Transformations of the Oriental in the Architectural Work of Juraj Neidhardt and Dušan Grabrijan
A Thesis
Submitted to the University of New South Wales
For the Degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
By
Dijana Ali
Faculty of the Built Environment
The University of New South Wales
Sydney, Australia,
2010
In memory of my parents, Nadija and Teofik Ali
Contents
TRANSFORMATIONS OF THE ORIENTAL IN THE ARCHITECTURAL WORK OF JURAJ NEIDHARDT AND DUŠAN GRABRIJAN ...... I
Abstract ...... i
Acknowledgements ...... iii
List of Figures ...... v
List of Publications ...... ix
Glossary of terms ...... xi
Chapter 1 Introduction: Architecture and Ideology in the Work of Dušan Grabrijan and Juraj Neidhardt ...... 13 The scope of the thesis: the writings of Grabrijan and Neidhardt ...... 15 Scope of the argument: the role of architecture in creating a national identity ...... 17 Thesis contribution: architecture, identity and politics of culture ...... 19 Theoretical framework: overlapping fields of architecture, identity, culture and politics of Yugoslavia ...... 23 Thesis outline: the development of the argument ...... 29
PART ONE: DEVELOPING A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ...... 35
Chapter 2 The Kunstwollen of Bosnia ...... 37 ‘Not to find a new, but to show it anew’: Ple nik’s architecture and teaching ...... 38 Identifying the significance of Baš aršija ...... 52 Historic yes, but not significant: the problems of Islamic heritage ...... 54 The origins and transformations of Baš aršija, from the town centre to the historic precinct ...... 58 The Austro–Hungarian transformations: from town centre to historic precinct ...... 66 The search for the relevance of historic fabric ...... 7 4 The modernity of past: ‘Le Corbusier and Sarajevo’ ...... 79 The authenticity of past: ‘Turkish house, its sources and principles’ ...... 84 Conclusion: role of architecture in establishing national claims ...... 88
Chapter 3 Baš aršija’s Contribution to the New Master Plan of Sarajevo: the Islamic as Oriental . 91 An urban vision of a modern city: ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ ...... 92 The old precinct and the new city ...... 100 Searching for Oriental secrets ...... 102 The impact of Le Corbusier’s views ...... 111 Baš aršija: ‘surgery or medication’ ...... 115 The new satellite mining towns ...... 119 Individual houses: modern houses with Oriental parts ...... 125 Conclusion: The Orient of the old town and the modernity of new suburbs...... 131
Chapter 4 Bosnian Oriental as an Architectural Expression of Socialist Ideology ...... 135 The Yugoslav communist artistic agenda and a resistance to the particular ...... 137 The changing political context: Tito–Stalin conflict ...... 145 Tito’s search for ‘our’ architecture ...... 147
Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity: a ‘synthetic integration of the old experiences and new socialist needs’ ...... 149 Redefining the grounds upon which a nation is constructed ...... 155 The qualities embedded in Bosnian Oriental ...... 172 Contribution of Bosnian Oriental to Yugoslavia ...... 175 Conclusion: Architecture is a carrier of the political message of multicultural Bosnia ...... 182
PART TWO: APPLICATION ...... 185
Chapter 5 Transforming the Theoretical into an Architectural Agenda: the Mahala and aršija as Architectural Prototypes of Bosnian Modern Expression ...... 187 Transforming Baš aršija: a new approach to the study of aršija and mahala ...... 187 The values of monuments: abstraction, light and scale ...... 194 The values of the traditional house (Bosanska ku a) ...... 200 The pragmatics of Bosanska ku a: the secular values and rational grounding of the traditional house ...... 202 Transforming religious into secular values ...... 207 The emotional values attached to Bosanska ku a ...... 211 The dictionary: integrating the pragmatics and poetics ...... 212 Conclusion: the universal and the particular of the Bosnian Oriental house ...... 217
Chapter 6 Transforming the City: the New aršija as the Theme Park of Socialism and the Design of the Parliament House Precinct ...... 219 Baš aršija and socialist urban polices ...... 220 Past and present reunited in the New aršija project: a theme park of socialist Bosnia ...... 224 Marindvor precinct and the design of socialist modernism ...... 241 Historical continuity and progressive development of culture ...... 244 The building of the National Assembly ...... 247 Postscript: Baš aršija as a centre of collective identity ...... 250
Chapter 7 Discussion and Conclusions ...... 255 Overview and conclusions ...... 255 Contribution: changing formations of identity ...... 259 Contemporary and future relevance: war destruction and the meanings of architecture ...... 262
Bibliography ...... 269 Books and articles ...... 269 Selected bibliography of Grabrijan’s publications: ...... 282 Web sites ...... 288
Abstract
This thesis explores the correlation between architectural expression and political ideology in the work of two prominent post–World War Two Yugoslav architects,
Dušan Grabrijan and Juraj Neidhardt. It focuses on their collaborative architectural writings, namely ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ (1942), published during the pro Nazi government of the Independent State of Croatia, and Architecture of Bosnia and the
Way Towards Modernity (1957), produced at the peak of Yugoslav socialism. Both publications explored the relevance of the Ottoman/Islamic built heritage to the creation of a modern city but only in the latter did the authors identify this legacy as a suitable catalyst for the creation of a Bosnian modern architectural expression.
This change in position, the thesis argues, developed in relation to the 1950s nationalist discourse in Yugoslavia and, more specifically, the socialist led validation of the Bosnian Muslim community through the latter’s official re presentation from a religious to a national group. Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s conception of the Bosnian
Oriental expression as a ‘synthesis of old experiences and new ways’, similarly offered to resolve the long standing problematic relationship between the architecture of Ottoman origin and an architecture deemed appropriate for a socialist society.
i Architectural historians of Yugoslav modernism have recognised Grabrijan and
Neidhardt’s contribution to modernity and praised their capacity to connect
Yugoslav modernism with the international agenda. However, the specifics of
Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s vision and the ideological connotations embedded in it have not been acknowledged. This thesis addresses that omission and shows that while there had been earlier attempts to integrate the Bosnian Islamic past into architectural debates, Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s model of Bosnian Oriental offered a place for the Ottoman fabric within the new socialist architectural aspirations. The thesis foregrounds the important role that architecture plays in the process of construction, as well as destruction, of national identities.
ii Acknowledgements
I began writing this thesis many years ago. The process has been as much an investigation of my own identity as an academic research project. It was prompted by the outbreak of war in the lands of the former Yugoslavia. The losses of war initiated a search for understanding what was happening back home and the reasons for this, if there could ever be any reasons for a war. It took many years of thinking for this thesis to be finally produced. I do not believe I have found answers, but I feel that I have explored the relevant paths. In the process I learnt as much about identity as about the impossible mission of defining it.
In developing this thesis I have received help from many scholars and friends. The depth of my gratitude to all those is greater than I can acknowledge. But with my sincerest apologies for any unintended omissions I would like to thank the following people and institutions: my supervisors, Dr. Peter Kohane and Professor Jon Lang, who provided inspiration and guidance. Many of my colleagues in the Faculty of the
Built Environment, who gave support and encouragements, namely Dr. Judith
O’Callaghan for her constructive suggestions, Maryam Gusheh and John Gamble for their sustained interest in my work; Graham Hannah for technical support, and the
University of New South Wales for providing the PhD Completion Scholarship that allowed for some focused research time. I would also like to acknowledge the encouragements and assistance provided by Professor Zeynep Çelik in her
iii constructive criticism at the early stages of my work; Andras Riedlmayer from the
Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture at Harvard University; Dr. Peter Kre i at
The Architectural Museum in Ljubljana; Dženana Gološ and staff at the Gradski
Zavod za Zaštitu I Ure enje Spomenika Kulture Sarajevo, and Istorijski Arhiv
Sarajeva, Dr. Jelica Kapetanovi at the Faculty of Architecture, University of
Sarajevo, and many others. I would also like to thank Dr. Deborah van der Plaat for her careful reading of a previous version of this text and Dr. Senka Boži Vrban i for lively conversations about Yugoslav politics. I want to thank my brother Dr. Nazif
Ali for his trust in me and my aunt Jasmina Musabegovi for searching for documents in Sarajevo libraries. I wrote this thesis in the time left over from full time teaching and parenting. My gratitude goes to my family, who supported me in working late and at night. My love and heartfelt thanks go to Branimir uri and my daughters, Ela and Ina, for everything they have done for me, but most of all for just being there.
iv List of Figures
Figure 1: Territorial division of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia 1918 1921. Source: Lampe, Yugoslavia as History, p. 113. ...... 40 Figure 2: Illyrian monument, J. Ple nik, Ljubljana. Source: D. Ali , 2004. ...... 49 Figure 3: Contemporary view of the exterior of the covered marketplace of Brusa Bezistan. Source: Dijana Ali , 2004. ...... 61 Figure 4: aršija with its surroundings at the end of 19th century, Neidhardt’s map developed on the base of late 19th century Austro Hungarian map. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 59. ...... 65 Figure 5: Contemporary view of Vije nica. Source: Dijana Ali , 2004. ...... 72 Figure 6: Contemporary view of Baš aršija square with sebilj. Source: Dijana Ali , 2004...... 73 Figure 7: ‘Schematic representation of the new suburbs of the middle Bosnian mining basin’. Map of satellite towns included in the proposal: (1) old and new Sarajevo; (2) Ilidža; (3) Breza; (4) Ri ica; (5) Ri ica; (6) Vareš Majdan; (7) Zenica. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 272. ...... 97 Figure 8: ‘East–west artery’, an urban vision for Sarajevo presented in its relation to significant locations (from top to bottom of the drawing) that include: city gate at Bijela Tabija; bazaar of Baš aršija; King Tvrtko urban square; Stjepan Tomaševi urban square, intersection in front of Ali Pasha’s Mosque, Marijin Dvor and New Railway Station. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 239. ...... 99 Figure 9: Drawings illustrating the organic unity of terrain and architecture. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 225. ...... 101 Figure 10: Muslim house, drawing. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 215. ...... 102 Figure 11: Josip Vancaš: houses designed in ‘Bosnian style’. Source: I. Krzovi , Arhitektura Bosne i Hercegovine, 1878–1918, pp. 232 & 235. ...... 104 Figure 12: The Orient as inspiration. Face cover and veil, (zar and vala). Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and its Satellites’, pp. 212 & 213. ...... 107 Figure 13: Medina mosque. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 210. [Image republished in Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity]. ...... 109 Figure 14: Sketch of an arabesque. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 212. ...... 111 Figure 15: Design proposal for urban regulation of Baš aršija. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 212. ...... 118 Figure 16: Map of satellite towns included in the proposal. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and its Satellites’, p. 274. ...... 121 Figure 17: Urban development of Ljubija, with a newly designed church located in the centre of town. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 280. ...... 125 Figure 18: Neidhardt’s development of the ‘elemental’ architectural vocabulary of Bosnia. Single man housing project for Zenica. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, also published in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 317. ...... 127 Figure 19: Single man housing project for Zenica. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, also published in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 292. ...... 128 Figure 20: Single men’s housing project for Zenica. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, also published in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 292. ...... 129 Figure 21: Single men’s housing project for Zenica. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, also published in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 287. ...... 130
v Figure 22: Territorial divisions of the former Yugoslavia, 1945 1991. Source: Lampe, Yugoslavia as History, p. 231. ...... 136 Figure 23: Stage designed by Neidhardt for Tito’s visit to Sarajevo. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 321. ...... 141 Figure 24: ‘People build, state helps’ poster designed by Neidhardt. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 320. ...... 141 Figure 25: Structure of the book as represented as a tree. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 4. ...... 152 Figure 26: Drawing of a panorama of Sarajevo, showing an harmonious connection between the terrain and the city. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 5. ...... 153 Figure 27: Sketch showing the Mecca–Sarajevo link. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 60. ...... 163 Figure 28: Drawing of sojenica structures. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 4. ...... 165 Figure 29: Ste ak from Radimlje, Bosnia. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 19. ...... 167 Figure 30: Neidhardt’s sketch of ste ak, a medieval tombstone. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 18. ...... 168 Figure 31: Neidhardt’s sketch of ste ak ornaments and decoration. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 18. ...... 169 Figure 32: Illustration titled ‘From old to new pyramid 5 millenniums’. Source: Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’; p. 464...... 173 Figure 33: Bosnia as a place of negotiations, ‘Urban and architectural analysis’. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 322. ...... 174 Figure 34: Mosque, church and the monument to Lenin. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 238. ...... 175 Figure 35: House on the mountain of Trebevi (1947). Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 279. ...... 177 Figure 36: Tourism and recreation zones. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 484. ...... 181 Figure 37: Map highlighting important architectural sites. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 442. ...... 182 Figure 38: Division of precinct based on crafts. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 64. ...... 190 Figure 39: Division of precinct based on crafts. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 65. ...... 192 Figure 40: ‘Store beside store, handicraft beside handicraft’. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 66. ...... 193 Figure 41: Baš aršija as a production line. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 66. ...... 194 Figure 42: Monuments and significant structures of the old precinct. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 61. ...... 195 Figure 43: Beg’s Mosque, cross section and axonometric. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 83. ...... 196 Figure 44: A. Choisy, Hagia Sophia, from Historie d’Architecture (1899); reprinted in A. Forty, Words and Buildings, A Vocabulary of Modern Architecture, Thames & Hudson, London, 2004, p. 23...... 197 Figure 45: Lighting in Beg’s mosque. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 87. ...... 198 Figure 46: ‘Mihrab, pulpit, carpet’, abstracting the space. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 284. ...... 199 Figure 47: Neidhardt’s proposal for temporary shelters, 1945. Source: Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, p. 269. ...... 201 Figure 48: Embryonic development of an old house in Sarajevo. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 166. ...... 203
vi Figure 49: Furnishings and utensils of a traditional house. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 204–05. ...... 204 Figure 50: Neidhardt’s drawing of Svrzo’s house; layout and cross section. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 183. ...... 206 Figure 51: Inner courtyard and a room in Svrzo’s house (Svrzina ku a), opened to the public in 1953. Source: Muzej Grada Sarajeva, Stambena Kultura Starog Sarajeva, DES, Sarajevo. http://www.muzejsarajeva.ba/content/view/37/52/lang,en/ ...... 207 Figure 52: Abdesthana and banjica space in Svrzo’s house. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 138. ...... 208 Figure 53: ‘Modernity of the traditional house’s interior’, erzelez house. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 208. ...... 209 Figure 54: Modernity of the traditional home: cross ventilation and an interior of a mutvak (women’s kitchen) of the Djerdjeles family house. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 208. ...... 210 Figure 55: The city, aršija, mahala, house, 24 sketches. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 56–57. ...... 213 Figure 56: Neidhardt’s ‘Up to date architectonic dictionary alphabet of the carpet town’. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 324. ...... 215 Figure 57: Neidhardt’s illustration of a traditional interior. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 230. ...... 217 Figure 58: Baš aršija precinct during the socialist period. Plan indicating the chronological development of the precinct: A) Gazi Husref Beg’s mosque; B) Orthodox church; C) Jewish synagogue; D) Brusa bezistan; E) Rustem pasha Bezistan; F) Czar’s mosque; G) Town Hall. Originally presented in JSAH, vol. 51, no. 1, March 1991, drawing adjusted from the map used in A. Bejti , Stara Sarajevska aršija – ju er, danas I sutra. ...... 220 Figure 59: Model of Baš aršija. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 98. ...... 224 Figure 60: View of the Baš aršija proposal. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 139. ...... 226 Figure 61: The New aršija proposal: view of new artists studios above the Old Orthodox church (top and bottom left); proposed change of Gazi Husref Beg’s bezistan into a bar (top right); an interior of the new Town Museum to be housed in the former Sheriat (Muslim Law ) School. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 114. ...... 229 Figure 62: Interior view of the proposed adaptation of Brusa bezistan. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 56–57. ...... 229 Figure 63: Proposal for the New Museum of Revolution within the old Gazi Husref Beg’s bezistan that would include art celebrating ‘Liberation war’. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 126. ...... 2 3 0 Figure 64: The proposed gate to the Baš aršija precinct. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 109. ...... 231 Figure 65: Proposed Bogumil gravestones in the precinct. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 113. ...... 232 Figure 66: Interiors of proposed restaurant ‘Aeroplane’. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 294. ...... 235 Figure 67: Longitudinal section through the new Baš aršija. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 120–21. ...... 236 Figure 68: Plan of the New aršija proposal: A) Gazi Husref Beg’s mosque; B) Orthodox church; C) Jewish synagogue; D) Catholic church of St Anthony; E) new graveyard; F) Czar’s mosque; G) new public/cultural buildings; H) new residential area for cultural workers. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 117. ...... 238 Figure 69: Proposal for the Academy of Arts and Sciences of the People’s Republic of BiH. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 113. ...... 239 Figure 70: Collection of architectural ‘elements’ includes ste ak; traditional house and mosques’ domes. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 416. ...... 240
vii Figure 71: Images of New aršija, photomontage. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 120 & 121. ...... 241 Figure 72: Master plan view of the new Marindvor proposal. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 414. ...... 243 Figure 73: The map of Marindvor precinct and Sarajevo, drawn by Neidhardt. ‘Dwelling complex in Yugoslav Army Street (1966 47). First [example] in the history of Sarajevo [where] the principle of a spacious meander street is applied’. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 408. ...... 243 Figure 74: Source: ‘Graphic analysis of the elements of the urban solution’ described through use of keywords (from top) ‘zone’; ‘zig zag space’; ‘visual markers of heights’; ‘space’; ‘views’, ‘traffic’; ‘historic precinct’; ‘continuity’; ‘pedestrian zones’ and patterns’; ‘squares’ and ‘city as a carpet’. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 415. ...... 245 Figure 75: From top: urban solution for Marindvor precinct. Bird’s eye view of ‘Manifestation square’ and the parliament House building. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 410 & 413. ...... 246 Figure 76: ’Elements’ of the new National Assembly buildings: tower, atrium, shells, balcony and veranda. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 417. ...... 247 Figure 77: Design for the National Assembly of Bosnia and Hercegovina. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 417. ...... 247 Figure 78: People viewing the Parliament House building. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 410 ...... 249 Figure 79: Sarajevo, a postcard, published by ‘Svjetlost’. ...... 252 Figure 80: The Parliament of Bosnia and Hercegovina burns after being hit by tank fire during the siege in 1992. Source: Mikhail Evstafiev (photographer), Wikipedia. ...... 264 Figure 81: Rubble in Vije nica, former Town Hall and National and University Library building. Source: D. Ali . ...... 267
viii List of Publications
Ali , D., ‘Saraybosna Belediye Binas : Belle in Yer ve Ortamlar ’,in C.Bilsel, A.Ciravo lu, N.Dosto lu, A.E.Bulca, D. nceday , H.Kahvecio lu, E.Madran, S.Özalo lu, T.S.Ta mat, G.Tümer, H.T.Y ld z (eds.), Mimarl klar n Pazaryeri, XXII. Dünya Mimarl k Kongresi'nden Seçme Bildiriler; TMMOB Mimarlar Odas (Chamber of Architects of Turkey), Ankara, January 2009, pp.63 77. Ali , D., ‘The role of rational and scientific arguments in the promotion of ideology through architecture’, F. G. Leman, A. J. Ostwald, A Williams (eds.) Innovation, Inspiration and Instruction: New Knowledge in Architectural Sciences, Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Conference on the Australian and New Zealand Architectural Science Association (ANZASca), Newcastle, Australia, 26 28 November 2008, pp. 161 168.
