the contemporary dilemma of the cultural landscape. the case of iasi municipality

7/28/2019 THE CONTEMPORARY DILEMMA OF THE CULTURAL LANDSCAPE. THE CASE OF IASI MUNICIPALITY

1/9

HUMANGEOGRAPHIESJournalofStudiesandResearchinHumanGeography(2011)5.1,117125

www.humangeographies.org.ro

THECONTEMPORARYDILEMMAOFTHECULTURALLANDSCAPE.THECASEOFIASIMUNICIPALITY

MdlinaPaftalCiubotriaa*

aFacultyofGeography,Al.I.CuzaUniversity,Iai,Romnia

Abstract: The article explores the cultural dimensions of the landscape of postrevolutionaryRomaniancities,withanapplicationonIasiasastudycase.Therelativelyrapidsuccessionofcontrastpolitical regimes determined the development of a mixture of landscapes, sometimes atypical.Following the intervention of the state and the noninvolvement of citizens, therewere dramaticchanges in the old city centers, socalled historical centers gathering, generally, the elementsconsideredrepresentativeofthepopulationforthecity'simage.Thesezonesarepresenttodayintheformofwarpedspaces,ofdesecratedspaces.Startingfromtheresultsofsomefieldsurveys,thearticleshows that the urban landscape of Iasi remains above all a cultural landscape, this picture beingpresent in the collectivemind,with the ability tohideor at least to leavebehind all tributariesofmodernizationandglobalizationimperfections.

Keywords:Culturallandscape,Iai,Metamorphose,Perception,Image

Introduction

It talks about the transition over the pastdecade:economictransition,socialtransition,political transition, ideological transition. Apainfulprocessoftransition(KennethRogoff,professorofeconomicsatHarvardUniversity)thathaslastedfor20yearsanddoesnotseemto end too soon.Why dontwe talk about alandscape transition or a cultural transition?Passing from a specific communist landscape(a faderuralarea,noncustomized,organizedby the sameprinciples, industrial cities,withgiant industrial platforms and workersquarters) to a specific landscape of liberaldemocraticsocieties(dynamiclandscapes,fullof personality), the passing from a closedculture,which required excessivevenerationof the president, to a culture open to ideasfrom abroad, seems as slow as the transitionfrom a socialist economy to the marketeconomy.Amixtureoflandscapes,sometimes

atypical, in conflict with the physicalgeographicalandculturalarea.

The definition of landscape conceptproves to be right from the beginning adifficulttask,becauseasawardedbydifferentsciences and arts (geography, sociology,philosophy, landscape, urbanism,architecture, ethnology, ecology, etc.), itbecomes rather an apple of discord than aheadstoneoraplatformfordialoguebetweenstakeholders in its defining and building(Tudor, 2009). There is a high mobility andpolysemy of this concept determined by theemergence of different disciplines dealingwithitsstudy,atdifferentlevels.

In general, the landscape is defined asan area, a territory that appears before anobserver, thus becoming the subject of apainting or an artistic act, or subject ofcontemplation. Beyond this generalunderstanding, relatively elastic, gathers aseries of segmentary understandings of acontinuousconstructionconcept.

Ingeography, the conceptof landscapehas emerged since the nineteenth century

*Correspondingauthor:Email:[email protected]


2/9

MDLINAPAFTALCIUBOTRIA

HUMANGEOGRAPHIESJournalofStudiesandResearchinHumanGeography,(2011)5.1,117125118

with the starting point to German studies,Landschaftbeingviewedinitiallyasaresultofthe evolution of object maps. Gradually, thelandscape becomes the basic unit of

geographical study (Groza, 2003). Thelandscape freeofbiaswasreduced toaspacetype(mountainscenery,hillylandscapeoftheplains),whichchangeswith thedevelopmentofhumanand culturalgeography.Significantprogress on the definition of landscape hasbeenachievedintheVIIdecade,byusingthesystemicconcepts inschools like:Russian(byVB Soceava),German (E.Neef),Canadian (J.Racine and H. Reymond), French (G.Berstrand).

