST MONUMENTS IN THE 21 ST CENTURY Department of History and Theory at the University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodesy (UACEG) – Sofia

https://doi org/10 17234/SEC 29 5

Zickel, R. E., & Keefe, E. K. (1991). Soviet Union : A Country Study. https://picryl.com/media/soviet-union-a-country-study-926

Tsvetkov, K. P. T. (2015). The transformation of urban space in post-socialist cities, on the example of Sofiar Bucharest and Bratislava. Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski. Monument of Buzludzha - Totally lost (n d ) Totally Lost

https://www totallylost eu/space/monument-of-buzludzha/ Brutalist Belgrade Photo Essay | Matthijs Kok (n d ) Matthijs Kok

Malaia, K (2020) A unit of homemaking: the prefabricated panel and domestic architecture in the late Soviet Union. Architectural Histories, 8(1).

https://doi.org/10.5334/ah.453

Cano, P. (2023, September 19). WZMH develops modular system to save partially or fully destroyed structures. ArchDaily. https://www.archdaily.com/989207/wzmhdevelops-modular-system-to-save-partially-or-fully-destroyed-structures

MediaCafe (2020, September 25)

https://www.mediacafe.bg/kafeto/istoriq/Razrushenite-obraztsi-na-arkhitekturata-namodernizma-Primeri-ot-Nesebyr-Sofija-i-Plovdiv-10699/

A contest organized by “TRANSFRMATORI” Association for the monument in front of The National Palace Of Culture, 2012 – transformatori. (n.d.).

https://transformatori.net/en/competition2012ndk/

Groat, L N , & Wang, D (n d ) Architectural Research Methods John Wiley & Sons

Leta (2022, August 25) Russia launches criminal case over demolition of Soviet monument in Latvia Baltic News Network https://bnn-news com/russia-launchescriminal-case-over-demolition-of-soviet-monument-in-latvia-237556

Mark. (2022, December 19). Monument to the founders of the Bulgarian State.

Kathmandu & Beyond. https://www.kathmanduandbeyond.com/monument-foundersbulgarian-state-shumen-bulgaria-2/

Shumen monument and Buzludzha: road trip from Sofia. (n.d.). Communism Tours in Bulgaria http://bulgaria-communismtours com/buzludzha-shumen-monument/ Li, L (2017) Rule by law and governance by law In Elsevier eBooks (pp 145–215)

https://doi org/10 1016/b978-0-12-811930-3 00004-0

Cutieru, A. (2020, November 1). Reframing the Monumental: reclaiming the architecture and public spaces of the former Eastern European bloc. ArchDaily. https://www.archdaily.com/950448/reframing-the-monumental-reclaiming-thearchitecture-and-public-spaces-of-the-former-eastern-european-bloc

COVER

Greyscape. (2023, July 9). Brutalist Belgrade. Greyscape. https://www.greyscape.com/brutalist-belgrade/

IMAGES

Malaia, K (2020) A unit of homemaking: the prefabricated panel and domestic architecture in the late Soviet Union. Architectural Histories, 8(1). Greyscape. (2023, July 9). Brutalist Belgrade. Greyscape. https://www.greyscape.com/brutalist-belgrade/ Monument to 1300 Years of Bulgaria – Nonument. (n.d.). Greyscape. (2023, July 9). Brutalist Belgrade. Greyscape. https://www.greyscape.com/brutalist-belgrade/ Cano, P (2023, September 19) WZMH develops modular system to save partially or fully destroyed structures ArchDaily Greyscape (2023, July 9) Brutalist Belgrade Greyscape https://www greyscape com/brutalist-belgrade/ Twinstravel. (n.d.). The Memento Park | Twinstravel.hu.

https://twinstravel.hu/en/blogs/197/the-memento-park

Adobe ID. (n.d.). Greyscape. (2023, July 9). Brutalist Belgrade. Greyscape. https://www.greyscape.com/brutalist-belgrade/

Dmitrieva, M., & Kliems, A. (2010). The post Socialist city: Continuity and Change in Urban Space and Imagery

A contest organized by “TRANSFRMATORI” Association for the monument in front of

The National Palace Of Culture, 2012 – transformatori (n d ) Greyscape (2023, July 9)

Brutalist Belgrade Greyscape https://www greyscape com/brutalist-belgrade/ Leta. (2022, August 25). Russia launches criminal case over demolition of Soviet monument in Latvia. Baltic News Network. https://bnn-news.com/russia-launchescriminal-case-over-demolition-of-soviet-monument-in-latvia-237556