Ali , D., ‘Political secularisation and architectural abstraction: the dialectics of the new socialist architecture’, Panorama to Paradise, XXIVth Conference of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand, Adelaide, Australia, 21 24 September 2007, pp. 1 13.
Ali , D., ‘Following the traces: the role of historical studies in the architectural design studio’, in ConnectED 2007 International Conference on Design Education, 9 – 12 July 2007, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, paper code 61.
Ali , D., ‘Dare to be Similar: The transformable house’, Architect Victoria, Official Journal of the Royal Australian Institute of Architects Victorian Chapter Print, Autumn 2007, pp. 4 5.
Ali , D., ‘Marindvor precinct and the design of the socialist Modernism’, in T. McMinn, J. Stephens, S. Basson (eds.), Contested Terrains, The Proceedings of the Twenty third Annual Conference of the Society of Architectural Historians of Australia and New Zealand, Notre Dame University, Fremantle, Western Australia, 29th September 2 October 2006, pp. 9 14.
Ali , D., ‘Dare to be Similar: The Transformable house’, in S. Whibley & D. Ramirez (eds.), Rehousing, UAL International conference proceedings, Urban Architecture Laboratory, RMIT, Melbourne Australia, 5 8 October 2006, pp. 46 55.
Ali , D., ‘Ascribing significance to sites of memory, the Sarajevo’s town hall’, in P. Somma (ed.), At War With the City, Urban International Press, Gateshead, 2004, pp. 65–86.
ix Ali , D., ‘What does place mean to me, everything’, Interview with Glenn Murcutt, ORIS Magazine of architecture and culture, vol. 5, no. 25, Zagreb, Croatia, pp. 4 33.
Ali , D., ‘Grabrijan, Riegl and the problem of Style’, Progress, The Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Conference of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand, Sydney, 2 5 October, 2003, pp. 1 5. Ali , D. & Bertram, C., ‘Sarajevo: a moving target’, Centropa, Journal of Central European Architecture and Related Arts, vol. 2, no. 3, September 2002, pp. 164 176.
Ali , D., ‘Site of Memory and History: Sarajevo Town Hall (Vijecnica)’, in S. Akkach (ed.), De Placing Differences, Architecture, Culture and Imaginative Geography, CAMEA, 3rd Symposium, Centre for Asian and Middle Eastern Architecture, The University of Adelaide, Australia, 2002, pp. 191 201.
Ali , D., ‘Transposed meanings: The Town Hall in Sarajevo’, Open House International, War & Cities, vol. 27, no. 4, 2002, pp. 20 31.
Ali D. & Gusheh M., ‘Reconciling competing national narratives in Socialist Bosnia and Herzegovina: The Baš aršija Project (1948 53)’, JSAH, Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, vol. 58, no. 1, March, 1999, pp. 6 25.
Ali , D., 'From Ottoman house to Bosnian style: Neidhardt’s design for workers’ housing in Bosnia and Herzegovina (1939 to 1942)’, InSite, An electronic journal published by Graduate Students at the Faculty of the Built Environment, no. 1, March 1999.
Ali , D., ‘Changing perspectives of architectural vernacular: Grabrijan and Sarajevo’, in R. Blythe, R. Spence (eds.) Thresholds. Papers of the Sixteenth Annual Conference of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand, Launceston, September 1999, pp. 1 7.
Ali , D., ‘Sarajevo and the making of monuments (1945 1992)’, in M. Ghandour, M. Labban, M. Lozanovska (eds.), Sites of Recovery, The Fourth 'Other Connections' Conference, Beirut, Lebanon, October, 1999, pp. 11 18.
Ali , D., ‘In the search of stabilising architectural principles: from the Bosnian house to Bosnian style’, in J. Willis, P. Goad, A. Hutson (eds.) FIRM(ness) commodity De light?: questioning the canons, The Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand, Melbourne, Australia, September 1998, pp. 9 14.
x Glossary of terms
Abdesthana the spatial alcove that traditionally facilitated the Muslim practice of ablution Avlija courtyard Basamci stairs Beg Bosnian spelling of the title bey or chieftain Bezistan covered bazaar for valuable goods aršija business district eif mood or temperamental behaviour Divanhana a wide, semi enclosed entry space in the Bosnian traditional house Esnaf the professional and economic organisation of the guilds Eyâlet governorate general Hajat anteroom Halvat room Hamam public bath Han hotel Hanikah hostel with a school for young dervishes Imaret kitchen for the poor Karavan saraj inn for travellers and merchants Kasaba small town Ku a house Kunstwollen an artistic expression embodying the spirit of the collective Kutubhana library Mahala neighbourhood, residential quarter Medresa religious school Mekteb elementary Islamic school Merak a feeling of irrational and leisurely joy and pleasure Mihrab qibla wall Millets system of self governing religious communities under the Ottoman government Mimber pulpit Muafnama a document providing the city with exemptions from taxes Musafirhana inn for poor people Mušepci latticework Pašaluk Ottoman administrative unit Šadrvan water fountain Sahat kula the clock tower Sandžak commonly translated as ‘province’ Šeher town Sejjidi descendants of the Prophet
xi Ste ak (plural ste ci) the gravestones generally accepted as common in pre Ottoman and early Ottoman times in Bosnia Tašlihan small inn Teferi picnic like gatherings commonly held by the Muslims Tekija , zawiya – a lodge of a dervish order Turbe mausoleum, tomb of the founder and his family Vakfija endowment deed Vakuf Islamic pious endowment
xii
Chapter 1 Introduction: Architecture and Ideology in the Work of Dušan Grabrijan and Juraj Neidhardt
The deliberate destruction of the cultural and built heritage in Bosnia and
Hercegovina during the 1992–96 war acts as a powerful reminder of the potency of architecture to carry a political message. Architecture’s capacity to embody cultural and political associations, even when reduced to rubble, was described by Andras
Riedlmayer, expert witness to the Commission on Security and Cooperation in
Europe. Referring to the destroyed National and University Library (former Town
Hall) in Sarajevo, he stated, ‘Rubble in Bosnia and Herzegovina signifies nationalist extremists hard at work to eliminate not only human beings and living cities but also the memory of the past’.1
This thesis explores the correlations between architectural expression and political ideology. Specifically, it investigates the role architecture played in the identity formation of post–World War Two Yugoslavia, focusing on two architects, whose writings and designs are considered to embody the collective Bosnian identity of the socialist period: Dušan Grabrijan (1899–1952) and Juraj Neidhardt (1901–79).2
1 A. Riedlmayer, ‘Killing memory: the targeting of libraries and archives in Bosnia Herzegovina’, testimony presented at a hearing of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, 4 April 1995, p. 51. Andras Riedlmayer was an expert witness to the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia, Miloševi trial, The Hague, 2003. 2 The spelling of Neidhardt’s surname varies and is commonly spelled Najdhart. Jelica Kapetanovi credits this to Neidhardt’s own insistence to assimilate and accept the phonetic spelling of Serbo
Chapter 1
Their concept of Bosnian Oriental expression – based on the integration of the spiritual values embedded in the historic Ottoman and Islamic built fabric, and the contemporary and modern aspirations of the socialist state – became recognised as a specific amalgam of local and international trends in architecture.
Together and individually, Grabrijan and Neidhardt have been celebrated as two of the most important practitioners and theorists of post–World War Two Yugoslavia.
Their ability to ‘penetrate deep into the substance of [Islamic] architectural and urban heritage’ is seen as central to their capacity to connect local architectural debates with the European modern agenda.3 However, while their contribution to this integration has been acknowledged, no discussion has addressed the nature of the relationship expressed in their vision of the modern architecture of Bosnian
Oriental.4 My intention in this thesis is to address that absence, exploring the interrelation between Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s architectural vision and the ideology of socialism. I address the question of how they justified the incorporation
Croatian language, thus transforming the German sounding Neidhardt into Najdhart (or Najdhardt). J. Kapetanovi , ‘Stvaralaštvo arhitekte Juraja Najdhardta’, (The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt), PhD thesis, University of Sarajevo, 1988, p. 11. This thesis uses the original spelling ‘Neidhardt’, as used in the credits of the book D. Grabrijan & J. Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity (Arhitektura Bosne i Put u Suvremeno), Ljudska Pravica, Ljubljana, 1957. 3 In 2001, in the aftermath of the 1992–96 Bosnian war, the Academy of Science and Arts of Bosnia and Hercegovina organised an event to celebrate the centenary of Neidhardt’s birth. The significance of this event and the high profiles of the organisers and participants were a testament to a lasting impact of Neidhardt’s ideas and work in Bosnia. Zlatko Ugljen, an architect and a recipient of an Aga Khan Award, in his tribute stated his admiration for Neidhardt’s ‘sixth sense’. In the keynote lecture, which opened the exhibition, Professor Ibrahim Krzovi described the occasion as, ‘an opportunity to express reverence for the name of one of the best artists in the cultural circles of Bosnia and Herzegovina’. ‘The Academy of Science and Arts of Bosnia and Hercegovina marking the centenary of the birth of the academic Juraj Neidhardt’, catalogue jointly produced by the Academy of Science and Arts of Bosnia and Hercegovina, and the Architectural Faculty of Sarajevo University, Sarajevo, 2001. 4 Numerous architects praised Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s promotion of the Islamic heritage of Bosnia, as is discussed in more detail in conclusion of this thesis.
14 Chapter 1
of Islamic forms within their vision of a modern and socialist city, and what kind of political and ideological agenda informed their vision.
The scope of the thesis: the writings of Grabrijan and Neidhardt
It took more than 20 years for the authors to develop their architectural and theoretical position. Dušan Grabrijan, originally from Slovenia, arrived in Sarajevo in
1929 to take up a job with Ministry of Building (Gra evinska Direkcija). In 1930, he took a teaching position at the Sarajevo’s Technical School, where he stayed until
1945.
Juraj Neidhardt’s architectural career followed a more international path. Upon completion of his architectural studies at the Vienna Academy in 1924, Neidhardt commenced architectural practice in Croatia. In 1930 he left Croatia for Germany and worked for architect Peter Behrens (1868–1940) between 1930 and 1932, and for Le Corbusier between 1932 and 1936. On the recommendation of his long time friend Grabrijan, Neidhardt took up a job with the Bosnia mining engineering company and joined Grabrijan in Bosnia in 1939.
Grabrijan and Neidhardt collaborated on two major publications – ‘Sarajevo and Its
Satellites’ (Sarajevo i njegovi trabanti), published in 1942, and Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity (Arhitektura Bosne i Put u Suvremeno), published
15 Chapter 1
in 1957 – and it is on these works that I primarily focus. 5 The first was produced during the early years of German occupation and the second under the communist government of socialist Yugoslavia. Whereas ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ presented the old as a burden to modernism, the Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards
Modernity argued for its contemporary relevance. The old urban fabric of Baš aršija that was initially presented as detrimental to progress was identified as the core of the new socialist architectural expression.
Importantly, while the publications are discussed in their chronological order, my focus is not the progressive development of the architects’ ideas. These publications represent the scope of Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s theoretical understanding, and this study argues that the change in their urban vision from the first to the second publication is indicative of the development of their modernist ideas as well as their growing awareness of the specifics of Bosnia’s political dilemmas.
In temporal terms, I am primarily concerned with Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s urban proposals for Sarajevo presented in the period between the late 1930s and mid
1960s. But my discussion both precedes and extends beyond this period by virtue of reference to the historical development of Sarajevo, as well as to issues relating to the later years of socialism. These brief historical digressions serve to capture some of the most significant aspects of debates concerning Islamic/Oriental heritage.
5 D. Grabrijan & J. Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ ’ (Sarajevo i njegovi trabanti), Tehni ki Vjesnik, br. 7–9, Zagreb, 1942; Grabrijan & J. Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity (Arhitektura Bosne i Put u Suvremeno), Ljudska Pravica, Ljubljana, 1957.
16 Chapter 1
Scope of the argument: the role of architecture in creating a national identity
Grabrijan and Neidhardt frequently stated that their interest in historic architecture was ‘not to return to Ottoman times or the life of that time’ but ‘to build upon the achievements of the past’.6 Tradition, they argued, was to be used as a vehicle for developing new ideas. In this context, Baš aršija – the historic precinct of Sarajevo established by the Ottomans – gained particular significance.
Bosnia’s Islamic origins and the particularities of its historical development were highly problematic during the period under review. Long standing Serb and Croat nationalist views, as well as Yugoslav secularist opinion, contested their relevance.