Geographicallandscapeisadualreality,equally subjective and objective: objectivereality because it contains measurableevidence,whichbecomessubjectiveinhumanperception. Geographical landscape can bedefinedasa"spatialstructureexpressedbyitsown physiognomy, individualized as a resultof interaction of abiotic, biotic andanthropogenic factors, valued differently,depending on how it is perceived" (Pretty,2000). Thus, the geographical landscape

represents the visual projection of a ratherpsychological relation that people maintainwith their habitat.A definition proposed byJ.B.Jackson(1984),highlysyntheticbutwhichhas the ability to embrace all aspects of thelandscape: geographical, ecological, aesthetic,socialandpoliticalaspects.Theseaspectshavethe ability to highlight the relationshipbetween vernacular and political, betweenfunctional and symbolical, suggestingperpetual and dynamic elements of stability:

"a compositionof spaces createdormodifiedby man to serve as infrastructure orbackground for our collective existence ".Inadditiontothis,wecouldciteA.Bailly(1986),whobelieves that the roleof landscape is "toseize the relationship between man and histerritory,"toovercomethemorphologicalandfunctional analysis of the space. "So "thelandscape, represents at the same time anatural environment [...], a humanenvironment (history, culture), a territorylived (vcu) of a group, a creative place(aesthetic, symbolic), constantlychanging"(Bailly,1986).

Whytalksomuchaboutthelandscape?What purpose is landscape? The answer ismultiple: on the onehand, it isnecessary intermsoflandscapeaesthetics,landscapebeing

able toprovide informationonqualityof life(landscape offered by a bidonville providesinformation on poor living conditions ofresidents,orreturningtothedomesticrealm,thelandscapeofavillageGypsycoppersmiths,etc..),on theotherhand, landscape iscloselyrelated to the image of that place, imaginethat becomes its business card that canattract, or, contrary, reject the visitors,investorsandresidents.

TheUrbanlandscape:betweensocialandcultural

"Thecity iswhatwedecide tomake itbasedon an objective analysis' (Reissemann, 1964).So,we decided to make the city a place ofcultural landscape transformation analysis,historicalandculturalcenteroftheRomaniancity, focusing on the city of Iasi (the formercultural capital of Romania). The city is the

essence of a nation's culture. Historicalchanges, cultural influences (and theRomanian territory has been subjected tosimultaneous influence over its becoming:Roman, Slavic, Austrian, Russian, Ottoman,German, Hungarian, Byzantine, French,American, etc.) territoriality, ethnic andreligious diversity, cohesion or segregation,political changes, are all part of the uniqueurbanlandscape(Voiculescu,2009).

Socialurbanlandscape

Arrangement for housing the urban areaprovides a social landscape. Using differentparts of the city, in terms of housing, overtime, allowed the succession andexperimentation of more types of urbanlandscapes. The city has always been thetheater of action of the twovectors, spatialsegregation factors: thecenterandperiphery.Initially, the center of the residential areas

surrounding it belonged to those with acertain social status, the periphery beinginhabited by poor and people without


3/9


HUMANGEOGRAPHIESJournalofStudiesandResearchinHumanGeography,(2011)5.1,117125 119

identity. With the onset of theindustrialization process, the periphery hasexpandedtoencompassthesurroundingruralareas, population included, who woke up

urbanized. Industrial siteswhichweremixedwith urban spaces, from the highest to thelowest,inthosetwowavesofindustrialization(1950and1970),allrequiredmanpower.Thus,increased migration to rural areas to urbanareas, peasants become urban overnight. Toaccommodate such a large mass of peoplegreatworkingclassneighborhoodswerebuilt,"urban tumors (Iano, 2004), that havecompletelychangedtheurbanlandscape.Thecenter has not escaped thewave of socialist

