Page 27 - Studia Universitatis Hereditati, vol 13(1) (2025)
P. 27

Patriotic War in Soviet history) as a reconstruc-  and Taras 1993). The crowds came together in
               tion strategy (Khmel-Nitskii 2006). In other cit-  front of the governmental buildings and main
               ies like Yerevan, Kyiv, and Belarus, Stalinist ar-  squares, showed their renewed remonstration
               chitecture transformed the city’s image with   against the central authority in public, and pro-
               interpretations and influences from vernacular   duced new narratives in their fight for liberty.
               structures and architecture, although each pro-  Being recorded extensively by the media chan-
               ject was strictly controlled and decided by the   nels, these crowds and their protests became the
               central government officials.               base for the national collective memory and the
                   Various state and party institutions oversaw   heroic saga of the successor states (Grigorevna et
               and directed urban development.    The Com-  al. 2019).
               missariat of the Municipal Economy (NKKKh       The next phase of these politics focused on
               RSFSR) and its subordinate bodies, such as the   erasing their dark past and decommunising their
               Main Architecture and Planning Administra-  culture and material traces. Some models com-   27
               tion (GlavAPU), ensured plans aligned with   monly observed in the post-Soviet landscape in-
               state policies and objectives.  Expert councils like   clude the writing of myths on the binary oppo-
               the Expert Architectural Council (EAS) and   sition between the Soviet enemy and a national
               the Scientific-Technical Council provided tech-  hero, the destruction of the Lenin statues (or
               nical  oversight  and  approval  for  architectural   other Soviet symbols) to replace them with na-
               projects.  Centralised planning agencies such as   tional characters, the renaming of Lenin squares
               Mosgiprogor and Lengiprogor created compre-  as  Independence Square,  Freedom Square, etc.,
               hensive city plans for various regions, working   commemorating their role in collective resist-
               closely with local city councils.  The State Plan-  ance, the transformation of public buildings in
               ning Committee (Gosplan) maintained control   terms of functional programmes, and the change
               over the planning process in Russian and Sovi-  of public holidays or parades according to the
               et governance (DeHaan 2013).  Stalin imposed a   new national history (Grigorevna et al. 2019). The Critical Position of Soviet Parliament Buildings Today
               uniform architectural style and planning princi-
               ples on all Soviet cities, using the Moscow City   Five Parliaments, Five Protests
               Plan of 1935 as a model to create a homogeneous   Although each nation-state followed its own
               structure that mirrored Moscow’s grandeur and   path and timeline in developing a distinct stance
               authority. Indeed, the parliament buildings and   on the legacy of the USSR, we aim to apply a
               Lenin Squares, built in Stalinist style, stand at   transnational  lens  and  compare  their  decom-
               the centre of many cities. They serve as a testa-  munisation effort in spatial terms, by focusing
               ment to the propaganda of their time and the   on the visual expression during episodes of pro-
               materialisation of the Soviet regime’s aim to   test that contributed to build crucial national
               be remembered for centuries to come. (Kalash-  histories.
               nikov 2019).
                                                           Moscow and the Constitutional Crisis
               From Dissolution to Decommunisation         (Black October) – October 1993
               Reinforced mainly by the  economic crisis and   The former House of Soviets,  now White
               political opponents during Gorbachev’s rule, the   House, in Moscow’s Krasnopresnenskaya em-
               nations of the USSR endeavoured to gain their   bankment alongside the Moskva River, was de-
               independence, national identity, and economic   signed in 1965 by a team called Mosproekt, led
               rights. The end of the union witnessed numerous   by the architect Dmitry Chechulin and inspired
               rallies and protests all over its crumbling land-  by Chechulin’s 1935 airport project as a typical
               scape. One by one, the nations declared inde-  expression  of  Stalinist  architecture.  From  its
               pendence and seceded from the union (Bremmer    completion in 1981– with a cost of more than 94
   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32