While approaching the subject from completely different positions, the ruling
Communist Party of Yugoslavia and the nationalists alike challenged the relevance of the Ottoman cultural legacy to the new socialist state of Bosnia and
Hercegovina.7 Maria Todorova argues that it is in the discussion of the Ottoman
Empire’s role that nationalist and Marxist agendas intersected.8 In the nationalists’ case, the Ottoman Empire was perceived as an obstacle to national (organic) development of culture. In the Marxist interpretation, the Ottoman Empire was
6 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 11. 7 It is important to note that the two forces did not have the same power or representation in the political arena of former Yugoslavia. Socialist Yugoslavia was a one party political system, headed by the Communist Party of Yugoslavia. While there were many different nationalists’ claims, which also changed over the course of socialist government, the most significant in regards to the Ottoman heritage of Bosnia are those of the Serbian and Croatian nationalists. They based their claims on the Christian origins of Bosnia, questioning the territorial integrity of the Bosnian state. 8 M. Todorova, ‘The Ottoman legacy in the Balkans’, in C. Brown (ed.), Imperial Legacy, The Ottoman Imprint on the Balkans and the Middle East, Columbia University Press, New York, 1996, pp. 45–77.
17 Chapter 1
seen as essentially feudal and backward, and therefore its legacy was one that hindered progress and modernisation.9
The absence of a well defined national identity for Bosnia provided a space for competing narratives to emerge,10 the most significant of which are discussed in this thesis. They are the socialist interpretation of Bosnia as a symbol of a united
Yugoslavia; the secular Bosnian Muslim, Serb and Croat articulation of a common identity for the inhabitants of the Bosnian state; and the historical and ongoing nationalist debates (both Serbian and Croatian) that denied collective Bosnian identity and the existence of the very notion of ‘Bosnian ness’.11 The dialectic between the absence of any formal recognition of the Bosnian nation and the search for a collective expression of ‘Bosnian ness’ became a mode of structuring the cultural imagination.
The urban core of Baš aršija became the subject of intense study for Grabrijan and
Neidhardt. In an attempt to overcome the limitations posed by its Ottomanism and to include this urban core in both Bosnian and Yugoslav national narratives, they resorted to a unique interpretation of the Ottoman and the modern. The vision of modern architecture presented in their writings and design work identified architecture as a force capable of negotiating the complex relationship between
9 Todorova, ‘The Ottoman legacy in the Balkans’, pp. 45–77. 10 In articulating certain dominant national narratives I do not deny the existence of multiple nationalist claims prevalent in post–World War Two Bosnia. 11 The term ‘Bosnian ness’ is adopted from discussions of the qualities associated with the cultural construct of being Bosnian, discussed in A. Buturovi , ‘Producing and annihilating the ethos of Bosnian Islam’, Cultural Survival Quarterly, summer 1995, pp. 29–33.
18 Chapter 1
modernist, nationalist and socialist/communist agendas of post–World War Two
Yugoslavia. And while the analysis of their work identifies numerous embedded contradictions, the significance of Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s contribution, it is suggested, lies in their ability to dissociate, albeit temporarily, the Islamic historical fabric of Sarajevo from its former colonial ties, instead establishing a secular and modern context for its interpretation.
Thesis contribution: architecture, identity and politics of culture
The 1992–96 war brought forward discussion of the significance of cultural politics in the construction and destruction of Yugoslavia’s identity. In an attempt to deal with the social and political forces that contributed to the country’s disintegration, an increasing number of scholars focused on the role of collective memory in the cultural processes accompanying the construction of a nation of Yugoslavs.
Andrew Wachtel’s book Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation is among the most embracing and ambitious projects of this kind. It considers the construction of
Yugoslav unity in a range of ways: linguistic policies and language; literary and artistic canons interpreted as supportive of Yugoslav ideals; educational policies; and the production of new literature and art that incorporated the various and changing views of the Yugoslav ideal.12
12 A. Wachtel, Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation, Literature and Cultural Politics in Yugoslavia, Stanford University Press, Stanford, Ca., 1998, p. 5.
19 Chapter 1
Although Wachtel’s attention is largely on forms of cultural expression other than architecture, he acknowledged the contribution made by Croatian architect Ivan
Meštrovi (1883–1962). In the period before and during World War One, Meštrovi became one of the leading representatives of a new kind of synthetic Yugoslav culture.13 Promoted mostly by the Yugoslav elite, this was based on the assumption that the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes were members of a single nation. Cultural expression that would represent this multicultural Yugoslav nation would thus synthesise the best elements of each of the separate South Slavic ‘tribes’.14 Despite the potential of this diversity to contribute to the idea of a multiethnic Yugoslavia,
Wachtel’s study presents only limited discussion of Bosnian artists and no mention of Bosnian architecture.
Some aspects of this deficiency have been recently addressed. For example, Amila
Buturovi ’s examination of the poetry and literature of Bosnian writers such as
Mehmedalija Meša Selimovi (1910–82) and Mehmedalija Mak Dizdar (1917–71) has revealed their involvement with debates surrounding the identity of Bosnia.15 In
Stone Sleeper, Buturovi discusses Mak Dizdar’s poetry and his use of the mediaeval tombstone ste ak in the ‘recovery’ of medieval voices in the imaginations of contemporary Bosnians. However, while her study challenges the view of Bosnian identity divided along ethnic lines, offering a view of culture built upon pluralistic
13 Wachtel, Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation, p. 54. 14 Wachtel, Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation, p. 73. 15 A. Buturovi (trans. Francis R. Jones), Stone Speaker, Medieval Tombs. Landscape, and Bosnian Identity in the Poetry of Mak Dizdar, Palgrave, New York, 2002; Buturovi , ‘Producing and annihilating the ethos of Bosnian Islam’, pp. 29–33; and Buturovi , ‘National quest and the anguish of salvation: Bosnian Muslim identity in Meša Selimovi Dervish and Death’, Edebiyat, 7, spring 1996, York University, Toronto, np.
20 Chapter 1
society and its ideals, it is still focused on literary texts. In this thesis I propose to add to the discussion by presenting Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s work as a contribution to the multicultural and multiethnic Yugoslav ideological agenda, and by extending the examination of forms of cultural expression to architecture and urban design.
My analysis builds upon existing recognition of the work of Grabrijan and Neidhardt as architects that connected the international modernist agenda with local architectural debates, bringing ‘the freshest ideas of modern architecture’ to the
Bosnian context.16 Professor of architecture at Sarajevo University and a recipient of the Aga Khan Award (1983), Zlatko Ugljen cited Neidhardt’s influence as crucial to his own architectural development. Neidhardt’s work, Ugljen stated, presented ‘the synthesis of the universal and regional, representing firmly the [ideas of] modern architecture’.17
In his Modern Architecture of Croatia Between the Two World Wars (Hrvatska moderna architektura izmedju dva rata), Tomislav Premerl, too, presented
Neidhardt as a major player in creating modern architecture in the Yugoslav territories:
It is through the work of Neidhardt that our architecture was strongly connected to the main European centre. He directly transferred and modified the ideas of Le Corbusier to our context … Neidhardt achieved the synthesis of logical traditional
16 Amir Zec, a contemporary Bosnian architect, in an interview with Emir Imamovi , ‘Mercator is badly positioned’, in Bosanskohercegova ki DANI, independent news magazine, special edition on urbanism, URBICID, Sarajevo, June 2003. 17 S. Roš & A. Rusan, ‘Interview with Zlatko Ugljen’, Oris, 3/12, 2001, pp. 4–31.
21 Chapter 1
elements and the new achievements, paying a special attention to the relation between the individual buildings, their immediate surroundings and the broader city contexts or the landscape. The presence of Neidhardt’s ideas in architectural debates between the two wars is felt today as an important link not only in building new spatial values at the time, but in linking us to the world and the world to us.18
This view was restated in the extensive anthology of Yugoslav modernity titled
Impossible Histories, Historical Avant gardes, Neo avant gardes, and Post avant gardes in Yugoslavia, 1918–1991.19 There, Slovenian academic and architect Peter
Kre i recognised Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s ability ‘to blend the qualities of the traditional house with contemporary trends,’ but without any investigation of such integration.20 Presenting Neidhardt’s own designs, such as the workers’ housing in
Zenica (1938) and the building of the State Mining School (1938), as ‘notable example[s] of the faithful transfer of Le Corbusier’s principles of architecture to
Bosnia’, Kre i maintained that the primary contribution of their work was its capacity to extend the international modernist ideas to the Yugoslav territories.
In 2001, in the aftermath of the 1992–96 Bosnian war, the Academy of Science and
Arts of Bosnia and Hercegovina celebrated the centenary of Neidhardt’s birth with an exhibition and conference. While still focused on the modernity of Neidhardt’s opus, the discussion recognised Grabrijan and his capacity to ‘penetrate deep into the substance of the architectural and urban heritage’ of Bosnia, and to integrate
18 T. Premerl, Hrvatska Moderna Arhitektura Izmedju Dva Rata (Modern Architecture of Croatia Between the Two World Wars), Nakladni Zavod Matice Hrvatske, Zagreb, 1989, p. 16. 19 P. Kre i , ‘Architecture in former Yugoslavia, from the avant garde to the postmodern impossible histories’, in D. Djuri & M. Šuvakovi (eds), Impossible Histories, Historical Avant gardes, Neo avant gardes, and Post avant gardes in Yugoslavia, 1918–1991, MIT Press, Cambridge, Ma., 2003, pp. 332– 73. 20 Kre i , ‘Architecture in former Yugoslavia, from the avant garde to the postmodern impossible histories’, p. 346.
22 Chapter 1
the Islamic component in their collaborative vision.21 However, no examination of that vision was presented and no indication of the importance of the political context was recognised.
This thesis extends and fills the gaps in the existing literature in two ways: firstly, it develops debate on the relationship between modern architecture and the ideological grounding of Yugoslav socialism; and secondly, it highlights the important role architecture plays in constructing identity, as well as in its destruction.
Theoretical framework: overlapping fields of architecture, identity, culture and politics of Yugoslavia
In bringing architectural and political discourses together, I use Foucault’s technique of ‘problematisation’; that is, I highlight the connections between political issues in
‘the historical and structural conditions which gave rise to them’.22 Accepting the premise of ‘discourse theory’, which presents all objects and practices as meaningful and all social meanings as contextual, relational and contingent, I examine Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s discussion of Bosnian Oriental as an attempt to embed the specific views of the Bosnian nation – its past and present – in the language of modern architecture.23
21 Zlatko Ugljen, in The Academy of Science and Arts of Bosnia and Hercegovina Marking the Centenary of the Birth of Academic Juraj Neidhardt, Academy of Science and Arts of BiH, and the Architectural Faculty of the University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, 2001, p . 34. 22 D. Howarth & J. Torfing (eds), Discourse Theory in European Politics, Identity, Policy and Governance, Palgrave, Macmillan, New York, 2005, p. 318. 23 For a discussion of discourse theory and method see Howarth & Torfing, Discourse Theory in European Politics, Identity, Policy and Governance, pp. 316 347.
23 Chapter 1
The work of British cultural historian Stuart Hall provides the theoretical underpinning for interpreting Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s architectural efforts in relation to debates on identity.24 Hall presents identity as a process that is ‘never completed’.25 A ‘process of becoming rather than being’, his concept is built upon an understanding that identities are:
... never unified and, in late modern times, increasingly fragmented and fractured; never singular but multiply constructed across different, often intersecting and antagonistic, discourses, practices and positions.26
Hall’s understanding of identity stands in opposition to essentialist views that assume a ‘stable core of self unfolding from beginning to end through all the vicissitudes of history without change’.27 He argues that identities are not unified, but ‘are constantly in the process of change and transformation’.28
Considered within the parameters of Hall’s discussion, Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s
Bosnian Oriental represents a model of identity that is demonstrative of the transient and constructed nature of identity creation. Their process of defining the
Bosnian Oriental involved ‘the invention of tradition’ as much as ‘tradition itself’.29
24 In his essay ‘Who needs 'identity'?’, Stuart Hall argues that the ‘natural’ definition of identity presupposes a stable core of the self that remains static across time, and has an origin, history and ancestry shared by people belonging to a particular group. Yet, contemporary scholars argue that the concept of a ‘stable core of the self’, or homogenic notion of identity, actually masks the plurality of positions behind each ‘identity’. According to Hall, there is a complex relation between these two concepts. Hall, in S. Hall & P. Du Gay (eds), Questions of Cultural Identity, Sage, London, 1996, pp. 1– 35. 25 Hall, ‘Who needs “identity”?’, p. 4. 26 Hall, ‘Who needs “identity”?’, p. 4. 27 Hall, ‘Who needs “identity”?’, pp. 3–4. 28 Hall, ‘Who needs “identity”?’, p. 4. 29 The term ‘invented traditions’ is used in reference to E. Hobsbawm & T. Ranger, The Invention of Tradition, Cambridge University Press, Canto edition, 1992. This text on nationalism presents ‘traditions’ as emerging through systematically; often institutionally, produced discourse and knowledge.
24 Chapter 1
It activated ‘the resources of history, language and culture’30 in a way that was evocative of the process of creating architecture as a form of art that is ‘constituted within not outside representation’.31 Precisely because Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s model of Bosnian Oriental is constructed within a specific political context it is important to understand its relationship to the historical and institutional sites from which it emerged, gaining meaning and significance.32 This relationship demonstrates that the search for identity is ‘not the so called return to roots’ but a process of ‘coming to terms with our “routes”’.33 By understanding the framework of Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s discussion of Sarajevo’s historic fabric, my aim is to identify the impact of the socio political context on their representation and on the meanings they attached to it.
To link urban and political debates, this study builds upon approaches developed by scholars such as Zeynep Çelik, Mary McLeod and Sibel Bozdogan, who have intertwined the analysis of urban history with the study of ‘urban processes’.34 Çelik suggests that this approach to urban history considers the diverse forces that impact on the urban environment, namely social, economic, political, technical, artistic and cultural factors.35 Drawing on Henri Lefebvre, Çelik argues that this
30 Hall, ‘Who needs “identity”?’, p. 4. 31 Hall, ‘Who needs “identity”?’, p. 4. 32 Hall, ‘Who needs “identity”?’, p. 4. 33 Hall, ‘Who needs “identity”?’, p. 4. 34 Particularly relevant to the theoretical underpinning of this thesis is the discussion presented by Professor Zeynep Çelik in Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations, Algiers under French Rule, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1997. Also see S. Bozdogan & R. Kasaba (eds.), Modernism and Nation Building: Turkish Architectural Culture in the Early Republic, University of Washington Press, Washington DC, 2001; and M. McLeod, ‘Urbanism and Utopia: Le Corbusier from regional syndicalism to Vichy’, PhD thesis, Princeton University, 1985. 35 For further discussion see Çelik, Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations, p. 5.
25 Chapter 1
method of analysis allows for the uncovering of a diverse set of relationships, inherent to the production of space, and presents an alternative to understanding space simply as ‘space “in itself”’.36 Çelik maintains that this emphasis on the ‘long history of space’, rather than on ‘chronologically fixed urban forms,’37 helps in understanding the ways in which ‘societies generate their (social) space and time – their representational spaces and their representations of space’.38 By examining the relationship between architectural form and the methods by which it is interpreted – both in the written word and through design – I aim to demonstrate the interconnections between architectural discourse and the ideological context within which it is produced.39
The relationship between socialist ideology and the specifics of architectural design promoted in Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s writing is thus considered within the framework of contemporary discourse on memory, history and identity. French historian Pierre Nora provides a context for the discussion of those relationships. He suggests that sites gain significance when they no longer form part of daily life, arguing that sites of memory (lieux de mémoire) emerge at points of rupture with the past, where the real environments of memory (milieux de mémoire) disappear.40 Often prompted by changes in social conditions, such a transformation releases a site of the specific collective memory attached to it, allowing multiple
36 Çelik, Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations, p. 5. 37 Çelik, Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations, p. 5. 38 Çelik, Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations, p. 4. 39 J. M. Schwarting, ‘Postscript’, in B. Colomina (ed.), Architectureproduction [sic.], Princeton Architectural Press, New York, 1988, pp. 246–53. 40 I draw from a number of essays presented in P. Nora (ed.), Realms of Memory: Rethinking the French Past, Columbia University Press, New York, 1996, 1998.
26 Chapter 1
interpretations. Consequently, a ‘site of memory’ emerges in an attempt to fix time and to stabilise the site’s meaning. While seemingly stable, ‘sites of memory’ have the capacity to constantly generate new social meanings.41 Considered within such a framework, Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s visions for Baš aršija present an attempt to transform the site by assigning the urban fabric new meanings, accepted and aligned with new socialist identity.
