ivana podnar the image of zagreb as a second metropolis yugoslavia

8/11/2019 Ivana Podnar the Image of Zagreb as a Second Metropolis Yugoslavia

1/27

IVANA PODNAR / THE IMAGE OF ZAGREB AS A SECOND METROPOLIS WITHIN yUGOSLAVIA

203

Ivana Podnar

THE IMAGE OF ZAGREB AS A SECONDMETROPOLIS WITHIN YUGOSLAVIA

Keywords: modernization, urban planning, Zagreb, identity, symboli-zation, urban icon, postcard, pin, communism, capitalism

In ro ionTe concept and unction o a metropolis, in the scope o geography and

politics, had an enormous impact on shaping the city o Zagreb during itsthree modernizations. Te second modernization was articulated by two

parallel processes, urbanization and industrialization; repercussions on thecitys development can there ore be traced at several levels. Te rst moder-nization, rom the 1860s to the First World War, was marked by ethnic inte-gration and social modernization, which required a denition o Zagreb as aCroatian ethnic center (Rogi, 2007 39). Although Zagreb still was not trulya metropolis during this period, it unctioned as an idea o a uture capital.It was this period when the rst Lower own o Zagreb was ormed, whoserectangular grid network ollowing the rhythm o greenery, prominent bo-

urgeois buildings, and scientic institutions dened Zagreb as ar as the rail-way station. Te urban abric, together with its architectural eatures, clearlysuggested the inuence o Vienna, the capital o the Habsburg monarchy.

Te rst large-scale expansion o Zagreb that made a radical break withthe vision o the city as ar as the railway, however, happened during itssecond modernization within communist Yugoslavia. As Josip Broz itoobserved, Zagreb was a second metropolis (Blau, Rupnik, 2007, 213) whoseurban, economic, and cultural growth represented the center o Croatia.


2/27


3/27


205

By analyzing three planned and developed city spacesVukovar Street( ormerly Moscow Boulevard and Street o the Proletarian Brigades), the

Zagreb Fairground, and New Zagrebthe spatial identity systems o Za-greb as a metropolis in the second modernization can be recognized. Teirsymbolization, summed up in postcards, souvenirs, pins, maps, and so on,represents implementation o the new social, political, and urban valuesamong the widest social groups.

However, the third modernization that began in the 1990s sublimed its values in completely different visual orms. aking into account the actthat urban memory is relatively long and that the rhythm o changes in thesame space is very dynamic, symbolic language mediates the mixed valueso the two successive, but principally opposed systems. Although the ico-nicity o the city is a dynamic and changeable category, there are constant,rm identity points present both within the citizens awareness and visualdissemination. It is exactly those permanent urban icons that x the idea oa place and its values that persist independent o the ideologies that come

rom outside and above. In addition to these rm points, each time periodimplements its own typical metonymic structures that orm a site- and ti-me-specic urban, cultural, social, and political environment in a dialoguewith what is already present.

V kovar S reeUntil the end o the First World War, urbanized space up to the railway

was sufficient or Zagreb. Signicant population growth and postwar settle-ment created a strong need to expand the urban space southwards, towardthe Sava River. Te key ideas o urbanization options were presented at aninternational competition in 1930. Although no prizes were awarded, thisshowed a dominant orientation towards the modern urban and architec-tural principles o the International Congresses o Modern Architecture(CIAM; Blau, Rupnik, 2007, 164). Tese principles, contextualized as parto the new political and social system afer the Second World War, wererealized in the construction o Moscow Boulevard ( Moskovski bulevar , re-


4/27

206

ARS & HUMANITAS / VARIA

named Beogradski bulevard Belgrade Boulevard in 1948, then renamedUlica proletarskih brigadaStreet o the Proletarian Brigades in 1954, and

nally renamedUlica grada Vukovara Vukovar Street). Tis genealogy othe streets name suggests its symbolic value and reects the complex socialscene o this east-west artery.

gure 2: Postcard with Vukovar Street view at southwestern part o the street withresidential building by Neven Segvic built in 1947-49 (right) and Vjesnik Skyscraper

during construction in the background (Antun Ulrich, 1972)source: Croatian State Archives

In 1947 Vladimir Antoli created the General Plan or Zagreb, whichdrew on various experiences, rom Le Corbusier to the CIAM and ree ur-ban planning, in order to make Vukovar Street exible enough or uturedevelopment, both human and technocratic, in line with the ideology oindustrial progress and concern or collective needs. In its main eatures,this wide road represents the turning point in Zagreb urbanism in ormand symbolism. It was dened by apartment buildings set transverse to theroad, built ollowing modern principles, with rein orced concrete, raised


5/27


207

on pillars, and governed by workers sel management units, ollowing a planthat rejected the city-block-based architecture o the nineteenth-century Lo-

wer own. Although built ollowing drafs o directive regulations (Ivanko- vi, 2006 192), the construction was almost programmatic. Te constructi-on o new Zagreb (Novi Zagreb) must be based on new sur aces that enable

ree shaping o new urban thought, that will satis y the demands o the unc-tionality o living relations with new social reality, but will simultaneouslyinterpret the emotions o art experiences expressed in the urban and archi-tectural compositions o socialist realism (Mohorovii, 1952, 49).