modernization, being constructed buildingswithout personality, in clear contradictionwith the architectural styles of the area, tohousestateinstitutions.Thecentercontinuesto belong to kulaks, while the peripherybecomesanarea for industrialworkers.After1990, the extension of localities, individualfreedom, financial power and willingness tolive inavilla,moves the richest families inachaoticsuburb,developedintheabsenceofacoherent plan for urban growth, and

formation of relatively rapid, socalledneighborhoods residential. Buildings indowntown and adjacent areas, whichoriginally belonged toJews (in the cities ofMoldova) and Germans (in the cities ofTransylvania) were gradually occupied by apopulation with weak financial and socialpower.Therewassuchanabandonmentofthehistoriccenter/civicspacesforcityconquerednew spaces.After two decades inwhichwewitnessed tothedegradationofthehistorical

andculturalcenter,wewitnessanewprocessthatattemptstoremovetheseareasofclinicaldeath, gentrification. It remains to be seenwhetheritwillsucceed.

Returningto thesceneof largehabitats(with reference to workingclassneighborhoodsherebuiltduring the socialistsystem) must be noted that they offer dullgray views, almost xeroxed, regardless ofdistrict/cityyoulook.Grayblocksofconcreteformwork,withasmany levelsaspossible(810), with as many boxes with matchesapartments, repeating endlessly, in a perfectmonotone.By design, themajor habitats arecharacterized by a high density apartment

blocks,children'splayareas,parksandgreenspaces being extremely low. However, theseareas were devoid of administrative andcultural institutions in order to create a

dependence on the city's civic center. Mostoften, workingclass neighborhoods weredevoidoftourist/culturalobjectives.

Immigrants (people arriving from ruralareas,employedon industrialsites),residentsof new neighborhoods, they brought withthem family traditions, social and culturalwaysofliving,socialbehaviorandaparticularinterpretation of space, the village, in itssocial way, and moved to the city. In thisrespect, it isvery suitable wolf changes his

hair but not his vices Romanian proverb,because the bourgeois transformation of apeasant title has not meant a change inmentalityandbehavior.

UrbanCulturalLandscape

Landscapes, in general, describe a history oftheimage.Theculturallandscapemeansareasin which the past has placed its stamp.Cultural landscape, such as the industrial

landscape, ispartof theanthropic landscape,the result of human creativity. Newly builtareas,areasthathavenotastorytotellcanbeclassified only social. Assimilated urbancultural landscape may have significantdifferences, depending on the typology ofphysical and social framework to which itrefers:itisapalimpsest,andakaleidoscopeofstylesandmode(Stan,2010).

Urban cultural landscape isnt definedoutsidethecity,itreflectsthepolitical,social,

economic,territorialstateoftheenvironmentinwhichitevolvesanditshistory.Each city is composed of several

landscape determined by the objectives andconstruction group and the formation ofrelativelycompactandhomogeneousareas.InIasicanbeidentifiedfivelandscapes:aspecificlandscape of historic center, a landscape ofcultural institutions, a recreational facilitiesone, an industrial landscape and a "bigHabitatslandscape.

Groupingthemostvaluableculturalandtouristic northwest center, overlappinglargelyonthecity'sciviccenter,determineusto perceive this area as being representative


4/9



for calling Iasi Romania's cultural capital.The perception of the landscape evolves.Landscapesupportsinterpretationsoftheideaofbeautiful,useful,valuable, the latterbeing

influenced by historical time, circumstances,ideology, etc.The cultural landscapeofpostsocialist cities in Romania has undergoneradical changesandnotalways so fair in theperiodbefore1989butespeciallyafter.