The study builds upon Benedict Anderson’s well known analysis of the nationalism and nation building process presented in the book Imagined Communities.42 Arguing that the nation is not a given historical entity but a constructed and ‘an imagined political community,’ Anderson presents ‘nationality … as well as nationalism’ as
‘cultural artefacts’. 43 By intertwining their architectural studies of the Ottoman historic built fabric within their vision of the Bosnian nation Grabrijan and Neidhardt offered to renegotiate the historical and spatial grounding of Bosnian nation.
In relating the individual experience of an architect such as Juraj Neidhardt to a broader socio political milieu, I am indebted to the work of Jelica Kapetanovi , notably her doctoral thesis. Undertaken at the University of Sarajevo in 1988, and published as Juraj Neidhardt, Life and Work in 1990, the thesis presents a biography of Neidhardt.44 It offers a comprehensive overview of the architect’s life, his
41 Nora (ed.), Realms of Memory: Rethinking the French Past. 42 B. Anderson, Imagined Communities, Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, Verso, London, New York, 1992, 13. 43 B. Anderson, Imagined Communities, 13. 44 J. Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’; J. Karli Kapetanovi , Juraj Najdhart, život i djelo (Juraj Neidhardt, Life and Work), Veselin Masleša, Sarajevo, 1990.
27 Chapter 1
professional engagements in leading European architectural practices, as well as the personal dilemmas and professional challenges he faced during his lifetime.
Permeating the account is Kapetanovi ’s admiration for both the persona and the work of her long time colleague and mentor, Professor Neidhardt. By contextualising Neidhardt’s work in relation to the critical debates within which his and Grabrijan’s work circulated – namely socialism/communism, modernity and modernism – my work here takes Kapetanovi ’s discussion a step forward.
Sources
This thesis draws on the following principal sources: the two publications written collaboratively by Grabrijan and Neidhardt, Grabrijan’s separately authored writings and Neidhardt’s design work.
‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, was only published in Serbo Croatian, and the translations of all quoted material are my own. The original Serbo Croatian has been placed in footnotes. The second collaborative publication, Architecture of
Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, was published in English and Serbo
Croatian, so the original English translations have been used (unless otherwise stated). I have also translated additional sources (unless otherwise stated), such as
Grabrijan’s articles in Serbo Croatian and his book Ple nik and His School, published in Slovenian (Ple nik in Njegova Šola, edited and published by Nada Grabrijan).
Again, the original quotes have been placed in footnotes.
28 Chapter 1
In the 1980s, Mrs Nada Grabrijan, the widow of Dušan Grabrijan, and Ms Tanja
Neidhardt, the daughter of Juraj Neidhardt, were engaged in a lengthy legal dispute over the authors’ individual contributions to the collaborative works. Mrs Grabrijan argued for greater recognition of her late husband’s contribution.45 While I recognise the significance and complexities of the dispute, I do not consider it relevant to the discussion presented here. I explore and re examine individual contributions in the collaborative works, and while efforts have been made to recognise the importance of individual contributions such considerations are not of major concern. Grabrijan’s relatively short stay in Sarajevo and his premature death at the age of 53 (five years before Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards
Modernity was published) in the end made Neidhardt the main advocate of the
Bosnian Oriental. Nevertheless, Grabrijan’s writing underpinned Neidhardt’s understanding of Bosnian architectural heritage, and Neidhardt’s own architectural design is commonly presented as a collaborative effort.
Thesis outline: the development of the argument
In summary, I argue in this thesis that while there were previous attempts to integrate the Islamic past into architectural debates, Grabrijan and Neidhardt were the first to amalgamate the Ottoman historical fabric with the new socialist culture in a single vision.46 This they termed Bosnian Oriental expression, and it was made
45 The Architectural Museum in Ljubljana contains archives of Grabrijan’s work, as well as the documentation of this court case. [Fužine Castle, Architecture Museum of Ljubljana, Slovenia.] 46 Particularly relevant is the discussion of attempts made by architects of the Austro–Hungarian period to construct a ‘style’ responsive to the specifics of Bosnian condition. The work of architectural historian Nedžad Kurto is most relevant: see his Arhitektura Bosne I Hercegovine, razvoj Bosanskog Stila, (Architecture of Bosnia and Hercegovina and the Development of Bosnian Style), Medjunarodni Centar za Mir, Sarajevo, 1998; and ‘Arhitektura Secesije u Sarajevu’ (Secession
29 Chapter 1
possible by the changes occurring in the political and cultural debates of the 1950s in Yugoslavia, and in Bosnia specifically.
I present a two part development of Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s position. Following the introduction (chapter one) part one of the thesis (chapters two to four) analyses the development of their theoretical agenda. It specifically focuses on the articulation of the relationship between the historical fabric of Baš aršija and the new city. Chapter two investigates Grabrijan’s early writings. It is in these articles that he identifies the Ottoman/Islamic heritage of Sarajevo as the Kunstwollen, a model of culture representative of collective Bosnian values. Grabrijan’s integration of specific Islamic forms within this vision of Bosnian architecture provided a theoretical argument for the place of this heritage in debates on modern architecture. This would later underpin Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s collaborative agenda. However, as the chapter concludes, the promotion of the Islamic heritage as representative of Bosnian collective identity went against dominant nationalist views, which denied the relevance of the Islamic past to contemporary Bosnia. The historical links between Muslims of Bosnia and the Ottoman colonial power, which brought Islam to Bosnia, problematised the future of Ottoman architectural and cultural heritage in Bosnia. The chapter highlights the contradictions in Grabrijan’s interpretation of this heritage as central to understanding his overall argument and the later collaborative works.
architecture of Sarajevo), PhD thesis, University of Zagreb, 1988. See also, I. Krzovi , Arhitektura Bosne i Hercegovine, 1878–1918, (Architecture of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 1878 1918), Umjetni ka Galerija BiH, Sarajevo, 1987.
30 Chapter 1
Chapter three analyses Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s first collaborative work, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’. This was an attempt to integrate the specifically Islamic forms of
Baš aršija within their vision of a new urban master plan. The chapter shows that in developing an argument about the relationship between the old precinct and the city their discussion begins to move away from the approach established in
Grabrijan’s earlier writings. They gradually abandoned the search for the authenticity and specificity of the old fabric, and ultimately presented Baš aršija and the people inhabiting it in a stereotypical Orientalist mode that highlighted oppositional relationships between Islam and Christianity, East and West. Unable to deal with the complex political and urban issues that surrounded the old precinct,
Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s master plan marginalised the heritage fabric in their vision of a new city. This position was in direct opposition to the views presented in their subsequent book.
Chapter four analyses Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, published in 1957, at the height of Yugoslav socialism. The chapter argues that the process of secularising Yugoslav society provided an opportunity for the authors to reposition their work by aligning their artistic vision with the socialist framework. In particular, a new political category of Bosnian Muslim – not a religious group, but a particular national entity – allowed Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s concept of Bosnian
Oriental expression to be contextualised within the Yugoslav socialist and communist ideology. The vision of the modern city presented in this book was grounded on the integration, not rejection, of the city’s historical fabric and
31 Chapter 1
specifically the Ottoman established precinct of Baš aršija. This new position allowed the authors, and Neidhardt in particular, to transform this theoretical position into architectural practice.
Part two of the thesis (chapters five and six) charts the transformation of the theoretical into an architectural agenda. Chapter five discusses the effects of the theoretical shift from ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ to the Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity. It argues that the emphasis placed on the rational and functional design aspects of the Baš aršija precinct provided the framework that allowed for the ideological separation of traditional forms from their historical associations. Once the old fabric was reinterpreted within modern paradigms, it was possible for Neidhardt, the practising architect of the two, to utilise this model of
Bosnian Oriental in creating some of his most prominent designs, which included the Baš aršija proposal and the design of the Bosnian parliament precinct.
Chapter six examines two projects undertaken by Neidhardt in 1950s – the New
aršija project (1953) and the proposal for the Marindvor precinct, which included the building of the National Parliament of Bosnia (1955). It argues that both projects embody Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s attempts to interrelate political and cultural debates. The underlying secularisation of the religious structures in the New aršija project, among others, and the insertion of non religious establishments in religious buildings only served to confirm Neidhardt’s desire to restructure the Islamic past to fit the socialist present. The chapter further argues that the proposal for the
32 Chapter 1
Marindvor precinct and the National Parliament of Bosnia demonstrated
Neidhardt’s insistence on presenting the Bosnian Oriental as a synthetic style, vested with a capacity to integrate the past, present and future of the architecture of socialism.
My conclusion, chapter seven, confirms that Neidhardt and Grabrijan’s design proposals and theoretical writings presented a vision of architecture framed by the identity debates of socialist Yugoslavia. The integration of architectural and political agendas in their work demonstrates the significant role architecture can play in constructing and deconstructing cultural identity. The chapter concludes with the contribution of this thesis to its area of study and offers views regarding potential research in the area.
33
PART ONE: Developing a Theoretical Framework
Chapter 2 The Kunstwollen of Bosnia
In the late 1930s Dušan Grabrijan published a series of articles that addressed the urban heritage issues of Sarajevo and the Ottoman established historic precinct
Baš aršija. He identified the precinct’s cultural character as an authentic reflection of local culture, and associated its architectural forms with the specifically Bosnian condition and a form of Kunstwollen – an artistic expression embodying the spirit of the collective.
This chapter argues that Grabrijan’s interest in exploring the heritage fabric of
Sarajevo was inspired by his teacher Jože Ple nik. In his practice and teaching
Ple nik promoted the integration of historic remnants within new urban proposals and considered historic fabric vital to the creation of new architecture. In an attempt to extend such an approach to Bosnia, Grabrijan’s early writings identified in the forms of Baš aršija the authenticity and inspiration needed for the creation of the new. However, unlike in Slovenia, where such connections enjoyed the support of the authorities, in Bosnia the urban forms of Baš aršija were viewed with scepticism and resistance. Due to Baš aršija’s historic connections to the Ottoman colonial times and the dominance of Islam over Christianity, the Serb and Croat nationalist ideologies contested its relevance. Consequently this heritage fabric was
Chapter 2
considered as a parochial architectural expression of the former Ottoman Empire.
Its integration into new urban approaches was commonly rejected.
In an attempt to curb this resistance, Grabrijan began to present a different view of the heritage fabric’s role in new urban development from the one proposed by his teacher. No longer interested in connecting historic remnants to their artistic and historical origins, Grabrijan identified their contemporary relevance and their modernity. This chapter concludes that while Grabrijan’s views did not receive public or official support at the time, his writings established the theoretical grounding for what became his and Neidhardt’s collaborative work. Later chapters argue that the ideas propounded by Grabrijan in his vision of Bosnian Kunstwollen provide the basis for the political success of the concept of Bosnian Oriental, promoted during the years of Yugoslav socialism.
‘Not to find a new, but to show it anew’: Ple nik’s architecture and teaching
Between 1920 and 1924 Dušan Grabrijan attended Jože Ple nik’s class in the School of Architecture at the newly established University of Ljubljana, in Slovenia.1
Ple nik’s approach to architectural design and teaching made a significant impression on Grabrijan. He kept a thorough record of the school discussions, which was published in 1968 under title Ple nik and His School (Ple nik in Njegova Šola).2
1 A number of monographs are available on the work and life of Jože Ple nik, such as: D. Prelovšek, Jože Ple nik 1872–1957, Architectura Perennis, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1997; P. Kre i , Ple nik, the Complete Works, Academy Editions, Ernst & Sons, United Kingdom, 1993; F. Burkhardt, C. Eveno & B. Podreca, Jože Ple nik Architect: 1872–1957, MIT Press, Cambridge, Ma., 1989. 2 As a student of the first generation of Ljubljana school and a member of the group ‘Hearth of Academic Architects’, Grabrijan’s book became a record of the debates and casual conversations within the school, as well as Grabrijan’s own view of Ple nik and a range of his articles. Grabrijan,
38 Chapter 2
By the time Ple nik started teaching in Ljubljana, he was already well known and an experienced architectural teacher and practitioner. He was educated at the School of Applied Arts in Graz (1888–92), and studied with Otto Wagner at the Academy of
Art in Vienna (1895–98). In 1911–12, he was recommended to succeed Wagner at the Academy of Art, but as the Ministry of Education and Religion turned down the proposal, Ple nik took up the professorship at the College of Arts and Crafts in
Prague (1911–21).3 Ple nik’s active professional life in Prague, and his involvement with the design of the presidential Castle at Hrad any (area around the castle) secured him a special place in his home town.4
The opening of the school followed the recent unification of South Slavs (Yugoslavs in the Serbo Croatian language group) – namely Serbs, Croats and Slovenes – into one state in 1918.5 The new Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenians aimed at transcending the differences between the diverse languages, religions and historical
Ple nik in Njegova Šola. Compilation, editing and illustration selection was done by Grabrijan’s wife, Nada Grabrijan, sixteen years after her husband’s death. 3 Prelovšek, Jože Ple nik 1872–1957. 4 When in 1921 Ple nik returned to Slovenia to take up the academic position, he was disillusioned with his European appointments. But he continued his professional involvements abroad, on projects such was the renovation of Prague castle. Ple nik was appointed architect of the Hrad any castle renovation in Prague by the Czech president, Masaryk, over the period 1920–35. 5 The idea of Yugoslavia rested on the assumption that the South Slavs were a single ethnic group that should, like European nation states, live in a single state with a shared language and culture. In historical terms, the origins of Yugoslavia as a unified South Slavic state – the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenians – were linked to the disintegration of the Austro–Hungarian Empire at the end of World War One, in 1918. The rule of the Habsburg monarchy was formally renounced and power handed over to the National Council, which declared the new Kingdom of Slovens, Croats and Serbs (1918–29) – later transformed into the Kingdom of Yugoslavia (1929–41). The Kingdom of Yugoslavia – a more unifying term than the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenians – was headed by the Karadjordjevi family of Serbia proper. Following the communist victory of the World War Two, the new state of the Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia (1945–92) emerged. This state disintegrated in the wake of the 1992–96 war, giving rise to a new state of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (1992–2003), which mostly covered the Serbian territory.
39 Chapter 2
experiences of its constituents [Figure 1]. While the contents of this vision of commonality were not popularly agreed upon, many shared the belief in the possibility of defining and articulating a unified Yugoslav culture and people.
Figure 1: Territorial division of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia 1918 1921. Source: Lampe, Yugoslavia as History, p. 113.
Grabrijan recorded numerous discussions in Jože Ple nik class, which explored the potential of architecture to represent the potency of political changes.6 Unlike the
Serb and Croat intellectuals, who by virtue of ethnic origin have historically been the political core of the idea of Yugoslavia, Ple nik’s position was moulded by the very marginality of his Slovene ness.7 Further, despite the long cultural heritage of
Slovenia’s capital city, Ljubljana, it was not a capital of an independent state. It was
6 D. Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola (Ple nik and His School), Založba Obzorja, Maribor, Slovenia, 1968. 7 Slovenia inhabits a rather compact territory on the western end of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia. Its population is highly homogenous. The Slovenes, who are predominantly Catholic, speak a distinct language, the literary traditions of which could be traced back to the 16th century. Wachtel, Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation, p. 30.
40 Chapter 2
considered less significant than other centres of the newly formed Kingdom of Serb,
Croats and Slovenes – the cities of Belgrade and Zagreb.
The newly created state, however, promised to provide opportunities for all within its boundaries, and both Ple nik and Grabrijan expressed a desire to take advantage of the new developments.8 The art historian Damjan Prelovšek states that related issues occupied Ple nik’s mind for many years while working in various European centres. Loyalty to his ‘small country’, Prelovšek writes, weighed on Ple nik and he
‘felt obliged to make good some of the shortcomings of its culture’.9 Writing from
Vienna to his brother Andrej, before his return to Ljubljana, Ple nik described his feeling of isolation among the Germanic people:
This is a German Vienna – and I want nothing more than to be increasingly a Carniolan – a Slovene – in the same way as my parents, on the one hand, and on the other hand I don’t want to distance myself in progressing, or rather developing, from what is native to me. It is in fact all wasteland – we have nothing – and yet in this period I have observed our character, and was taken by it.10
Once Ple nik came back to Ljubljana, his architectural approach was framed by his desire to identify and transform the unique qualities of his people into an artistic expression.