Te rst buildings were designed by the interwar architects o Zagrebmodernism: Boidar Raica, Neven egvi, Drago Gali, and others that, ina specic way, combined two urban principles: ree-plan modernism andspace-enclosing place making (Blau, Rupnik, 2007, 187). However, thoseprinciples are not only ormatively, but rather philosophically different: acity block assumes a clear border between private and public space, whe-reas a ree plan presumes a general public nature; that is, sociability. By thetime construction o Vukovar Street was nished, this idea was completelyenlivened, in both the orm and comprehension o architecture and space.

From the very beginning o building Vukovar Street, the process o crea-ting it was care ully documented and this was disseminated among variousgroups in the orm o postcards. New architectural aesthetics, new materi-als, a new relation towards space, private and public, and new housing cul-ture were all radically different aspects rom previous ones (the unctiona-listic city o the 1930s, a precursor o the micro-district, did not have suchan expanse). Tat revolution needed the strong support o an ideologicalprogram, which, at that time, had a potential to radically change habits andways o thinking. arko Domljan nds the absence o a critical-theoreticalsphere (1969, 4) to be the key act or illustrating postwar architecture. Terational argumentations that explain the necessity o construction that re- jects the city-block approach to urban planning were also very signicant.It is very important that, instead o those barriers, buildings on pillars bebuilt, to enable views and movement in all directions, to create recreationopportunities or children and adults. Te sur ace o land should be lef

or man to walk on and an open view at least up to the level o the groundoor (Bakrac, 1974, 4).


6/27

208


However, what arose as the main question o this radical interruptiono tradition are the ways this new practice was accepted or imposed on

social habits. Because there was a bold awareness o Zagreb as a medievaland nineteenth-century city, located in a clearly dened area, building sucha diverse and large urban abric demanded proper social marketing. Oneo its undoubted aspects were countless workers movements that encom-passed large numbers o men and women, motivated by the creation o thenew Zagreb socialism, with new opportunities or brotherhood and unity.Te other, more subtle, level o social communication was the media andtourism materials such as postcards that tried to dene Vukovar Street as

the new urban icon.Over the years, iconicity was integrated into the major buildings that

were built on the edges o Vukovar Street: the City Hall (1958), WorkersUniversity (1960), Hall o Justice (1970), Vatroslav Lisinski Concert Hall(1973), and Public Accounts Service (1981), which represented temples opower, culture, and the planned economy. Te construction o the two in-tersecting streets, University Mall (Sveuilina aleja) and Miramar Street( Miramarska cesta), with their prominent buildings, delineates the westernand eastern axis o the Green Horseshoe (Zelena potkova) string o parksin the area rom the railway to the Sava River (Blau, Rupnik, 2007, 194),which clearly marks not only the idea o connecting new and old Zagreb,but also the need to understand this new approach with the same sense oiconicity as in the project by Milan Lenuzzi (a.k.a. Lenuci).

Popularization o this new artery in the socialist city was supported by astrong marketing campaign that, in addition to the traditional moti s o theold city center with St. Marks Church and the cathedral, to a large extentpresents various views on Vukovar Street, especially with the distinguishedCity Hall. Particularly interesting or analysis is the mix o compositionscombining traditional symbols with, or example, the building o the Fa-culty o Humanities and Social Sciences, the Faculty o Mechanical Engi-neering and Naval Architecture, and the Open University or highway. Tisiconographic clash actually unctions as a buffer that trans ers the undoub-table iconicity o the cathedral, Lotrak ower, Stone Gate, and NationalTeater to the newly established symbols o prosperity, technical moder-nity, and humanistic democracy. Te construction project represented not


7/27


209

only the construction o housing, but the construction o a homeland, aswell as direct participation. Tis was demonstrated on postcards with the

moti s o workers campaigns, in which men and women stood side by side,under the slogan o brotherhood and unity, participating in this sacred pro-cess. Te uses o advertising established a completely new set o ideologicaland social values, a new architectural urban system, and a new iconographyrepresented by workers and the products o their labor.

gure 3: Postcard with Vukovar Street - lef: residential building by Drago Gali,1956-59, right: City Hall by Kazimir Ostrogovi, 1955-57

source: Croatian State Archives

the za reb fair ro nTe history o airs in Zagreb begins in the thirteenth century in the

Gri neighborhood, which under a Golden Bull o Hungarian King BlaIV gained the status o a ree royal town. By the eighteenth century airshad gradually moved to the Lower own, on the edge o the city. In every


8/27

210


ollowing expansion o urban space, the air moved to the new edge, whereit unctioned as an urbanization point or the neighboring area (Blau, Ru-

pnik, 2007, 221). Te Zagreb Fair (Zagrebaki Zbor ), ounded in 1909, wasrenamed the Zagreb International Fair (Zagrebaki Velesajam) in 1947, thusbecoming a new symbol in promoting Yugoslavia as a global orce. Te pre-war location o the airground on Sava Street (Savska cesta) was becomingincreasingly inadequate or the ever-growing number o national pavilions,which encouraged Mayor Veeslav Holjevac to spearhead relocating theZagreb Fair to a location on the other bank o Sava. Tis proposal met withdisapproval rom the highest governmental organs, with the excuse that the

capital o the Yugoslav ederation should be the air center, but by invokingthe tradition o the Zagreb Fair and owing to the strong lobbying o MayorHoljevac, a revolutionary shif in Zagreb planning happened: the Sava wascrossed and the expansion o the city towards the south began. Te newnorth-south highway took a 180-degree turn in Zagrebs development ... .Te New Zagreb Fair south o the Sava, the rst phase o this conception,sparkled in neon and uorescent in ront o thousands o visitors rom Yu-goslavia and abroad. (Petrovi, 1956, 1)