The old town center was the mostseverely affected, presenting today like amixed shop, with everything (XVII XVIIIcentury buildings and churches rigidconstruction of the twentieth century,socialistera, glass highrise buildings, iron

andconcretebuildings,allmixedtogetherandhavingageneralaspectofkitsch).In terms of cultural institutions

(schools, universities, libraries) they havemanaged to maintain its old sites and haveescaped largely specific modernizationcommunist and postcommunist society.Increasingthenumberofpupilsandstudentsdetermined to build new bodies that wereseen ina totalmismatchbetweenparentandnew construction building (geometrized,

impersonal,gray).Through its functions, thecenter isnotonly culturally but also socially. The socialdimension iswell defined, is linked to boththe historical past and the active present ,becausethatiswheresocialcontactsareatthehighest intensity, where the populationknowledge, in the most profound andcompleteway,thescaleandthedynamismofthecity(Lazarescu,1977).

Themetamorphosisoftheurbanculturallandscape

Continuing the above idea, that the urbancultural landscape is composed of elementsthat are considered representative by theinhabitants of the settlements, majoritygrouped in theold town, Iwill try topresentin a structured way the transformationssuffered by the center. Romanian Urban

Experienceshowsusthattheproblemsofthecenter of cant be approached than in thegeneral context of understanding the whole

urbanarea,beinganintegralpartofallurbangood or bad decisions taken locally ornationallyimposed.

The organization of this center is

conditioned by the geographical location ofthe city, its size and historical context inwhich it evolved.Culturalandadministrativecenterofthecitydoesntalwayscoincidewiththe geometric center of the territory,becoming theresultofavoluntaryprocessofurban development (the example ofConstanta,withanalmostperipheralpositionwithintheterritory,aseloquently).

The ideathathistory forges thepresentand that historical heritage of a city counter

socialist lifestyle stood to the vast socialisttownplanning programs.As a result, on theone hand, remove the items comparedwiththe past (buildings, mansions, memorialshouses,religiousbuildings),andon theotherhand, gave free rein to the application ofCeausescu's megalomaniac ideas in urbanpractice (Iano, 2004). Implantation of new"modern" construction in existing areas hasled to assault and desecration of theirheritage.

According to the drawings ofsystematization,inbigandmediumcitiestheyhave demolished the central areas, to build"civiccenter"inwhichadministrativepalaces,housesofcultureunionsandyouthandotherbuildingswith lessthanatypicalarchitecturedominated the new urban landscape. Theinterventionshaveoftenbeenbrutal, causingfunctional ruptures obvious even today, andevendeepenedby thenewesturbanprojects.Dependingon the intensityof these fractures

can be distinguished fundamental rupturecities (grouped by county residence townswhoseinhabitantsnumbertripledafter1966),citieswith significant ruptures (in this classbeingincludedregionalcities:Bucharest,Iasi,Craiova, etc.), towns with minor tearing(represented by small and mediumsizedcities) and townswithout functional tearing(gatherssmallagriculturetownsandresorts).

Centralareasofcitiesoverlap,mostly,tothe historical centers, in more or less happypreservationoptions, reflectingahistory thatretains only convenient episodes, being alsosupport tourism activities (Iancu, 2003).Central areas meet not only the positive


5/9



aspects (grouped buildings and monumentswhich tell us about the life and culture ofcommunitieswhose existence has exhaustedphysically,but still leftwith tangible signs in

town) but also negative, such as congestionand conflict situations (for example,inadequatestreettexturetothenecessities ofmoderncartraffic).

Whatwenowcalltheoldhistoriccenterit is the old functional core that preserveditselfinfunctionalurbanareasovertime.Thehistoriccenterisdefinedastheplacethathasaccumulated in a given time history, asubstantial amount of urban valuescharacteristic for the existence of such

community(Lazarescu,1977).The historic center is characterized byconcentrating most valuable touristattractions around the old city center. Theirposition to the old urban core shows theamplitudeandthemaindirectionsofgrowth.