Underpinning Ple nik’s approach was his interest in history. Congruent with his belief that the role of an architect was ‘not to find a new, but to show it anew’, 8 On 28 June 1921 the first Yugoslavia came into being as the constitutional, parliamentary and hereditary Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. In 1929 it was renamed the Kingdom of Yugoslavia. J. Lampe, Yugoslavia as History, Twice There Was a Country, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996, p. 125. 9 Quoted in Prelovšek, Jože Ple nik 1872–1957, p. 13. 10 Quoted in Prelovšek, Jože Ple nik 1872–1957, p. 13. Undated letter.
41 Chapter 2
Ple nik’s designs commonly integrated an historic remnant within new urban plans.11 Grabrijan recorded Ple nik’s maxim that ‘If we always want to discover the new, we would get nowhere, for our life is too short …’12 Ple nik also frequently stated in class that the inspiration for his practice came from the recognition of the historic urban artefacts of his hometown, Ljubljana.
Grabrijan’s records show high praise for Ple nik’s architectural achievements in the urban transformation of Ljubljana.13 It was Ple nik‘s conversion of the small objects scattered around town into something new and significant that fascinated
Grabrijan.14 ‘He was a master in accommodating and discovering the old, unanticipated beauty’, wrote Grabrijan in Ple nik and His School.15 Astounded by the impact such changes made on the city, Grabrijan commented that Ple nik turned the city of Ljubljana from ‘a former small Austro–Hungarian town into a capital city’.16 Perceiving this approach as a poetic attempt to modify the cityscape through humble changes, without dramatically altering it, Grabrijan wrote:
He revealed small and old jewels of monuments, neglected and forgotten by all; he revealed old architecture and knew how to breathe new life into it. He created architecture with limited means and elements, and brought to life things that were considered worthless.17
11 Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 88. 12 Original quote: ‘Ako bi hoteli vedno samo v novo kopati, bi nikamor ne prišli, za to je prekratko naše življenje in je taka namera tudi smešna’, in Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 88. 13 A list of Grabrijan’s writings is included in the bibliography. 14 Kre i suggests that Ple nik’s interest in historical sources emerged from his exposure to various influences during his formative years. He also argues that while Ple nik’s classicism was seemingly ‘reminiscent of “Antiquity”, the “Romanesque” or “Egyptian” styles’, it was in fact the result of a complex fusion of diverse architectural influences. Kre i , Ple nik, The Complete Works, p. 235. 15 Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 25. 16 Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 27. 17 Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 25.
42 Chapter 2
Ple nik’s interest in architectural history extended to his teachings and to discussions with his students. In his record of the topics discussed at the school,
Grabrijan noted Ple nik’s emphasis on the study of historical architecture and his promotion of classicism as ‘the only complete style’.18 Ple nik believed that students had to start from the very beginning, and that was from antiquity.19
‘Antiquity, is not that beautiful! … It is something divine!’,20 Ple nik proclaimed as he encouraged his students to search for the timeless and everlasting elements of classical architecture. In a constant interrogation of the past, the class drew obelisks, pyramids and columns in an attempt to familiarise themselves with the grammar of classicism.21 According to Prelovšek, Ple nik acquired the idea from the time of his apprenticeship in Otto Wagner’s office in the late 1890s. ‘Draw profiles, heads, tables in chapels, take a thick pen and practise every day and every hour’,
Ple nik suggested to his students, and ‘all of a sudden you will hear above you the sound of the wings of the angel of eternity, that will take you above the everyday’.22
Grabrijan, like most students in his class, immersed himself in the study of antiquity, presenting for his graduation work a variation on the motif of the stone vase originally designed by Ple nik for the entrance to the Paradise Garden at Hrad any castle, in Prague.23
18 Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 87. 19 Prelovšek, Jože Ple nik 1872–1957, p. 158. 20 Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 87. 21 Prelovšek and Kopa suggest that Ple nik’s practical involvement and study with the Otto Wagner’s school of architecture convinced him that the modern architecture need not be invented from nothing but developed from available sources. D. Prelovšek & V. Kopa , Žale by Architect Jože Ple nik, DELO, Ljubljana, 1992, p. 42. 22 Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 58. 23 Prelovšek & Kopa , Žale by Architect Jože Ple nik, p. 158.
43 Chapter 2
Importantly, for Ple nik, the overarching power of classical architectural traditions provided a context for integrating individual expression into a coherent whole. It facilitated a connection between an historical artefact or a landscape setting, its historical origins and architectural origins. In his search for the artistic origins of
Slovenian architecture, Ple nik sought to establish a direct link to the Etruscans, the ancient inhabitants of the Apennine Peninsula. 24 He believed that Slovenian art was the successor of the Mediterranean Antiquity period. Architectural historian
Damjan Prelovšek has argued that such attempts by Ple nik were aimed not at promoting specific or regional architectural or artistic expression, but at establishing a connection to a universal artistic tradition, such as classicism. 25
Certainly Grabrijan perceived his teacher’s approach as inclusive and open to diverse artistic influences. Commenting on Ple nik’s approach, he wrote: ‘Eclectic?
He [Ple nik] almost admitted it himself. Yet, not in the usual meaning of the word.’26 Ple nik’s approach, Grabrijan argued, allowed him to choose from a treasury of historical styles and apply them in a seemingly random or eclectic
24 Prelovšek & Kopa , Žale by Architect Jože Ple nik, p. 52. Ple nik studied the ornamentation of the Va e situla (vessel, dated at the end of the 6th century BC), which was at that time thought of as a typical Etruscan product. It represented a masterpiece of decorative art and European prehistory and was considered the most important artefact of the Hallstattian culture in Slovenia. Also see www.narmuz lj.si/ang/odd/arh/arhobj.html. 25 Prelovšek & Kopa , Žale by Architect Jože Ple nik, p. 52. 26 Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 25.
44 Chapter 2
fashion.27 Grabrijan saw this approach as a reflection of Ple nik’s capacity to engage in architectural design free of the constraints of architectural conventions.28
Ple nik’s discussions, according to Grabrijan’s record, challenged the perception that Slovenian national architecture was strictly defined by national borders. While the search for such artistic expression defined the approaches of many of Ple nik’s contemporaries in neighbouring German speaking countries, Grabrijan quoted his teacher saying, ‘a national art, in fact, does not exist’.29 According to Prelovšek,
Ple nik avoided compatriot organisations and was critical of their interest in ethnographic particularities. He had limited interest in domestic architecture and indicated his distrust in the values of folk art as a guide to artistic creation. 30
27 Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 25. 28 As noted in footnote 14 Ple nik was exposed during his formative years to a variety of sources. But for Ple nik, the other important consideration was that the classical tradition represented access to the divine and the worldly in architecture. A devout Catholic, Ple nik believed in the importance of Rome to Western culture. Ple nik’s faith in artistic endeavours thus was not unlike faith in God – an individual journey for each person with the aim of discovering the ‘truth’ that connects oneself and the eternal qualities of architecture. Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 50. 29 Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, pp. 96–97. Admittedly, Ple nik’s views were deeply conservative and his teaching methods seen as dogmatic. In letter to his colleague, Grabrijan wrote ‘I do not wish Ple nik’s temper on anyone, I do not wish his pessimism, even if his genius shines through it’. Original quote: ‘Ne žalim nikomur Ple nikove ljubezni, ne želim niomur njegove vere in pesimizma in vendar ob utim v the stvareh genialnost. Vprašenje je, ali za to dejevost vse tisto drugo potrebno – potem tudi njo odklanjam!’. Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 62. Further, Ple nik’s promotion of Slovenian nationalism relied on mobilising exclusivist and at times racist views that to varying degree framed the fascist agenda. But Ple nik’s views of both nation and art, I would argue, emerged amid the intellectual and political struggle to define the Yugoslav culture, and by extension his own Slovenian culture. Resistance to surrounding nationalism framed Ple nik’s views on art and nation. While I do not intend to justify or reject the possibility of interpreting Ple nik’s approach as racist and nationalistic by suggesting that he reacted to the pressure applied by the other nationalisms, it is important to remember that the discourse that defined discussions of Yugoslav culture was one that promoted exclusivist nationalism. It would be only as recent as the late 1990s that Marxist cultural theorist Slavoj Žižek criticised Ple nik for his elitism. Žižek argued that Ple nik’s perception of architecture as high art, his attachment to history and the rejection of modernism, were all connected to the ideas that structured fascism in Europe. For further discussion of this see S. Žižek, ‘Everything provokes fascism’ (interview) and A. Herscher, ‘Ple nik avec Laibach’, Assemblage 33, MIT, 1997, pp. 58–75. 30 Prelovšek suggests that Ple nik leaned towards Semper’s idea that nations were only distinguished by their comprehension and reproduction, while styles were the common property of the whole of
45 Chapter 2
Grabrijan credited Ple nik’s ability to construct new urban realities through the reuse of heritage remnants as part of his talent for expressing, in architectural terms, the artistic qualities of the place, reviving the latent value of urban landscapes. Ple nik said to students: ‘You have to follow the people … you have to listen to the instincts and impulses’.31 It was an architect’s role to define a ‘style’,
Ple nik suggested, that expressed a people’s ‘inner self’ and reflected the nation’s
‘set of beliefs, mentality, and climate’.32 This idea that it is the architect’s responsibility to find, among the diverse possibilities embedded in the urban context, the remnants of a past that have value to the present was central to
Grabrijan’s own understanding of his professional and ethical role of architect.
This search for a relationship between architecture and the people who created it connected Ple nik’s thinking to well known debates of the time – most specifically to the Austrian art historian Alois Riegl’s writings and to the concept of Kunstwollen, or will to art.33 While Ple nik never acknowledged the significance of Riegl’s ideas, historians such as Prelovšek and Stele have argued that there is an obvious connection between Ple nik’s notion of the ‘inner nerve of art’ and Riegl’s ‘will to
civilisation. Semper warned against the folk art as being too young, and as such reflects the deformed origins of national creativity. Ple nik also was not interested in folk art, and did not join fellow compatriots in their Vienna club Vesna. Prelovšek & Kopa , Žale by Architect Jože Ple nik, p. 46. 31 Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, pp. 96–97. 32 Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola. Prelovšek referred to it as the ‘inner nerve of art’ in Prelovšek, Jože Ple nik 1872–1957, p. 12. 33 M. Iversen, Alois Riegl: Art History and Theory, MIT Press, Cambridge, Ma., 1993, p. 6.
46 Chapter 2
art’.34 Grabrijan presented Riegl’s work as particularly relevant to the Slovene students, dedicating a whole section of Ple nik and His School to the importance of
Riegl’s ideas.
Riegl’s notion of Kunstwollen,35 Grabrijan wrote, ‘presented works of art as a result of the artistic consciousness of people, and the history of art as the discipline of describing the artistic will.’36 Conceived as the historical propensity of an age or a people, the stylistic development of which was governed without respect to mimetic or technological concerns, Kunstwollen offered legitimacy and structure to
Grabrijan’s understandings of Ple nik’s effort.37 This approach confirmed Grabrijan’s faith in the independent nature of artistic agency and the importance of artistic will over causal explanations of artistic production. ‘Riegl’s main contribution’, Grabrijan wrote, ‘was that he taught us to differentiate between art and craft, liberating art from external purpose, which almost took it over, making art history a history of spiritual values.38
34 F. Stele referred to it as the ‘geographic constants of art history’, in Prelovšek, Jože Ple nik 1872– 1957, p. 12. 35 The translation of this term is problematic and differs between various texts. Henri Zerner offers two interpretations: the first, articulated by Panofsky, interprets kunstwollen as ‘a content or objective meaning – each work, by its style, involves the whole culture from which it comes’; the second, expressed by Sedlmayr, is that it is the ‘central and informing principle, a truly creative force’. Iverson defines the highly problematised concept as ‘an artistic will or urge or intent informing different period styles’. H. Zerner, ‘Alois Riegl: art, value, and historicism’, Daedalus, Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 105, winter 1976, p. 180; and M. Iversen, Alois Riegl: Art History and Theory, p. 6. 36 Original quote: ‘Rieglova glavna zasluga je, da nas nau il razlikovati medumetnostjo in rokodelstvom, da je osvobodil umetnost od zunanjeg namena, kateremu je bila ze skoraj podlegla, in da je napravil iz umetnostne zgodovine duhovno znanost.’ Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 44. 37 Riegl’s thesis suggests that the visual experiences of an artist become useful and relevant only if they communicate the requirements of the stylistic situation of a particular historical moment. O. Pacht, ‘Art historians and art critics – vi: Alois Riegl’, Burlington Magazine, 105, 1963, p. 189. 38 Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 44.
47 Chapter 2
Riegl’s publication Spätrömische Kunstindustrie (1897), which focused on the study of late antiquity and could be regarded as of archaeological interest only, presented new ways of thinking for people like Grabrijan. Rejecting the common perception that the late antiquity represented the decadence and decline of the classical age,
Riegl argued that an interrogation of this art revealed ‘new values’.39 His proposition recognised the presence of the historical character of aesthetic judgment and opened up possibilities for including different aesthetic ideals.
Similarly, his work on the Baroque, another period regarded decadent, moved away from the traditionally accepted modes of analysis that focused on the individual artist or the problem of patronage. Instead, it explored works of art as defining the
‘artistic projection of that society’.40 Grabrijan saw this search for an interrelationship between the historic fabric and the will of people as an underlining force in Ple nik’s work – his urban transformation of Ljubljana being an attempt to include the arts of small nations, such as Slovenia, within the overall historical development of the world of arts.
Grabrijan does not offer an assessment of the quality or relevance of the elements integrated. But his continuous admiration of Ple nik’s capacity to show, in his architecture, the supposed inner qualities of the Slovenian people and city of
Ljubljana suggest his approval. His numerous comments highlight the relevance of
Ple nik’s excavations of the Roman wall remnants in Ljubljana, offered to prove the
39 Zerner, ‘Alois Riegl: art, value, and historicism’, p. 178. 40 Zerner, ‘Alois Riegl: art, value, and historicism’, p. 179.
48 Chapter 2
classical roots of Slovenian culture.41 And he supported Ple nik’s integration of the
Illyrian monument (1929), reinstating the popular view of the French ideal of liberty underpinning Slovenian civil society [Figure 2].42 The numerous embellishments of existing architecture with their connections to the selected monuments of the
Slovenian national past all told a story of what Ple nik wanted Slovenia to be – a
Christian land with roots in the classical cultures of the ‘West’.
Figure 2: Illyrian monument, J. Ple nik, Ljubljana. Source: D. Ali , 2004. Ple nik’s limited interest in his compatriots of the Yugoslav state – the Croats and the Serbs – is well documented in Grabrijan’s texts. According to Grabrijan’s records, Ple nik was clearly dissatisfied with the Yugoslav government’s attempts to
41 Within the square of the French Revolution in Ljubljana, Ple nik included the Illyrian monument (1929), the monument to the Slovenian poet Simon Gregor i (1937) and the ends of the Roman wall. Prelovšek, Jože Ple nik 1872–1957, p. 12. 42 Historically, Slovenian nationalism was awakened relatively early by Napoleon Bonaparte’s forces, which occupied the region between 1809 and 1813. The revived ancient term Illyria was introduced to promote the integration of Croatian and Slovenian lands into a single administrative unit, governed by the French. Ple nik, allegedly, was very interested in the ideas behind French Illyrian ideals, particularly the connection it established between the Slovene culture and the Etruscans. P. Rowe, Civic Realism, MIT Press, Cambridge, Ma., 1997, p. 172.
49 Chapter 2
dominate the Slovenes. He particularly objected to continual attempts from
Belgrade to control the Slovenian architecture program, and to the introduction of fees for professional registration.43 Most significantly, despite Ple nik’s attempts to define the grounds of a specifically Slovenian culture he was not interested in adding those to a new collective Yugoslav culture.