During the Cold War, the Zagreb Fair was the only international airthat offered a common ground or exhibitors rom the US, the Soviet Uni-on, and unaligned countries (Blau, Rupnik, 2007, 216). Zagreb acted as acatalyst. Not only commercial arrangements between our companies and

oreign companies were concluded, but also between countries split by theWestEast divide (Zagrebaki velesajam, 1957, 5). Te role o the ZagrebFair long exceeded its commercial unction. Its signicance could be perce-ived at two main levels: national and city. At the national level, the ZagrebFair represented commercial networking with Western countries, the EastBlock, and unaligned countries, cultural exchange, technological competi-tion, and political promotion. At the city level, however, the location o theZagreb Fair played a key role, especially rom the perspective o Zagreb as a

uture metropolis. Its location south o the Sava, in a completely undevelo-ped part o the city, brought in rastructure, which proved to be the condi-tion or building a new urban housing project: New Zagreb (Blau, Rupnik,2007, 221). o ensuring the conditions or creating a new airground area,the new rnje Bridge had to be built and electricity, sewage, water, and te-


9/27


211

lecommunication lines installed. Levees had to be built along the Sava. Allthis would not have even been initiated i the Zagreb Fairground had not

been anticipated as the core o New Zagreb. Te signicance o the rst airon the opposite bank o Sava is proved by the act that in 1956 the ZagrebFair was opened by Yugoslav leader Josip Broz ito himsel , and the ope-ning ceremony was transmitted by the rst telecast o Zagreb elevision.

Te Zagreb Fairground was built ollowing two plans, by Marijan Ha-brele and Boidar Raica (Richter, 1959, 1). Te latter accentuated the ori-entation o the airground, in a broader urban sense, as the ocus o the u-ture city on the right bank o Sava (Raica, 1957, Razgovor s projektantoming. arh. Boidarom Raicom, 1). In a conversation with Boidar Raica,the planner emphasized this new orientation in the second phase o the

airground construction. Te basic conception o the project is to integratethe Zagreb Fairground with other parts o the area on this bank o Sava,between the Sava and Jakuevac bridges; in other words, integration o thewhole area into the urban abric o Zagreb, which the Sava should owthrough, and not past (Raica, 1957, Razgovor s projektantom ing. arh. Bo-idarom Raicom, 1). In addition, in 1957 Raica stressed the construction

o the space east and south o the Zagreb Fairground. On available landone could nally start building housing in the manner o modern housingdevelopments, which are the only kind that allow the large-scale, qualitati- ve, and economical building and shaping o the city (Raica, 1957, Razgo- vor s projektantom ing. arh. Boidarom Raicom).

oday, trade airs are not only economic and political events, but alsoevents o national potential that also demonstrate to citizens what is happe-ning in production and what level o standard has been reached (Raica,1957, Zagrebaki velesajam intervju, 2). Providing simultaneous exhibi-tions o the worlds orces acing off, competitive displays o American andSoviet space technology could be seen at the Zagreb Fair, with the displayo Sputnik III in 1961 and American Mercury capsules in 1970 (Blau, Ru-pnik, 2007, 216). Te air was a training ground or presentations o diffe-rent innovations in various sectors rom all over the world, to be seen notonly by pro essionals and politicians, but also by the vast number o newworkers, which ormed the majority o the population. Te architecture othe pavilions was a display o modern, unctionalistic architecture, and it


10/27

212


was designed by the biggest names in the eld: Marijan Haberle, Ivan Viti,Boidar Raica, Vjenceslav Richter, Drago Korbar, Aleksandar Dragoma-

novi, and others. According to Haberle ... displays have to be attractive.Te same goes or the look o pavilions, which have to be attractive in theircolors and shapes (1959, 2).

gure 4: Postcard with Zagreb Fair rom lef to right: Pavilion o Eastern Germanyby Bozidar Rasica, built in 1964; Pavilion o heavy industry by Bozidar Rasica,

built in 1957source: Croatian State Archives

Te principles applied to the architectural construction o the ZagrebFairground would become later the construction principles o New Zagreb.As Marijan Haberle said, it is a question o the three economics: economi-cs o planning the time, which is always insufficient ..., the economics, thatis the purpose, o the object and, in the end, economics o price (Habre-le, 1959, 2). Furthermore, the pre abricated principle, later applied using

another material or the New Zagreb apartments, was important because


11/27


213

the specic pavilions had only temporarily served air purposes and werelater moved to other city locations, where their unction was changed. Te