InIai,theoldcityiscontainedwithinaquadrilateral bounded by the current tefancel Mare street (Broad Lane), AlexandruLpuneanu, Independence Blvd (HagioaieiBridge), Elena Doamna and Grigore Ghica

(Russian lane), the core city being in thePalaceofCulture(RoyalCourt)andCostacheNegri Street (Old Lane). The new cityexpanded in all directions, including in thefirst stage (XVIIIXIX centuries) Copouneighborhoods, Srrie, icu, Ttrai,Ciurchi,Galata,Pcurari,Nicolinaandpartly,inthesecondphase(twentiethcentury),wereincluded neighborhoods Pcurari (the newwest), Nicolina (the new south part, nowcalled CUG), Frumoasa, Poitiers, Socola,

Bucium,Canta,Mircea celBtrn,Alexandrucel Bun, Dacia and Grdinari, plus theIndustrialZone.

By 1940 the city has developed mainlyaccording the location and geographicalfeatures of the site: buildings along the riverBahlui were built on high ground portions,andthecitydoesnotextendtothehills.Afterthis period, these principles have beenforgotten,anddevelopmentafterthewarhadnot connected with the landscape and thehistoric city center (Horizon 2020). Iai 2011presentsanamalgamated image:oldbuilding(formerlybohemian,now sittingdrop,plusafewrenovatedbuildings)withcurtainsofgray

concrete blocks of flats, built during thecommunist era, modern iron and glassbuildings, abandoned industrial sites,industrialbuildingsandgreenspaces.

Goldenplatform"ofIasi,asitisknownin tourist language the area which bringstogether themonumentsaroundoldPrincelyCourt (1434) (Palace of Culture, Royal St.Nicholas Church, Dosoftei House, ChurchThree Holy Hierarchs (including thePhilharmonic building ), the MetropolitanCathedral, the Palace Roznovanu, NationalTheatreAlecsandri)canbeextendedtosoutheast /east, embracing also "the hexagon offormer or present monasteries " (Church

Barnovschi, Zlataust Church,White Church,GoliaMonastery,BrboiChurch,St.Sava).Civiccenterofthetownpartiallyoverlap

on historic center, grouping the stateinstitutions (City Hall Palace Roznovanu,Prefecture,PublicFinanceDivision,theCourt with a less typical architecture). Thedynamicsofthisareaiscomplementedbythepresence of banking institutions (BRD,RaiffeisenBank,CEC,Banc,BankMillennium,etc...), schools (V.Alecsandri School,College

of Arts), the business objectives (MoldovaMall, Central Hall, etc.. ), theaccommodation(H. Moldova, H. Ramada, H.Europeetc..)andfood(restaurants,bars,pizzaplaces,cafes,etc..),Travelagenciesandtouristadvice (Atlantic, Giramondo, United, etc),medicalcentersandpharmacies(St.ParaskevaMedical Center, Hospital of Obstetrics andGynecology).

Toaccommodateallthesenewbuildings(hotels, shopping areas) interventions were

required on the initially landscape, beingsacrificed even Gardens (Grdina Beilicului),fancy boxes, testimony to the city heavilybourgeoislifeofanothertime(theexampleofthedemolishedarea forconstructionofHotelEuropa)butalso theroyalornoblemansions(GhicaVod'smansion).

Anotherwayofaggressionofthecenteris itsmodernization. Themain reasonswerephysical and moral wear of built, historicalandarchitecturalmonumentsimpairmentdueto physical degradation and poor land use.Active framing of the historical into thecontemporarycenterofthecityhasmeantnot


6/9


7/9



underlyingthe imageofIaimunicipalitywasachieved using theWordle program (Figure

3). Wordle is qualitative data processingsoftware,availableonline,whohastheabilityto map words. The word fond size is

determinedbythenumberoftheoccurrences,as theword appears more frequently in the

textprocessingitisevenmoreprominent.The responses highlight the cultural

(94%) and educational (30%) dimensions of

Figure2.ThemappingoftheelementsunderlyingtheimageofIai

Figure3ThefrequencyofplacesassociatedwiththemunicipalityofIaiSource:Grozaetal.2010