Exemplifying his opposition to attempts to construct an art reflecting Yugoslav ideologies, Ple nik spoke openly against artists such as Ivan Meštrovi . Meštrovi , a sculptor and an architect who many have argued was one of the world’s most famous, was a leading supporter of the idea of a new kind of Yugoslav culture.44
Meštrovi made his alliances clear in his controversial display at the Rome
Exhibition in 1911. Expected to present his work within the Austro–Hungarian pavilion, Meštrovi refused to do so unless a separate pavilion was provided for the
South Slavs; his request was denied, he exhibited his work in the Serbian pavilion.45
Himself a Croat, Meštrovi ’s rejection of his perceived ‘Central European culture’ for an alliance with the Serbs, who were considered ‘barbarians’, was as Wachtel has suggested ‘sensational’.46 His exhibition work presented fragments from the so called Kosovo or St. Vitrus’ Day Temple (the battle of Kosovo was fought on St.
Vitrus’ Day).47 A wooden model of the Temple combined Catholic and Orthodox elements, with the plan following the pattern of a Roman Catholic cross and the dome having more a Byzantine character. The exhibit as a whole was encircled by a
43 Prelovšek, Jože Ple nik 1872–1957, p. 159. 44 Wachtel, Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation, p. 54. 45 Wachtel, Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation, pp. 55–56. 46 Wachtel, Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation, pp. 55. 47 Wachtel, Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation, pp. 55–56.
50 Chapter 2
range of figures inspired by the famous heroes of South Slav oral poetry.48 The work of Meštrovi resonated through the territories of Yugoslavia, as a proposal of deep national significance. But commenting on the 1923 Meštrovi exhibition in
Ljubljana, Ple nik said: ‘I respect Meštrovi as an artist, but I do not think that he has really thought through what his aims were.’49
Perceiving his artistic vision as a warrant of Slovenian cultural integrity, Ple nik told his students:
I am whole heartily for the unification [of Yugoslavia], but I am for each family living separately, so that we can, with ease, look in each other’s eyes and talk about things and learn about each other – it is only that way that we can develop.50 Encouraged, Grabrijan embarked on his lifelong project aimed at discovering and adding to the significant and diverse artistic creations of Yugoslavia – to the ever growing artistic creations of the world. Under the influence of Riegl’s theories,
Grabrijan’s discussion of the urban condition of Bosnia began to be marked by the search for architecture that demonstrated the society’s artistic experiences, and the specifics of its cultural expression.51 Encouraged by Ple nik’s credo that it was the role of an architect to discover new values in what was already there, Grabrijan’s
48 Wachtel, Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation, pp. 55–56. 49 Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, pp. 96–97. 50 Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 68. 51 Alois Riegl’s search for correlations between society and artistic creations had a significant impact on architectural discourse from the late 19th century on, from the all enveloping art of the Gesamtkunstwerk, associated with the work of Wagner, to William Morris and the arts and craft movement.
51 Chapter 2
early writings on the city of Sarajevo sought to identify the values hidden within the urban fabric.52
Identifying the significance of Baš aršija
From 1930, Grabrijan’s writings focused on the old Ottoman established urban precinct of Baš aršija. By the time Grabrijan settled in the city this historic core occupied only a relatively small area on the eastern edge of the new city.53
Notwithstanding its size and peripheral position, the precinct’s busy shops and pedestrian routes continued to play a significant role in the daily life of Sarajevo.
Established in the 15th century, the old precinct still maintained the original principles of Ottoman urban design. Most notable was the generic division between public and private domains,54 the road separating the activities of the aršija, the trade and business district, from the surrounding residential area, the mahala. The
Baš aršija business section also accommodated the most important civic and religious buildings, including the markets, Gazi Husref Beg’s Mosque (1531), the
Jewish synagogue (original building from 1581) and the Old Orthodox Church
(1539–40).55 These structures coupled with the precinct’s narrow, meandering
52 Grabrijan retained his teaching position at Sarajevo’s Technical School until the onset of World War Two. In 1945 he returned to Slovenia to a position as Professor of Architecture at the University of Ljubljana. 53 By the early 20th century, the limits of Baš aršija had been determined geographically: on the south by Obala Street, which separated Baš aršija from the northern residential hills; on the west by Gazi Husref Beg’s Bezistan and the old Jewish Hram (synagogue), which borders a new Austro– Hungarian development; and on the east by the Vije nica (Town Hall) and the Šeher ehajin bridge. 54 A. Raymond, The Great Arab Cities in the 16th–18th Centuries, An Introduction, New York University Press, New York, 1984, p. 10. 55 A. Bejti suggests that the original building was built in 1581, and the building that stands today was built in 1821–23, in Stara Sarajevska aršija ju er, danas i sutra, Osnove I Smjernice za
52 Chapter 2
streets gave Grabrijan an impression that the unique values of the city of Sarajevo were laid within the old precinct.
In a 1940 article entitled ‘Architecture in human scale’, Grabrijan stated that despite the diversity of urban experiences in Sarajevo, his focus is on the old. ‘If we look at
Sarajevo from the surrounding hills of Trebevi , we will notice two formations: eastern and western parts – cities next to each other.’56 Admitting that the
‘western’ part with its ‘corridor like streets’ was not of particular interest, he focused on the ‘eastern’ part and the old town of Baš aršija. He stated:
[The eastern part] is made of small houses surrounded by gardens, low in height, calm, humble and tame – the monotony that is only here and there interrupted by domes and minarets of mosques, i.e., a layered composition similar to stone slates. Everything is harmonious and homogenous: a reflection of a residual culture.57
Attracted to the small scale development of the precinct and its ‘harmonious’ qualities, Grabrijan wrote, ‘My heart is leaning towards the eastern part of the town’. Hidden in this fabric are the ‘secrets [that] I would like to reveal’.58 Further rationalising this interest in the old and dilapidated city, he wrote:
Regenaraciju (Old Town of Sarajevo, Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow, a Development Proposal), Gradski Zavod za Zaštitu i Uredjenje Spomenika Kulture, Sarajevo, 1969, p. 34. Bejti also suggests that the Orthodox Christians built their church in 1539–40, p. 31. 56 Grabrijan, ‘Architecture in human scale’ (Arhitektura nadohvat covjecje ruke), Novi Behar, Sarajevo, 1940, br. 2, 3 and special edition reprinted in, D. eli (ed.), Grabrijan i Sarajevo, Izabrani lanci 1963–42, (Grabrijan and Sarajevo, Selected Articles 1963–42), Muzej Grada Sarajeva, Svjetlost, Sarajevo, 1970, p. 51. 57 Grabrijan, ‘Architecture in human scale’ in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 51. 58 Original quote: ‘Ove stvari imaju kvalitet kojima Europa oskudjeva. Ispred njih se odjednom osjeti barbarinom taj superiorni ovjek sa Zapada, koji dolazi ovamo kao u koloniju. Dakle, pored haoticnog grada živi tu, negdje i smisao za ljepotu I osje aj za mjerilo! I srce mi naginje u taj drugi, isto ni dio grada, I želio bih mu otkriti tajnu! Šta, je dakle, tu što privla i, uprkos nerješenog prometa, nehigijene I neekonomije! Pokušat cu to nazvati I izraziti: arhitekturom nadohvat ovje ije ruke’; also published in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 52.
53 Chapter 2
… So, what is there that makes it attractive in the unresolved traffic conditions, lack of hygiene and rent viability? I will try to name it and explain it as: architecture in human scale.’59
His fascination with the precinct resulted in numerous articles published in both professional journals and the daily papers. They included titles such as ‘Family small house’ (1936), ‘Muslim graveyards’ (1936), ‘Le Corbusier and Sarajevo’ (1936) and the ‘Turkish house’ (1937), and in these Grabrijan argued that the historic precinct was relevant to the construction of a new city. Its urban and formal qualities reminded him of not only of his days at Ple nik’s school, but also of his interest in modern debates, such as Le Corbusier’s discussion of the Orient. These themes underpinned Grabrijan’s writings on the city.
Historic yes, but not significant: the problems of Islamic heritage
In the article ‘Muslim graveyards’ Grabrijan addressed the pertinent issue of the destruction of Islamic built heritage in Sarajevo.60 The ‘exhumation’ of old Muslim graveyards started with the Austro–Hungarian government in the 1880s, initially as part of expanding city boundaries and transforming the land once on the periphery.
The practice also formed a part of the government’s endeavour to modernise the city and to turn old graveyards into new parks. In an attempt to participate in those
59 eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 52. 60 Exhumation of old Muslim graveyards was started by the Austro–Hungarians, who took out two significant graveyards in the southwest corner of the Presidential Palace. Opposite the palace, in the position of today’s Small Park, an old Muslim graveyard was turned into a park in 1886, and after World War Two new buildings were built on the site. The main city park, known as the Big Park, was also originally a Muslim graveyard. During the Turkish time At Mejdan, later renamed Sijaset Mejdan, was used as an execution ground. Nijazija Koštovi presents an extensive record of exhumed Muslim graveyards, but Koštovi ’s inconsistent referencing system makes this study difficult to use. N. Koštovi , Sarajevo, Izmedju Dobrotvorstva i Zla, (Sarajevo Between the Charitable and Evil), El Kalem and Merhamet, Sarajevo, 1995, pp. 186–99.
54 Chapter 2
changes and find new revenue, the directorate of vakufs (Islamic pious endowments) – the legal owner of the all the vakuf properties – apparently
‘willingly handed over’ two large graveyards in 1885 to transform into such parks.61
In return, the government promised to keep the gravestones and pay the vakuf directorate yearly rent.62 New parks, roads and paths were cut through old graveyards and mosque gardens, and when Grabrijan addressed the issue in 1936 the process was in full swing.
Accepting modernisation as the premise on which the policy of graveyards clearing was based, Grabrijan’s text addressed the issue of integrating the old gravestones
(the historic remnant) in the new setting. He perceived modernisation as a progressive socio economic force and suggested that the graveyards could be turned into the ‘lungs of the new city.’63 Naively calling for a full incorporation of the past’s remnants into new landscape, Grabrijan wrote, ‘bring park into the graveyard, graves into the city centre, and history into modern life!’64 Unaware of the complexity of the debate, he focused on the importance of contextualising the old relicts into the new landscape. ‘Sarajevo’s history’, he wrote, ‘is written on these tombs’.65 Adjusting Riegl’s thesis to the specifics of local debate, he stated that the tombs communicated the stylistic requirements of a particular historical moment
61 T. Kruševac, Sarajevo pod Austro Ugarskom upravom 1878–1918, (Sarajevo Under the Austro Hungarian Administration 1878 1918), Izdanje Muzeja grada Sarajeva, Sarajevo, 1960, p. 47 62 Kruševac, Sarajevo pod Austro Ugarskom upravom 1878–1918, p. 47 63 eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 108. 64 Original quote: ‘Dakle: park u groblje, grobove usred grada, historiju u moderan život.’ ‘Muslim graveyards’, in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 108. 65 Original quote: ‘Ali Sarajevo ima historiju pisanu na nišanima, tj. historiju naroda koji je bi vjerski prepotentan, pa je onda, kad se nije smio iživljavati u bogumilstvu, prešao odmah na islam.’ ‘Muslim graveyards’, in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 107.
55 Chapter 2
and were relevant to the contemporary city.66 In an attempt to find support for his argument, Grabrijan recalled an event when in an attempt to divert the authorities from clearing an old graveyard Ple nik proposed a public park. The design incorporated important historic monuments in spatial and symbolic configurations that Grabrijan stated was evocative of ‘Slovenian Pantheon’.67
But unlike in Ljubljana, where urban authorities supported Ple nik in his efforts to include remnants of the past in his new urban plans, in Sarajevo the Ottoman heritage was under considerable attack. The exhumation of old Ottoman graveyards was accompanied by outright demolition or passive neglect and destruction of historic buildings. This saw the mosque of Mustafa Beg Skenderpaši (the first domed mosque in the whole of Bosnia and Herzegovina, built in 1518) collapse in
1935 after an underfunded roof replacement project left the structure uncovered and open to weather.68 A number of local mosques and religious schools were demolished, including the Hadži Idris Mesdžid (1540), the Mesdžid Tavil Hadži
Mustafa (1545), the Mesdžid Hadži Mahmud Bali Sahtijandži (built before 1602) and the Mejdan medresa (1741).69
It is clear that Grabrijan saw heritage conservation as a significant problem. In his
1936 paper, ‘Thoughts and comments on the development of Sarajevo’, published
66 Pacht, ‘Art historians and art critics – vi: Alois Riegl’, p. 189. 67 While Grabrijan does not mention the specific project, the reference was most likely made in relation to Ple nik’s design of Ljubljana cemetery at Žale project. eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 108. 68 The whole structure disintegrated, leaving only the minaret standing. The minaret was subsequently destroyed in 1960. Koštovi , Sarajevo, Izmedju Dobrotvorstva i Zla, p.170. 69 Koštovi , Sarajevo, Izmedju Dobrotvorstva i Zla, pp. 174–76.
56 Chapter 2
six years after his arrival in the city, Grabrijan expressed his frustration with approaches to urban development.70 Discussing zoning, traffic and hygiene in relation to the urban planning of Sarajevo, Grabrijan accused the city authority of losing ‘its head’ by allowing the ‘barbarity of modernisation’ to destroy the urban qualities of the city.71 In a number of articles published in 1936 and 1937 Grabrijan continued his criticism of broader urban planning approaches and specific heritage policies for Baš aršija.72 However, his voice remained a lone one and his requests went unheard. His outspokenness was seen as a reflection of his non Bosnian background and lack of involvement and awareness, or maybe appreciation, of the specific historical and political factors that framed discussion of Sarajevo’s built heritage.
To understand the context within which Grabrijan’s articles appeared and the resistance they faced, it is necessary to outline two broader issues framing the discussion of Baš aršija: first, the Ottoman origins that underlined the internal
70 Grabrijan ‘Sarajevo se izgradjuje, Nekoliko polemi kih misli o urbanizaciji Sarajeva’ (Thoughts and comments on the development of Sarajevo), originally published in Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 11. 4. 1936; republished in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, pp. 101–05. 71 eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, pp. 101–05. 72 In the years 1936–37 Grabrijan published more than 20 papers. Among those that specifically addressed the problematic issues of urban development were: ‘Sarajevo se izgradjuje Nekoliko polemi kih misli o urbanizaciji Sarajeva’(Sarajevo is getting built, some thoughts on the urban development of Sarajevo), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 11. 4, 1936; ‘Porodi na mala ku a’ (Small family home), Tehni ar, br. 7, Beograd, April 1936; ‘Muslimanska groblja’, (Muslim graveyards), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 14. 6, 1936; and Novi Behar, Sarajevo, 1937, br. 5–6, god. XI; ‘Željezni ki problem, O astronomskim sumama’, (A problem of the [Sarajevo] railway station, about exuberant prices), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 24. 6, 1936; ‘Sarajevski željezni ki problem, konkretni predlog’, (A problem of the Sarajevo railway station, a proposal), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 1. 7, 1936; ‘Osvrt na arhitektonsku izložbu Juraja Neidhardta na Tehni kom fakultetu u Zagrebu Gradjevna ideja GI’, (A review of architectural exhibition of Juraj Neidhardt at Technical Faculty in Zagreb), Gradjevinski Vjesnik, Zagreb, br. 1, January 1937; ‘Arhitektonski problemi modernog teatra, Orijentacija prilikom Sarajevske adaptacije’, (Architectural problems of modern theatre, a case study of Sarajevo theatre), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 6. 1. 1937.
57 Chapter 2
structure of the precinct and the precinct’s subsequent changes under the new
Austro–Hungarian government, which took over Bosnia in 1878; second, the impact those urban changes had on geographical and contextual relationship between
Baš aršija and the rest of the city.