structure was imagined and realized as pre abricated and de-pre abrica-ted, and then to be moved to a given location on Prague Street (Prakaulica), afer the exhibition (Dragomanovi, 1959, 3). Tis is how Aleksan-dar Dragomanovi explained his basic thoughts or the construction o theSel -Service Finished Goods Pavilion. Stjepan Milkovi, one o the threeplanners o the Department Store or Family and Household Exhibition,similarly explained the style o and reasons or the construction reassem-bled in the renjevka neighborhood. It was necessary to demonstrate the

possibility o ast and economical construction o pre abricated small de-partment stores with specialized shops on the sel -service (supermarket)principle or the commercial centers o micro-districts ... Te equipment othe structures was designed rom pre abricated elements. (Milkovi, 1959,4) Tere ore the Zagreb Fair, with its border location, not only demonstra-ted the new concept o modern architecture on the one hand and modes osel -service shopping on the other, but also, by being implemented into theurban abric o the Lower own (on Prague Street) and in the renjevka

neighborhood, it came into direct contact with traditional architecture.In the new iconography o Zagreb, the air took a solid place. It presen-

ted the city o Zagreb, the Yugoslav republic o Croatia, and the ederationo Yugoslavia. It presented Yugoslavia as a modern industrialized countrywith strong integrative orces, which was able to gather representatives oradically opposed ideologies in one place, and demonstrate its model asthe optimum orm o a political and economical system: communism withelements o consumer societies. Te air, then, ollowed the developmento Zagreb in its urban, economic, and social basis. Its orm and content areexpressions o a specic time and society, and it remains so today (Saj-movi, 1959, 1). Te extent o the airs signicance or the identicationprocess is demonstrated on numerous postcards with the moti s o nationalpavilions and the most modern products, as well as on pins and ags withthe air logo. Tis presentation o the air was a symbolic declaration obelonging to the developed world, in whose added value the citizens o acommunist country could participate. Ever since 1924, leaets about Za-greb had been printed on the eve o the airs; these also served as guidebo-


12/27

214


oks and, when the edition was sold out, new ones with some updates wereimmediately published. Tese were the orerunners o the deluxe Zagreb

monographs published afer 1945 (Kolar-Dimitrijevi, 1999, 320). In themedia, the air days lled the headlines; every year saw increased gures odomestic and oreign exhibitors and visitors rom all parts o Yugoslavia.Te success o the Zagreb Fair was also a barometer that showed tren-ds and tendencies aster then other marketing media (Zduni, 1968, 69).Although the Zagreb Fair was ounded to help the young Croatian capita-list class (Kolar-Dimitrijevi, 1999, 331), it undoubtedly became a symbolo communist prosperity. Te original visitorsindustrialists, merchants,and crafsmenwere replaced by the new categories o people: organizedgroups o workers, union representatives, youth, anti ascist activists, andso on (Kraljevi, Arabi, 2006, 160). Te mixed symbolic orms o systemsat odds with one another were quite common and were present in publiccommunication during the entire period rom the Second World War until1990, and until today, but in a changed language.

New za rebEvery expansion o the Zagreb Fair signies new urban changes in Za-

greb ( rnsko, Savski Gaj, and other housing developments), and impacts therate o economic development, the populations living standard, and shifs inits social and ethnic structure, and at the same time encourages new popu-lation movements as well as an entire chain o new economic activities and

cultural, art, and political events (Kolar-Dimitrijevi, 1999, 338). Tere ore,the planning o new housing areas in the southern part o the city was alre-ady implemented in the idea o moving the Zagreb Fairground to the rightbank o the Sava. In the background o this revolutionary urban idea, therecertainly was a very rapid and accelerated growth o the working popula-tion, which came rom rural areas to nd jobs in the numerous actories

ounded afer the Second World War (Domljan, 1969, 6). Te working classwas a legitimating basis o society; it was the ocus o the highest nationalinterest, which is why residential construction, alongside industry, was a


13/27


215

kind o indicator o social success. From the Second World War until 1947,104,397 apartments were built in Zagreb (Stipeti, 1974, 19).

Te situation in Zagreb at the time was airly specic. In act, the hi-storical center was almost completely built up, so it was vital to nd anundeveloped city area whose open space would enable the development ocompletely new urban planning, coordinated with the material and spiritu-al needs o new man. Te construction o Vukovar Street was the rst step,but, although partially residential in unction, it was just a testing ground

or preparing the real integration o the southern part into the city as awhole. Te jump over the Sava was acilitated by the in rastructure suppli-ed by the air; lling the green expanses with such housing developmentswas to demonstrate that the New Zagreb o socialist society remained to beaccomplished. It was estimated that this area would be settled by 250,000people (Kolacio, 1962, 1). Residential, leisure, work, and traffic issues werethe priorities that had to be secured. In this project it meant building ne-ighborhoods, micro-districts, and districts. Tis created an opportunity toclearly and unctionally connect primary and secondary units into a uniedurban whole (Kolacio, 1962, 5). Although the housing developments are very different, their main characteristic is to satis y the planned unctions.Cultural and social unctions were lef or uture times with a more lavishpublic li e, but have not yet been realized. Although planned or, a qualita-tive new value was not accomplished. However, the theoretical argumenta-tions that could be read in trade journals such as Arhitektura (Architecture)and ovjek i prostor (Man and Space) spoke in avor o new micro-districtsto make li e more human, with plenty o sun and air, with greenery andthe togetherness o the residents, whose isolation was almost impossible