8/9



themunicipality,followedbytheothers::28%believe that thehistoricpastof thecity isanasset for the citybrand image (the capitalofMoldova, and later of unoccupiedRomania,

thetownofthethreeunions,promotercityofthe1989Revolution),14%indicatethenaturalelement as being important in building theimage of the city (geographical location, theexistence of greenery islands inside the city,andof thebordersofwoods in the suburbs),8%mentionstheimportanceofreligiousitem(relics of St. Cuv. Paraschiva, theapproximately100churchesandmonasteries),5%believe that the economicactivityhasanimportant contribution to the image of the

city (the touristic, industry and commercialactivity), 5% remember the traditions andcustoms stillkept,3%mentions theattributeof medical center, of prime importance, toMoldovaand2%thehowtobeofthepeople(open,hospitable,warm).

TheimageofIaiseemstobeacomplexone (Table 2), with some contradictoryelements(youngcity closedcitytotheideasfrom abroad, etc.). We easily remark theassignedcharacterofaculturalcity.Alsowith

reference to the cultural dimension we addtheattributesof attractiveuniversity town, acity with special objectives, and a city thatpreservesthecustomsandthetraditions.

Conclusions

TheculturalcapitalofMoldaviawasa largeindustrial citywhich tends to become a big

bazaar, like a market town. The culturaltradition of Iai was interrupted by thecommunistregime,onlytheeffectofcitysize(regional city) succeeding in to keep itssuperiorurbanfunctions.Theurbantransitioninvolves a cultural transition to, by thereduction of the proletarian culture eventsand the emergence of the consumer culture(theconsumer literature,thecinemacity,thediscosandbars, thecitydayswhorise in thebad taste party). The cultural attribute does

not imply only the existence of significantpatrimonialvaluesinthecity,butalsocertaineffervescenceandacontinuityof theculturalevents (graphic exhibitions, painting,sculpture exhibitions, a high circulation ofcultural magazines, the festivals ofinternational fame, the goodmusic concerts,etc.). Returning to the cultural heritage (thenaturalandtheanthropicone),itisinafairlyadvancedstateofdegradation,therestorationactivities being initiated since the 1990s, but

unfinishedeventoday.Moreover,thereshapeof the urban space during the communismand thepostcommunistcaused fundamentalchangesintheculturallandscape,throughtheemergence of new buildings, to adapt theterritory to different kinds of activities,

Table2.ThecompositeimageandsometimescontradictoryofthecityPositiveaspects NegativeaspectsCulturalcity 97%

Attractiveuniversitytown 92%Citywithspecialsightseeing 92%

Friendly,warmcity 83%Townwitholdtraditionsandcustoms 79%

Safecityfortourists 79%Citylocatedinanicearea 78%

Anattractivetouristicdestination(68%)Youngcity 67%

Acitywhichhasamoderninfrastructureofaccommodation 61%

Citywithqualitytouristicservices 57%Aestheticcity 54%

Livelycity 51%Citywithsatisfactory(37%)orgood(26%)

recreationalopportunities

Highunemployment(87%)Citywherethelivingisnotgood 78%

Thecurrentmunicipalteamdoesnotgiveapositiveimagetothecity 77%

Theoldtransportinfrastructure,whichdoesnotsatisfiestheneedsoftheresidents 71%

Citywhichdoesnthave adynamiceconomy 70%Acitythathadsufferedbothduringthecommunist

andpostcommunistperiod 62%Closedcitytotheideasfromabroad 61%

Thecurrentimageofthecityabroaddiscouragesthebusinessdevelopment 53%

Poorcity 52%Atouristicdestinationtooexpensivecomparedwith

thequalityofservices 40%

Source:Grozaetal.,2010


9/9



therebycreatingobvious textural, formalandchromaticdisharmonies.

Theattributeof"cultural" inthephrase"culturalcapital"isstillanurbanmythbehind

whichtohidethemediocrityofurbansocietyin search of its parts, itsmarks. Fortunately,thismythisquitepowerfulandhassomerealfoundationonwhich toraise the foundationsofatrueurbanimage.