The origins and transformations of Baš aršija, from the town centre to the historic precinct
The origins of the city of Sarajevo are connected to what later became the
Baš aršija precinct.73 In the mid 15th century the Isa beg Ishakovi , first governor of the newly acquired Ottoman province of Bosnia, built his administrative headquarters, or saray, from which Sarajevo took its name (saray = military camp/palace; ovasi = field).74
73 Historian Behija Zlatar offers a detailed discussion of the development of Sarajevo from its origins till the end of 16th century. Zlatar identifies a small town located around the medieval market square Trgovište, or Utorkovište, located where Ali Pasha’s mosque and the Hygienic Institute are today. Most mentioned localities are in the area that the Isa Beg vakuf documents (vakufnama) refer to as Stara Varoš (Old Town), dated 1468. Old Trgovište (Old Marketplace) is from the documents of 1569, Varošište or Vrhbosna as it is referred to in some documents. Vrhbosna is also the name of the mediaeval town on that place. In 1451, the Ottomans took over the town of Vrhbosna, which grew into the major Ottoman city of Bosnia – the city of Sarajevo – and launched a series of further attacks that resulted in the whole mediaeval kingdom falling into Ottoman’s hands. Isa Beg Ishakovi is sometimes spelled as Isakovi , and ‘beg’ is a Bosnian spelling of the title bey or ‘chieftain.’ Here the former spelling is used, as it is by B. Zlatar in Zlatno doba Sarajeva (Golden Age of Sarajevo), Svjetlost, Sarajevo, 1996, pp. 28–37. 74 According to Zlatar, 1463 marks the takeover of the Bosnian territories by the Ottomans. That year the territory of Bosnia became a sandžak (commonly translated as ‘province’), with the newly established city of Sarajevo as its centre. Zlatar, Zlatno doba Sarajeva, p. 34. Also, from the establishment of Ottoman power until 1580, Bosnia formed a part of the eyâlet (governorate general) of Rumelia which comprised a number of sandžaks and covered most of the Balkans. Sarajevo was the first centre of Bosnian sandžak and later on pašaluk (Ottoman administrative unit). The eyelet of Bosnia was created which included the whole of modern Bosnia and Hercegovina as well as some parts of neighbouring Slavonia, Croatia, Dalmatia and Serbia. Traditionally the provinces of the Ottoman Empire were known as eyâlets. From 1864 they were gradually restructured as smaller vilâyets, vilajet in Bosnian. N. Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, Macmillan, London, 1994, p. 50.
58 Chapter 2
Having initially established the governor’s palace and Sarajevo’s first mosque, on the left bank, Isa Beg built a bridge across the Miljacka River, connecting his development with the existing intersection of roads that would become the new commercial centre.75 On that left bank he established a tekija (zawiya – the lodge of a dervish order) to serve as ‘a place of rest for poor Muslims that are students, sejjidi [descendants of the Prophet], warriors and travellers’.76 On the right bank he commissioned a karavan saraj (caravansaray, inn for travellers and merchants), with adjoining shops and workshops, a development that formed the nucleus of the future grand bazaar that would be called Baš aršija.77
Between 1521 and 1541, under the governorship of Gazi Husref Beg, Baš aršija and the surrounds entered a period of major development.78 The increase of urban activities marked the beginning of the ‘golden period’ of the city and advanced the
75 In addition to the existing medieval town of Vrhbosna, the place that Isa Beg selected to build the new town was close to another mediaeval settlement – Brodac. There, Isa Beg appropriated land and in exchange gave the local Christian population new fields further away. However, the first building activities took place before 1462. The transformation was marked by the town’s classification to kasaba, a place that has a mosque where Friday prayers are performs, a community of Muslims and a marketplace. Zlatar, Zlatno doba Sarajeva, pp. 28–30. 76 Isa Beg designated vakuf property to secure the working of tekija. The structures that provided the maintenance and support for his vakuf included hamam (baths), water supply, mills and land. Zlatar, Zlatno Doba Sarajeva, pp. 31–33. 77 The term Baš aršija is derived from Turkish language as ‘Baš’ is related to ‘ba ’ that in Turkish means ‘main’, ‘capital’ and ‘ aršija’ which is ‘çar ’ that in Turkish means ‘bazaar’ or ‘market’. The term aršija only is also commonly used. 78 There have been two spellings used for his name: Gazi Husref Beg and Gazi Husrevbeg. Here the former is used. Gazi Husref Beg came as a governor of the Bosnian sandžak in 1521, where he stayed until 1541, with two small interruptions. A. Handži , Studije o Bosni, historijski prilozi iz osmansko turskog period, (A Study of Bosnia During the Ottoman Turkish Period), Research Centre for Islamic History, Art and Culture (IRCICA), Istanbul, 1994, p. 79. For a discussion of Gazi Husref Beg and his endowments see also: Gazihusrevbeg’s Vakuf (comp.), Spomenica Gazi Husrevbegove etiristo Godišnjice (Four Hundred Years of Gazihusrevbeg’s Vakuf) Sarajevo, 1932, in particular the section by H. Kreševljakovi , ‘Sarajevo do Husrefbega’, pp. 3–17.
59 Chapter 2
status of Sarajevo from kasaba (small town) to a šeher (town).79 In 1531, Gazi
Husref Beg commissioned the construction of Sarajevo’s most prominent mosque in
Baš aršija – the Beg’s (Begova) mosque, with associated structures that included a
šadrvan (water fountain), two turbes (burial chambers) and a kutubhana (library).80
To the west of the mosque he built an imaret (kitchen for the poor), a musafirhana
(inn for poor people), and to the north of it a mekteb (elementary Islamic school) and a hanikah (hostel with a school for young dervishes).81 In the same year, he also began construction of commercial buildings, such as a karavan saraj (inn for travellers and merchants).
The following decade witnessed Baš aršija’s steady development into a commercial centre, with commissions such as Gazi Husref Beg’s bezistan (covered bazaar for valuable goods) and tašlihan (small inn) in 1540.82 The commercial growth of
Baš aršija continued throughout the second half of the 16th century. The most significant commercial structure built in this period was the Brusa Bezistan [Figure
79 Handži suggests that most of the sultan’s mosques in Bosnia were, in fact, state sponsored and not established under the vakuf of the Sultan. That suggests that the first mosques in various towns can be seen as more a planned action of the Ottoman government and less the result of individual undertakings through the institution of vakuf. A. Handži , Studije o Bosni, historijski prilozi iz osmansko turskog perioda. 80 The document compiled by the Gazihusrevbeg’s Vakuf, Spomenica Gazi Husrevbegove etiristo Godišnjice, contains detailed description of the vakuf and the buildings and structure that it encompassed. 81 The hanikah burned twice, in 1697 and 1755, and was renovated three times in 1769, 1831 and 1852. In 1931, it was replaced by a new medresa. Gazihusrevbeg’s Vakuf, Spomenica Gazi Husrevbegove etiristo Godišnjice, p. 57. The dervishes were of the halvetija order. 82 Tašlihan (stone han, Husrev beg's caravanserai or old han) was built between 1540 and 1543. The structure caught fire in 1697, and then again in 1831, before burned down completely in 1879.
60 Chapter 2
3], a covered marketplace constructed by Rustem Pasha in 1551 to facilitate the importation of silk from Turkey.83
Figure 3: Contemporary view of the exterior of the covered marketplace of Brusa Bezistan. Source: Dijana Ali , 2004. In accordance with the Ottoman practice, the institution of the vakuf underpinned urban development. The vakuf was a religious trust fund, with its own separate administration and legal identity.84 Its finance was reliant on a permanent endowment of land or real estate made by an individual stipulating that the property be used for purposes compatible with Islam.85 Thus, the donated property and finance were primarily used for providing public institutions, such as mosques,
83 For a thorough description of Baš aršija’s development in the 16th century see Zlatar, Zlatno Doba Sarajeva. 84 For further discussion of vakufs in former Yugoslavia see M. Serdarevi , Pravna zaštita kulturno historijskog naslijedja BiH, (Legislative Regulations for Cultural and Historic Heritage in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Origins, Protection, Destruction), Medjunarodni Centar za Mir, Sarajevo, 1997, pp. 17– 22. 85 The spelling of the term vakuf is Bosnian. The author is aware of the derivation from the Turkish vakif and Arabic waqf, but to maintain accuracy in referencing original documents, all terms in this thesis are spelled in Bosnian.
61 Chapter 2
schools, libraries, hostels, hospitals, public fountains, kitchens and sometimes bridges and roads. The system also provided for income producing properties, such as farmlands, toll bridges, inns, bathhouses, shops and warehouses. Funds raised through these institutions allowed for the perpetual operation and restoration of the vakuf’s properties.
In the context of Baš aršija, the vakuf’s details of Gazi Husref Beg’s endowment for building and maintaining structures were set out in three administrative documents called vakfija (endowment deed).86 The first of these, dated 1531 (938 according to
Islamic calendar), documented the establishment of the main mosque, hanikah, mekteb, imaret and musafirhana. The second, from 1537, was related to the medresa, and the third, dated the same year, presented the establishment of the main mosque in more detail.87 The vakuf’s funds were used to support the main buildings, as well as other public structures, such as sahat kula (the clock tower), four hans, and vakuf hospital, to name the most significant.88 Further, in his desire to develop Baš aršija into an active marketplace, Gazi Husref Beg provided loans to merchants interested in building markets and stores within the boundaries of the precinct.
Despite Baš aršija’s Ottoman urban structure and the prominence of Islamic educational and religious institutions, the precinct also accommodated other
86 The vakfija documents included movable and fixed assets, and set up the relationships between the economic and urban aspects of specific vakuf establishments. Gazihusrevbeg’s Vakuf, Spomenica Gazi Husrevbegove etiristo Godišnjice. 87 Gazihusrevbeg’s Vakuf, Spomenica Gazi Husrevbegove etiristo Godišnjice, pp. 91–92. 88 Handži , Studije o Bosni, historijski prilozi iz osmansko turskog perioda, VIII.
62 Chapter 2
religious groups, which were granted a degree of social and civic autonomy under the millet system.89 Millets were self governing religious communities under the
Ottoman government, granting rights to Christians and Jews to apply their own laws in their own courts, albeit under certain restrictions. The system thus recognised the Bosnian population through its religions (Muslims, Catholics, and Orthodox) and not its national belonging – Bosnians, Croats and Serbs. Because Islam formed the backbone of the Ottoman state, the religious separations hindered integration of the various segments of the empire’s population into a uniform group.
The millet structure affected the urban layout of the city, as religious groups occupied separate parts of the same precinct.90 In the 16th century, the Catholic merchants from Dubrovnik (Ragusa), for example, built a church within their district of Latinluk, or Frana ka mahala, while the Orthodox population settled near the northern boundary of Baš aršija, where they established their church, with its surrounding residential and commercial dwellings, in 1539.91 Later in the century,
Baš aršija saw the arrival of the Sephardic Jews, following their expulsion from
Spain. They established a community in Sarajevo and built their first synagogue, in
1581, at the western end of the precinct. Over the following two centuries
Baš aršija retained its urban structure, as determined by the prominent buildings of
Gazi Husref Beg’s vakuf and the peripheral development of various ethnic quarters.
So by the beginning of the 17th century one could view the presence and 89 Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, p. 49. 90 Handži provides more information on millets in Bosnia in Studije o Bosni; see also, R. Donia & J. Fine, Bosnia and Hercegovina – A Tradition Betrayed, Hurst and Company, London, 1994, pp. 64–65. 91 The original Roman Catholic church in Latinluk, dating from the Middle Ages, was destroyed in the fire of 1697.
63 Chapter 2
interaction of Bosnia’s four religious communities within the one square kilometre of Baš aršija.
Sarajevo was a tax free city, which furthered Baš aršija’s economic development.
The Muafnama, a document providing the city with exemptions from taxes, was initially given to Sarajevo in 1464 in appreciation for the city’s military contribution.
This privilege remained a characteristic of Sarajevo until the late 18th century.92
Clearly, this economic climate provided a financial advantage to merchants and artisans, whose gravitation to Baš aršija further confirmed this urban core as the commercial centre of the city. Bosnia’s growing importance as a stronghold of the
Ottoman Empire contributed to a change of status in 1580 into a principal unit of the empire. It enjoyed its special status for the remaining period of Ottoman governance and the 1878 takeover by the Austro–Hungarian Empire [Figure 4].93
92 Muafnama was first given to Sarajevo by sultan Mehmed el Fatih, and the same Muafnama was renewed at least four more times, in 1572, 1692–93, 1701 and 1748. Serdarevi , Pravna zaštita kulturno historijskog naslijedja BiH, pp. 16–17. 93 From the early 19th century, the Ottoman Empire started experiencing significant problems in Bosnia. Internal pressures and rebelliousness within Bosnia accompanied the end of Napoleonic wars and the Serbian rebellion. In 1877, Russia declared war on the Ottomans, and by 1878 Russia was able to dictate the terms of settlement with the empire. Under the Treaty of San Stefano, Bosnia was to remain Ottoman territory, but various reforms had to be introduced. However, the Congress of Berlin in 1878 (Treaty of Berlin) changed those arrangements and announced that Bosnia and Hercegovina, while still officially under Ottoman suzerainty, would be occupied and administered by Austria–Hungary. For a discussion on this period see ‘Resistance and reform’ in Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, pp. 119–35.
64 Chapter 2
Figure 4: aršija with its surroundings at the end of 19th century, Neidhardt’s map developed on the base of late 19th century Austro Hungarian map. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 59. The interwoven nature of the central market and the main mosque of Gazi Husref
Beg contributed to the development of a complex and active civic centre. More significantly, this urban model served political purposes, as it allowed for the articulation of an authoritative Ottoman imperial image. In the first instance, the reliance on the vakuf and the large financial investments in religious buildings emphasised Islam and Islamic law as the basis of community, cultural and political life, thereby strengthening the Ottoman presence in Sarajevo. Further, the city centre’s concentrated network of economic activity symbolised the Ottoman commercial interest in the region. Given the peripheral position of Sarajevo on the western boundaries of the Ottoman Empire, the official tax exemption secured
Sarajevo’s economic growth and represented an economically powerful empire to the neighbouring western states.
Chapter 2
In the following two centuries Baš aršija retained its urban structure of prominent buildings of the Gazi Husref Beg’s vakuf, with peripheral development of various ethnic quarters. This period of moderate and conservative growth, however, came to an abrupt end as the Austro–Hungarian Empire assumed administrative charge of
Bosnia in 1878 and annexed this region in 1908. The new government’s focus on infrastructure and urban renewal, gave rise to a period of development and growth in Sarajevo.94
The Austro–Hungarian transformations: from town centre to historic precinct
The Treaty of Berlin gave the Austro–Hungarian government administrative control of Bosnia in 1878. The new government began almost immediately to upgrade the existing city, as well as develop the new city to the west of the old precinct. The new city’s placement responded to restrictive topography, defined by the surrounding mountains and the narrow valley of the river Miljacka. The new city therefore moved away from the old precinct. The pretext for the Austro–Hungarian takeover being premised on Ottoman incapacity to administer the region, the new government immediately focused on introducing an administrative and urban structure. Authorities began numbering the houses, straightening and regulating the streets, building containing walls for the river Miljacka and adding a series of
94 By the early 20th century, the limits of Sarajevo’s Baš aršija had been determined geographically: on the south by Obala Street, which runs parallel to the river Miljacka to the south; on the north by Petar Ko i /Marshal Tito Street, which separates the Baš aršija from the northern residential hills; on the west by Gazi Husref Beg’s Bezistan and the old Jewish Hram (synagogue), which borders with a new Austro–Hungarian development; and on the east by the Vije nica and Šeher ehajin. An alternative term aršija (markets) is also commonly used in reference to the same precinct. Both terms could be inclusive of the surrounding residential areas of mahalas.
66 Chapter 2
new bridges and civic buildings. This focus on infrastructure and urban renewal gave rise to the development and growth of the new city, to the west of Baš aršija.95
Frequent fires that started easily in the densely populated Baš aršija area threatened not only the historic monuments but the surrounding fabric as well. A sudden fire that destroyed significant parts of Baš aršija in 1879, only a year after the Austrians arrived, provided a legitimate excuse for government to address the
‘problem’ of Baš aršija and test its new regulatory policies.96 In the 1880s, a building code for Sarajevo stipulated that new buildings could be built in the Baš aršija area and that existing buildings could be adapted only with governmental permission, thus putting all new development under strict governmental control.97 The measures were introduced not so much to protect the traditional environment as to provide a space for the selective conservation and control of the city’s growth and development. A separate section of the building code introduced the widening and
95 For a discussion of the Austro Hungarian administration of Sarajevo see Kruševac, Sarajevo pod Austro–Ugarskom upravom 1878–1918; and H. Kreševljakovi , Sarajevo za vrijeme Austrougarske uprave (1878–1918), (Sarajevo During the Austro Hungarian Government), Izdanje Arhiva Grada Sarajeva, Sarajevo 1969, pp. 23–27. 96 The first three books of regulations and directives (1878–1880) were published in Vienna in the German language, with more instructional rather than normative character. In the first instance the Austro–Hungarian government relied on the existing Turkish ‘buildings and roads regulations’ (originally published 1863) for its own needs. This changed from 1881, when the government started printing its publications in both German and Serbo Croatian and sometimes the Serbo Croatian version in both scripts (Latin and Cyrillic). Kruševac, Sarajevo pod Austro–Ugarskom upravom 1878– 1918, pp. 36–37. 97 At the beginning the new authorities accepted and respected Turkish laws. But by 1880 the new building code (Gra evni red) had already been introduced, stipulating building heights and requiring submission of drawings as a part of the building approval process. M. Serdarevi , Pravna zaštita kulturno historijskog naslijedja BiH, p. 27 also in Kruševac, Sarajevo pod Austro–Ugarskom upravom 1878–1918, p. 37.