(Begovic, 1962, 67).Considering that the population living in New Zagreb came mainly

rom rural areas, with underdeveloped habits o urban dwelling, the cri-tique o particular deciencies was lef out. Te voice o the pro essionalcommunity also praised the results o communist planning as that whichenabled everybody to live in a quality environment, and it emphasized thatunder communism urban planning played a much greater role than undercapitalism (Savez arhitekata Jugoslavije, 1962, 6). Moreover, the categoryo socially owned apartments (company-owned apartments or buildings


14/27

216


or indenite use by their residents) had a number o semantic levels: thepositive human relation o the communist system towards the worker, wi-

thout negative connotations or that type o resident (Frani, Korlaet, Vra-ni, 2005 199), wealth o the country that can afford this, and the solidarityo the workers themselves, who were ready to participate in public activitiesto assist such construction.

New Zagreb, burdened by economizing the production costs o the dwel-ling units, encouraged experimentation with new construction methodsand techniques. Te Jugomont Company manu actured the JU 61 system,which consisted o pre abricated concrete construction and replaceablealuminum skins. Construction was signicantly accelerated, standardized,and exible (Blau, Rupnik, 2007 260), and thus cheap. Te apartments werepopularly re erred to as cans and were conceived o as dwelling machi-nes appropriate or their inhabitants: industrial workers.

gure 5: Postcard with motives o Zagreb rom lef to right: the Stone Gate, the Ca-thedral, Lortrscak ower, National Teater, Ilica Skyscraper, Museum o the Revolu-

tion, the City Hall, Arts pavilion, University Alleesource: Croatian State Archives


15/27


16/27

218


ons demanded suspension o the construction and announced new biddingor the new structure (Vukadin, 2007, 231). Tat demand was re used, and

the building was nished considerably differently rom Fabris project, anddiscussions about its quality and its integration within the environment didnot abate until the announcement o the new bidding in 1990 or a redesigno the Music Academy.

gure 6: Postcard with Zeljpoh Building (S. Fabris, 1964) in the middle, NationalTeater on the lef and Lexicographic Institute on the right

source: Croatian State Archives

Tose controversies resulted in two parallel processes. First, there was a very detailed analysis o the structure that was created as typical architectu-re o its time, ollowing the ideal o Mies van der Rohe (Vukadin, 2007, 232)and ollowing the interpolation method o contrast that was characteristic

or this period. Second, there was an attempt to turn this architecture intoan acceptable image o the city. With no respect or argumentation clearlyde ending the position o the architect Fabris, the public had a negative

relation towards the eljpoh building. Tis negativity was even expressed


17/27


219

in a survey conducted in 1997, when the public placed the building high onthe list o places that aroused displeasure (Stiperski, 1997, 314). Although

the dialogues about architecture held in Otocac in 1962 dedicated special at-tention to the relation between architecture and the public, and emphasizedthe importance o the public inuence on orming public awareness aboutthe necessary support or progressive orientation in architectural producti-on (Divac, 1962, 3), the eljpoh building remained on Marshal ito Square,increasingly distorting the image o the city due to neglect and deteriora-tion. Te tendencies to integrate Fabris building, a witness o modern ar-chitecture and one o the rst buildings with a suspended-curtain acade inCroatia, into the visual picture o the Lower own success ully combines thetraditional and the modern. It harmoniously integrates two different archi-tectural and ideological languages, seen in a number o postcards that, sideby side with the temples o nineteenth-century culture (the National Teaterand the Lexicographic Institute), also show the eljpoh building.

the I i a Skys ra erTe Ilica Skyscraper (1959, designed by Slobodan Jovii, Josip Hitil,

and Ivan uljevi) was the rst building in Croatia with a glass-curtainacade. In addition, this is the only high structure (64 m) on the central

square in the Lower own, Ban Jelai Square (rg bana Josipa Jelaia).Te idea o a skyscraper at this location originated in 1929 (Mutnjakovi ,1959, 5), and there ore all the theories that the skyscraper is an ideological

counterpoint to the cathedral are awed arguments. A tender was anno-unced to build a skyscraper, and all the applicants offered to build a highstructure. However, Mutnjakovi believed that the vertical accent shouldhave been even bolder than realized, thinking that the creation was toomodest a breakthrough.

Independent rom criticism then and now, the Ilica Skyscraper has beco-me an urban accent o the Lower own, burdened with a variety o symbolicconnotations. In the media, especially during the communist era, it was oneo the most common postcard moti s, ofen photographed at night under


18/27

220


the lights o the metropolis with associations o its New York orerunner.It is its location that is ocal; aluminum glass construction, the most mo-

dern building in communist Zagreb, located in the very heart o the nine-teenth-century airground. Shining in the daylight, reecting the sun, andarticially lit at night, the Ilica Skyscraper, like every other skyscraper, was a visual ocal point and simultaneously a symbol o the modernity o Zagrebarchitecture and interpolation. Tis is why it entered the citys iconography;in addition to modernity it also embraced the content o tradition.