After the nightmare of destruction inthe latterpartof theCeausescueraand theircontinuing after the transition period,applications to respect "specific" of the citybecome increasinglyvehement.To those, thefollowers of "hard" modernization forwhom

the eclecticism and inconsistency due to aturbulent history can serve as an excuse tobuild anywhere and everywhere(Ghenciulescu,2008).

Despitethedevelopmentofsettlementsin the urban aspect is, at least in theory,coordinated by a general urban plan thatdescribes how to permit intervention andinherent constraints, changing landscape inrecent decades makes us define the urbanspaceasanareaoftheRomanianallpossible,

a place where beauty and ugliness coexist,authenticity and kitsch, traditional and toomodern. However, the landscape remainsabove all a cultural landscape, this picturebeingverywell entrenched in the collectivementality, able to hide any imperfectionsdependentmodernization.

Bibliography

Bailly,A, Racine,JB& Sderstrm,O 1986, 'A ladcouverte de lespace urbain: gographie desreprsentations et excursions de gographieurbaine', in Rpresentations spatiales etdynamiques urbaines et rgionales, Montral,UniversitdeQubec,p.133172

Drgu,L2000,Geografiapeisajului,ClujNapoca,Ed.PresaUniversitar Clujean,119p.

Ghenciulescu, t 2008, Oraul transparent,Bucureti,EdituraUniversitii IonMincu, 123p.

Groza,O2003,Deregeographiaesaulunguldrumal spaiului ctre teritoriu, in Groza, O (dir.)Teritorii(scrieri,dezscrieri),Bucureti,Paideea,268p.

Groza,O,CoudroydeLille,L&PaftalCiubotriaM 2010, 'Spatial coordinates in building thebrandimageofregionalmetropolises.Thecaseof Iasi Municipality', Journal of Regional andUrbanAnalysis,vol.II,nr.1,p.3 13

Haute Europe, MULTINOVA & Group ExpertIndependent, Strategia de Dezvoltareeconomicosocial durabil aMunicipiuluiIaiOrizont 2020, availlable athttp://www.primaria

iasi.ro/uploads/ORIZONT2020.pdfIancu,A2003,Reprezentare ireprezentativitaten

spaiul urban comunitar, Cluj Napoca, U.T.Pres,148p.

Iano, I2004,Dinamicaurban.Aplicaii laoraulisistemulurbanromnesc,Bucureti, EdituraTehnic,213p.

Jackson, JB 1984, Discovering the VernacularLandscape,Londra,YaleUniversityPress,165p.

Lzrescu, C 1977, Urbanismul n Romnia,Bucureti,EdituraTehnic,223p.

PaftalCiubotria, M 2010, 'Crearea imaginii de

marc aMunicipiuluiIai'BAthesis,Facultateade GeografieGeologie, UniversitateaAlexandruIoanCuza,iulie2010,Iai,182p.

Reissmann, L 1964,Theurbanprocess,NewYork,FreePressofGleoacoe,255p.

Samama,A 2003, 'De limportance aujourdhuidepasserde lamarque image lamarque',RevueFranaise deMarketing,nr. 192/193/Mai 2003,p.8081

Stan, A 2010, 'Cultur urban peisaj culturalurban', Urbanism. Arhitectur. Construcii.,vol.1,nr.1,p.924

Sillamy,N2009,Dicionardepsihologie,Bucureti,UniversEnciclopedicGold,336p.Tudora, I2009,Lacurte grdin,cartier ipeisaj

urbannBucureti,Bucureti,CurteaVeche,196p.

Voiculescu, S 2009, The Romanian PostsocialistCity: Urban Renewal and Gentrification,Timioara,EdituraUniversitiideVest,183p.

the contemporary dilemma of the cultural landscape. the case of iasi municipality

Documents