gure 7: Postcard with Ilica Skyscraper (S. Jovicic, S. Hitil, I. Zuljevic, 1959) at nightsource: Croatian State Archives

the universia eTe Zagreb Universiade, held in 1987, was not only a sports event, but

an incentive to renovate the citys in rastructure (Zeki, 2007, 299). Onthis occasion, a number o sports, cultural, and hotel acilities were built


19/27


221

in Zagreb, such as the Mimara Museum, the Cibona Business Center, theMladost, Salata, and Jarun stadiums, the Vjesnik ower, the bus terminal,

and the Dubrovnik Hotel. Other activity took place a well; or example, Re-public Square (rg Republike, today Ban Jelai Square) was renovated, aro-und 60 acades were re urbished, a olklore estival was held, the Eurokazinternational theater estival was launched, and new galleries were opened.Te entirety was a program o social in rastructure with the aim o beinga oundation or development o the city and the country as a whole (Pavi,1987, 23). Trough such broadly set goals o the Universiade, Yugosla- via sought to overcome a signicant economic crisis and present itsel in

an international context as an economic power to be contended with. TeUniversiade was marked by very intense positive political maneuvers thatnot only rein orced the notion o brotherhood and unity, but also involveda very extensive building program to beauti y the citys image.

gure 8: Pin with the Universiade mascot Zagi, designed by Nedjeljko Dragi

source: I. Podnar


20/27

222


o promote this huge sports event, in addition to designing the mascotZagi, which was disseminated in all possible media rom toys and pins to

acades and ags, very intensive promotion was organized or every newstructure built or this occasion. Tese automatically gained symbolic me-aning and assumed iconic status. Numerous postcards with the Cibona o-wer and the Dubrovnik Hotel were printed; pins were made with the gureo Zagi, the Volleyball Club, and so on. Te Universiade became a very po-wer ul symbol o Zagreb, and all the structures and activity that it createdbecame a permanent reminder o this international success. In 1987, onlythree years be ore the disintegration o Yugoslavia, this event was used as an

attempt to attain national cohesion and to obscure Yugoslavias enormouseconomic problems. In this situation Zagreb, although at the time only acapital o a Yugoslav republic, was able to bring together economic, in ra-structure, sports, and cultural actors, pointing to its uture as a metropolis.

gure 9: Pin with moti o Zagisource: I. Podnar

con sionTe metropolitan character o Zagreb, observed in the period o its se-

cond modernization, is identied through the parallel processes o creatingnew and nourishing inherited symbolic orms that coexist as complemen-tary systems in a social groups awareness. Te rst modernization, duringprewar capitalism, announced the ormation o this uture metropolis and


21/27


223

there ore tried to create urban architectural oundations or its potentialrealization. It was absolutely clear that the development o Zagreb in the

second modernization would not take the same course but, by using al-ternative spatial orms, would create Zagrebs ramework primarily as anindustrial center directed towards an urban establishment, synchronizedwith all other industrial cities in Yugoslavia.

By contextualizing the general aspirations o spatial ormation, Zagrebconstructed a combined model in a dialogue with the old and new, thecity-block and ree plan, communist and capitalist, to create a very specicidentity system. Tis system can be recognized in a wide acceptance o di -

erences: Zagreb is equally dened by the Stone Gate, the cathedral, and St.Marks Church, as well as by the City Hall, the Ilica Skyscraper, the ZagrebFairground, the Open University, New Zagreb, and so on. Te symbolic

orms o different social systems, at least in their secondary presentations,gained a similar level o communicational requency. However, at the sametime it should be remembered that all the propaganda instruments, espe-cially afer the Second World War, were in the hands o the ruling class,and there ore it is hard to assume what the real extent was o the level o

symbolic integration o both models.Excluding this actor, and basing the analysis on concrete material, the

tendency o new architectural orms as bearers o quite clear ideology tobuild upon the symbolic capital already present is completely evident. Tisis how many interesting derivatives were created, such as Zagrebs traditi-onal coat o arms, to which a red ve-pointed star was added, or postcardsthat together with the National Teater and Lotrak ower depict theskyscrapers in New Zagreb, aculties rom University Mall, City Hall, andother elements. raditional symbols are still dominant in these pastiches,but the newly established ones can certainly be seen alongside them. Inmost tourism material, Zagreb is still presented as a medieval and ninete-enth-century city. A small portion o this material explicitly rein orces thenew ideological gures: postcards with actory chimneys, workers demon-strations, marching officers, pins showing the new highway or the Pioneer

own (Pionirski grad ) communist youth camp, and so on.


22/27

224


Te identity systems o every specic time are materialized in urbanorms, and in their continuance their meanings are always newly interpre-

ted. Te communist period cultivated a relatively negative relation towardsthe urban and architectural shapes that preceded it, which was mani estedtowards the space o the Lower own, whereas the Upper own remainedoutside the ideological discourse despite the act that churches and stateinstitutions are located there. However, systems are created as continuities,which is why some periods simply cannot be lef out but, based on theiridentications, those symbolic constructs that least differ rom the desiredones should be selected. Tis method enables maximum participation in

building new identity systems, the aim o which is to create urban icons.Te development o Vukovar Street, the Zagreb Fairground, or New Zagrebwas in a continuous dialogue with the city on the lef bank o Sava. Evenin orm, the views towards the old city center were not closed off, but therewas an attempt to produce a positive dialogue and mutual affirmation inthe identication o contemporary Zagreb.

gure 10: Pin with the sign Building Zagreb across Savasource: I. Podnar

For this analysis, tourism propaganda materials such as postcards andpins were chosen that were most accessible to broad social classes and inwhose production aesthetic criteria stood behind the silent language o ide-ology and state marketing. Apparently these benign, very mundane, and

cheap souvenirs were the ideal agents o communication, and their simple


23/27


225

visual language was very understandable. However, as ofen is within thenormal, ordinary, and acceptable, those unquestioned categories beca-

me signs and images o more complex relations in the context o a specictime and space. While viewing the postcards and pins with moti s o Za-greb, still nonexistent symbolic elements were revealed: the buildings onVukovar Street, parts o the Zagreb Fairground and New Zagreb, and theglass structures o the eljpoh building and the Ilica Skyscraper. Tey wereshown independently or in combination with traditional moti s.

Pins are, however, the souvenirs that are most ofen connected with thelogos o Yugoslav economic giants. Tey were equally tting as small-sca-le posters with messages or symbols re erring to the construction o NewZagreb or individual structures created or the Universiade, and the logoso the Zagreb Fair, which simultaneously unctioned as an economic, archi-tectural, and urban entity. Tese pins would not only be attractive marke-ting or a specic industry, but marketing o specic urban politics.

Te postcards and pins with Zagreb moti s rom the communist periodthemselves present a set o new urban moti s that, via integration withinthe content o the most requent visual materials, precisely aimed at posi-tioning them as the new iconic places. By cataloguing and analyzing thosenew moti s, an integral image is derived, showing what Zagreb consideredits identity rom the end o the Second World War until 1990. Te materialsdemonstrate that the identity o Zagreb by no means denied its traditionalsymbolic places, but that there were attempts to add a new set o urbansigns to its existing symbolic capital.

REfERENcES

Bakrac, Boris. O poslijeratnoj stambenoj izgradnji u socialistikoj republi-ci Hrvatskoj. Arhitektura149 (1974): 4.

Begovic, Miroslav. Dinamika ivota, prostora i arhitekture.ovjek i pro-stor 107 (1962): 67.


24/27

226


Blau, Eve, and Ivan Rupnik.Project Zagreb: ransition as Condition, Strate- gy, Practice. Barcelona: Actar, 2007.

Divac, Olga. Arhitektura i javnost.ovjek i prostor 117 (1962): 3.Domljan, arko. Poslijeratna arhitektura u Hrvatskoj.ivot umjetnosti10(1969): 445.

Dragomanovi, Aleksandar. Zagrebaki velesajam intervju.ovjek i prostor82 (1959): 2.

Frani, in Sven, Luka Korlaet, and Dubravla Vrani. Prilog analizi stam-Prilog analizi stam-benih politika i planske stanogradnje Nizozemske i Hrvatske.Prostor 13.2 (2005): 196206.

Habrele, Marijan. Zagrebaki velesajam intervju.ovjek i prostor82(1959): 12.Ivankovi, Vedran. Moskovski boulevard Ulica grada Vukovara u Zagre-Moskovski boulevard Ulica grada Vukovara u Zagre-

bu 1945.-1956. godine.Prostor 14.2 (2006): 17895.Kolacio, Zdenko. Juni Zagreb.ovjek i prostor 116 (1962): 15.Kolar-Dimitrijevi, Mira. Projekt povijesti Zagrebakog velesajma iz 1967.

godine: u povodu90-godinjice Velesajma.asopis za suvremenu povijest 31.2 (1999): 31939.

Kraljevi, Iva, and Goran Arabi. Zagreb Fair in 1947.: Te First Fair ra-de Exhibition in the Post-War Yugoslavia [sic]. asopis za suvremenu povijest . 2.1 (2006): 15364.

Milkovi, Stjepan. Zagrebaki velesajam intervju.ovjek i prostor82(1959): 4.

Mohorovii, Andrija. Analiza historijsko-urbanistikog razvoja gradaZagreba.Rad Jugoslavenske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti (1952):2752.

Mutnjakovi, Andrija. Zagrebaki neboder.ovjek i prostor 92 (1959):13.

Pavi, Nino. Velika predstava moe poeti, Zagreb je ve pobijednik.Vje-snik14302 (1987): 23.

Petrovi, Branko. Bio sam posjetilac kraj 17520. Izmeu htjenja, moguno-sti i kreativne snage.ovjek i prostor54 (1956): 1.

Raica, Boidar. Razgovor s projektantom ing. arh. Boidarom Raicom.ovjek i prostor 67 (1957): 16.


25/27


227

Raica, Boidar. Zagrebaki velesajam intervju.ovjek i prostor82(1959): 12.

Razgovor s projektantom ing. arh. Boidarom Raicom.ovjek i prostor 67.4 (1957): 16.Richter, Vjenceslav. Jo dva urbanistika problema grada Zagreba.ovjek

i prostor82 (1959): 1.Rogi, Ivan. Te Metropolitan moves o the First Modernization. u: Pro-

ject Zgareb (Eve Blau i Ian Rupnik) (2007): 3941.Sajmovi.ovjek i prostor82 (1959): 1.Savez arhitekata Jugoslavije. Otvorena pitanja arhitekture i urbanizma.

ovjek i prostor 116 (1962): 6.Stiperski, Zoran. Mjesta u Zagrebu - sinonimi za ugodu i neugodu.Prostor 5.2 (1997): 30720.

Stipeti, Davor. Stambena arhitektura ili arhitektura stambene krize. Ar-hitektura149 (1974): 1920.

Vukadin, Ana. Gradnja poslovne zgradeeljpoh (Ferimport) na rgumarala ita u Zagrebu.Prostor 15.2 (2007): 22435.

Zagrebaki velesajam.ovijek i prostor 67.4 (1957): 5.

Zduni, Drago. (ed.).Zagreb: Te Fair City . Zagreb: Pomurski tisk, 1986.Zeki, Jasenko. Univerzijada 87. - drugi ilirski preporod.asopis za su-vremenu povijest 39.2 (2007): 299318.


26/27

228


pOdOBA zAgREBA KOt dRugE mEtROpOlE SfRj

Kljune besede : urbane ikone, urbanistini razvoj povojnega Zagreba,modernizem v arhitekturi, zagrebke vedute na raz-glednicah, simboline podobe Zagreba na znakah

Povzetek

Raziskava odpira pogled na dinamiko urbanega razvoja Zagreba kotmetropole v socialistini dobi, kakor se kae na izbranem iroko dosto-pnem (v veliki meri turistino obeleenem) likovnem materialu, kot sorazglednice in znake. Z analizo motivov, ki se v tovrstnem materialu po- javljajo kot najbolj reprezentativne podobe Zagreba v doloenih obdobjih,tudija razkriva ideoloke vidike, ki se skrivajo tako v izboru motivov kot v njihovi predstavitvi.

V zgodnjem povojnem obdobju sta bila v Zagrebu realizirana dva veli-ka urbanistina projekta:Ulica grada Vukovara, reprezentativni center po-membnih vladnih, administrativnih in kulturnikih stavb, ter razstavinikompleksZagrebkega velesejma, s katerim je bil storjen radikalen korak v iritvi mesta v juni smeri in izgradnji Novega Zagreba na desnem bre-gu Save. a dva revolucionarna projekta sta morala unkcionirati v okvi-ru aktualnega politinega diskurza, hkrati pa je bilo potrebno sprejetje sstrani najire drubene s ere delavskega razreda. Abstraktna arhitek-turna govorica modernizma je bila za veji del te drubene s ere (ki je bilado nedavnega preteno ruralnega znaaja) teko sprejemljiva. Manji delprebivalstva je imel drugano socialno poreklo to so bili meani, ki soiveli v starem mestnem jedru. o je zanje predstavljalo pravi Zagreb,zato so bili do novonastalih urbanistinih projektov zadrani iz druga-nega razloga. Naloga iroko zastavljene medijske kampanje je bila torejnove podobe Zagreba pribliati obema skupinama in vzpodbuditi procesprepoznavanja novih urbanistinih projektov kot njunega mesta spod-bujati identikacijo prebivalcev s konceptom mesta, ki je vpeto v sodobneurbanistine tokove.


27/27


Da bi uspeno implementirali nove simboline podobe Zagreba v dru-beno zavest meanov, so njihovi snovalci uporabili preizkuene mehaniz-

me medijske propagande. Prizadevali so si, da bi postale im bolj vidne tudiza tiste, ki ne ivijo v njihovi bliini. Hkrati so jih premiljeno povezovaliz mestnimi znamenitostmi, ki so e bile vsesplono sprejete kot ikonine,in to z namenom povzdigniti jih na isto raven oziroma jim dodeliti ena-ko simbolino vrednost. Rezultat je bil indikativen izbor urbanih vedut,s katerimi so poskuali vizualizirati idejo Zagreba kot prestolnice ene odrepublik SFRJ Zagreb, ki je urbano sredie s pomembnimi spomenikiiz razlinih zgodovinskih obdobij, od srednjega veka do najnoveje dobe,

hkrati pa napredno evropsko mesto, ki v polni meri sledi sodobnim tren-dom arhitekturnega in urbanistinega razvoja.

Z natannim sledenjem upodobitev Zagreba na razglednicah in znakah v asu socializma se vzpostavi zemljevid, ki jasno razkriva prioritete splo-nega urbanistinega razvoja tako v velikem merilu kot v posameznih de-tajlih: od celih mestnih etrti, kot sta Zagrebki velesejem in Novi Zagreb,do enako indikativnih posaminih interpolacij, kot sta stavba Ferimportain nebotinik na Ilici. Vsi ti projekti so imeli izjemno velik vpliv na dru-

beno okolje, saj so vnesli nova unkcionalna in estetska merila, obenem paposredovali ideoloke, politine in kulturne vrednote. Njihovo razirjanje vobliki razglednic in znak je unkcioniralo kot oblika tihe, vendar uspenepropagande nove vizualne in idejne podobe Zagreba kot metropole, ki za- vestno gradi lastno identiteto.

ivana podnar the image of zagreb as a second metropolis yugoslavia

Documents