67 Chapter 2
straightening of streets, the opening of new squares and streets and a new regulation (expropriation) and zoning of the land.98
A process that initially aimed at making the area safe saw Baš aršija gradually change from the centre of city life to a designated historical precinct. The new 1893
‘Building code regulations for the capital city of Sarajevo’ (Gra evni pravilnik za
Zemaljski glavni grad Sarajevo) defined the business sector of Baš aršija as a separate zone, with specific building regulations.99 The code allowed building in timber, but limited the building height to basement and two storeys. Building a third storey depended on providing appropriate ‘health, air and light access’ and proving non interference with the ‘picturesque appearance’ of the surrounding buildings.100 Building in the proximity of the Gazi Husref Beg’s mosque was heavily regulated to preserve the ‘character’ of the precinct.101
Ultimately, the conservation policy articulated in the ‘building code regulations for the capital city of Sarajevo’ favoured the conservation of the ‘significant heritage’ only.102 Although this led to projects such as the re painting of the ornaments in the
Beg Mosque in 1885, and the reconstruction of the Šeher ehajin bridge in 1902, it
98 Kruševac, Sarajevo pod Austro–Ugarskom upravom 1878–1918, p. 37. 99 Serdarevi suggests this document was the first legal act that regulated the building industry in Sarajevo. Serdarevi , Pravna zaštita kulturno historijskog naslijedja BiH, p. 29. 100 Serdarevi , Pravna zaštita kulturno historijskog naslijedja BiH, p. 29 101 Branka Dimitrijevi refers to ‘Bosnische Post’ of 12 May 1903, which outlines the attempt by the Austro–Hungarians to regulate building in the area of Baš aršija. B. Dimitrijevi , Prilozi o zaštiti graditeljskog nasljedja u Bosni I Hercegovini I valorizaciji Baš aršije u Sarajevu u Austro Ugarskom periodu (1878–1918), Sarajevo, September 1988, unpublished paper presented at a conference on the development of Baš aršija. 102 Serdarevi , Pravna zaštita kulturno historijskog naslijedja BiH, p. 27.
68 Chapter 2
overlooked the need to maintain small scale structures.103 The focus on significant structures isolated and privileged monuments and historic buildings above the overall context of the precinct.104 With the authorities’ growing recognition of the importance of historic preservation, questions of whether the precinct was to be a historic section or a growing and living part of the city began to enter urban debates.
A group of Baš aršija residents appealed for their right to build commercially viable buildings on their land, and asked the authorities to clarify what was meant by regulations such as ‘keeping the character of aršija’. They wrote in a letter ‘that [if that meant] aršija character is expressed through the timber shutters where different shop owners present their goods’, then, they argued:
… we think, that keeping these aesthetic qualities will be almost impossible, because no one can be forced to built timber shutters today, so whenever the new building is built in the aršija area, even if it is a ground storey building it will inevitably have the qualities of the modern shop, which will have nothing characteristic in its appearance’.105
The concerned group further appealed to the government to protect the ‘interest of the poor people’, rather than ‘antiquarian’ efforts. To regulate to keep the wooden shutters ( efenek), they said, ‘it was obvious that the people who made this decision
103 The introduction in 1892 of the ‘Order of the Government for Bosnia and Herzegovina of the protection of monuments, the handling of heritage items and other historically and culturally significant structures’ (‘Naredba Zemaljske Vlade za Bosnu I Hercegovinu od 27.6. 1892 br 50.243/1 o uvanju histori kih spomenika, zatim postupku sa starinama i drugim u histori kom I kulutrno histori kom pogledu znamenitih objekata) specifically defined the heritage protection procedures. Serdarevi , Pravna zaštita kulturno historijskog naslijedja BiH, pp. 26–27. Discussion of this document and its significance is presented in Dimitrijevi , Prilozi o zaštiti graditeljskog nasljedja u Bosni I Hercegovini. 104 Kostovi , Sarajevo izmedju dobrotvorstva i zla, pp. 114–15. 105 Dimitrijevi , Prilozi o zaštiti graditeljskog nasljedja u Bosni I Hercegovini.
69 Chapter 2
had no property in Baš aršija “but were led by their fantasies”’.106 Throughout the
20th century, the request to the government to devise and make public its approach to heritage preservation underpinned the urban debates of Sarajevo.
In addition to the regulations that concerned the built fabric, the new government introduced a series of measures that restructured the economic structure of the vakuf, the institution supporting the development of the precinct. Primarily it was the vakuf’s amalgamation of religious beliefs with social and urban practices that prompted the Austro–Hungarian government to take control of the institution’s dealings, and it requested more administrative procedures and transparency in the institution’s accounting processes. To implement the new structures the government established, in 1883, the Vakuf Commission, and nominated the senior
Muslim membership. The commission replaced the local family administration of vakuf with a centrally controlled administration that required proper budget and accountability.107
Further, to allow a free market of land, in 1912 the Zemaljska Vlada of BiH (the local governmental body under the Austro–Hungarians) changed land regulation, so that the holder of the land became its owner and vakuf the collector of taxes – effectively replacing the 1886 document that regulated and prevented the selling of
106 Dimitrijevi , Prilozi o zaštiti graditeljskog nasljedja u Bosni I Hercegovini. 107 By the institutional laws of vakuf, once a property is a part of a vakuf it could never revert to ordinary ownership. At the time of the Austro–Hungarian annexation in 1878 it was estimated that nearly one third of all useable land in Bosnia was owned by vakuf. Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, p. 146.
70 Chapter 2
the government land (mirija land).108 As the landholders became the owners, the institution of vakuf lost much of its property, and the change in structure made the institution more open to corruption.109 The next big loss of vakuf land occurred after the World War One, when much of the land was included in agrarian reforms.110
While most of the construction under the Austro–Hungarians remained to the west of Baš aršija, new structures within the precinct as well as the Austro–Hungarian conservation approach towards the Ottoman centre altered its reading significantly.
The most monumental marker of the new government’s urban vision for the precinct was the city’s town hall, or Vije nica, which was designed and built between 1891 and 1895, opening in 1896 [Figure 5]. Positioned at the eastern end of the Baš aršija, on the banks of the river Miljacka, it marked the edge of the
Ottoman market precinct, as well as the outer edge of the dense urban development of the old city center.111 The building’s imposing height – almost twice
108 In principle vakuf was established on the ‘real’ property fully owned by the person establishing the vakuf (evkafi vakuf). Land titles were divided in five groups: private – mulk; government owned – mirije; religious endowment/vakuf – mevkufe; common use – metruke; and non usable land – nesvak. While it was common to endow the government owned land, permission (temliknama) was needed in any transactions. Serdarevi , Pravna zaštita kulturno historijskog naslijedja BiH, p. 18. 109 For example, the building of Brusa Bezistan, originally established under the vakuf of Rustempaša, ended up being recorded as the private property of several individuals Serdarevi , Pravna zaštita kulturno historijskog naslijedja BiH, p. 22. 110 Serdarevi , Pravna zaštita kulturno historijskog naslijedja BiH, p. 22. 111 Among other significant examples of buildings designed in ‘pseudo Moorish’ style are: the high school (1885) architect H. Niemeczak; Muslim community reading room (1888), vakuf’s building at 8 Zrinjskog street (1889) and the building of Isa Beg’s bath (1890), all designed by J. Vancaš; and the Sheriat School of Law (1887) by K. Paržik.
71 Chapter 2
that of the neighbouring Ottoman structures – stated the Austro Hungarian administration’s greater significance than the previous Ottoman rulers.112
Figure 5: Contemporary view of Vije nica. Source: Dijana Ali , 2004. The first pseudo Moorish style building in Sarajevo was the Ruždija High School, built in 1885, and almost each year for the next five years a building of this style was erected in old Ottoman Sarajevo.113 With every new structure that appeared, the visual and architectural coherence of the precinct was further undermined [Figure
6]. The advent of World War One saw the collapse of the Austro–Hungarian government, which ushered in a period of conflict and regional instability.114 With diverted funds from conservation and development, a period of architectural
112 For further discussion see D. Ali , ‘Ascribing significance to sites of memory, the Sarajevo’s town hall’, in P. Somma (ed.), At War with the City, Urban International Press, Gateshead, 2004, pp. 65–86. 113 For a discussion of other structures built by the Austro–Hungarians in this period see D. Ali & C. Bertram, ‘Sarajevo: a moving target’, Centropa, Journal of Central European Architecture and Related Arts, vol. 2, no. 3, September 2002, pp. 164–76. 114 In 1918, Austro–Hungarian rule was formally denounced and the Kingdom of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs was formed. This was re named the Kingdom of Yugoslavia in 1929. Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, pp. 166–74.
72 Chapter 2
stagnation and urban deterioration set in. The Catholic Cathedral and the Orthodox
Church were built in the new city centre, and Baš aršija was no longer a viable religious and administrative city centre but an old and historic part of the town.
Figure 6: Contemporary view of Baš aršija square with sebilj. Source: Dijana Ali , 2004. Bosnia’s ethno religious stratification became one of its central political issues, particularly exploited in the growing nationalisms of the Bosnian neighbouring states of Serbia and Croatia.115 Drawing their strength from the ‘imagined’ and the
‘invented traditions’ of 19th century European nationalism, Serbians and Croatians questioned the authenticity of the Bosnian Muslims in their national rhetoric.116
115 For an account of Bosnia’s internal nationalist divisions refer to Buturovi , Stone Speaker, p. 128. 116 This is a reference to the well known Imagined Communities, by Benedict Anderson. Anderson argues that the nation is not a given historical entity, but a constructed and ‘imagined political community’. It is an imagined community because members of even the smallest nation can never hope to meet, or even hear of, all fellow members. Its membership, thus, is usually established not upon the common grounds of the objectively identifiable criteria such as common language, culture or history, but because ‘they think’ they belong to such a community. See B. Anderson, Imagined Communities, Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, Verso, London & New York, 1992. The concept of ‘imagined community’ has also been used in relation to Bosnia. For discussion of the Yugoslav ‘imagined communities’ see Lampe, Yugoslavia as History, Twice There Was a Country, p.
73 Chapter 2
Serbian nationalism did so by promoting its superiority and resistance in the struggle against Ottoman foreign dominations in the territories, and Croatian nationalism by promoting its cultural superiority.117 Primarily interested in building upon what they perceived as their own real and existing communities, Serbian and
Croatian national ideologies of the 19th century provided very little support for the
‘imagined community’ of Bosnians. Unlike in the Middle East, where the Ottoman legacy could be considered organic or in Turkey where it might be an ancient regime, in the Balkans and Bosnia the Ottoman past became commonly framed by a discourse of social and political segregation.118 Nevertheless, Grabrijan continued his interest in the Ottoman built heritage, a passion that he shared with his friend
Juraj Neidhardt. But his writings on the relevance of this built fabric to the collective identity had begun to make a turn.
The search for the relevance of historic fabric
Faced with what he perceived as lack of appreciation, by the authorities, for the old fabric and local population, Grabrijan began to acknowledge the difficulties associated with integrating the past into new Sarajevo. He realised that unlike in his and Ple nik’s Ljubljana, where integrated historic remnants formed a vital part of the new city and symbolised the search for the historic continuity of Slovenians, the 40, and for the Yugoslav nation as ‘a state of mind’, an ‘imagined community’ see Wachtel, Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation. 117 Lampe, Yugoslavia as History, Twice There Was a Country, p. 40. 118 Balkan historians such as Maria Todorova have argued that the main rationale behind this attitude rests on what she suggests is ‘the not so erroneous perception of segregation of the local Christian population’ and the privileges that Muslims enjoyed within the essentially Islamic state – privilege that, in historic terms, marked the inter ethnic relationships in Bosnia well after the Ottomans left. Todorova argues that as a supra national or non national state, the Ottoman Empire in its very structure neither provided nor desired to achieve that kind of interaction. Todorova, Imagining the Balkans, Oxford University Press, New York, 1997, pp. 164–65.
74 Chapter 2
built fabric of Baš aršija had no such role in the collective imagination of Bosnians.
Its disparate visual markers and dilapidated fabric were not reminders of the collective historic experience, but signalled a disjointed past and colonial times. The diversity of the precinct’s religious monuments, which formerly served the religious communities of Muslims, Orthodox Christians, Catholics and Jews, was by the early
20th century framed by growing nationalisms and increasing awareness of the absence of a unified Bosnian community.
The potency of Baš aršija to act as a literary metaphor for the inter ethnic relationship appeared in the work of a significant Yugoslav writer and the Nobel prize winner, Ivo Andri . Andri ’s novel A Letter from 1920 described religious markers – the mosques, churches and synagogues – of Baš aršija, in the following way:
Whoever lies awake at night in Sarajevo hears the voices of the Sarajevo night. The clock on the Catholic cathedral strikes the hour with weighty confidence: 2am. More than a minute passes (to be exact, seventy five seconds – I counted) and only then with a rather weaker, but piercing sound does the Orthodox church announce the hour, and chime its own 2am. A moment after it the tower clock on the Bey's [Beg’s] mosque strikes the hour in a hoarse, faraway voice, and that strikes 11, the ghostly Turkish hour, by the strange calculation of distant and alien parts of the world. The Jews have no clock to sound their hour, so God alone knows what time it is for them by the Sephardic reckoning or the Ashkenazy. Thus at night, while everyone is sleeping, division keeps vigil in the counting of the late, small hours, and separates these sleeping people who awake, rejoice and mourn, feast and fast by four different and antagonistic calendars, and send all their prayers and wishes to one heaven in four different ecclesiastical languages. And this difference,
75 Chapter 2
sometimes visible and open, sometimes invisible and hidden, is always similar to hatred, and often completely identical with it.119
Grabrijan himself registered the resentment and the dislike for the precinct by the local population. In his article ‘Architecture in human scale’, Grabrijan admitted that his appreciations of the old precinct were not commonly shared:
It [Baš aršija] is not significant, say local people. It is only the work of local [unskilled] labourers, without any qualifications and culture – a reflection perhaps of another cultural centre, far away from this city [Sarajevo] – one provincial expression, [that is] today neglected and in a dilapidating state.120
The perception that Bosnian architecture was a provincial copy of the architecture of the former empire was a significant component of the nationalist argument that questioned the authenticity of Bosnian Muslims.121 In Ottoman provincial capitals such was Sarajevo, it was the duty of the local governor, or vezir, to establish the new city to promote the principles of Ottoman urbanism.122 Drawing inspiration from the metropolitan sources of Istanbul, the architectural style of monumental buildings in cities such as Sarajevo, Bursa and Amasya shared distinctive Ottoman
119 Ivo Andri , A Letter from 1920, trans. Lenore Grenoble, Forest Books, London & Boston, Dereta, Belgrade, 1992. For a discussion of this novel see, I. Lovrenovi , Bosnia: A Cultural History, New York University Press, New York, 2001, pp. 221–23. Lovrenovic suggests that Lord Owen and some US personnel involved in the peace process of 1992 had been given this letter as a factual document. Lovrenovi highlights the fact that the novel, while set in the period between two wars, was first published in 1946. For extracts from the novel see, [http://www.ivoandric.org.yu/html/body_andric_s_treasury_ii.html] 120 Grabrijan, ‘Arhitektura nadohvat ovje je ruke’ (Architecture in human scale), originally published in Novi Behar, Sarajevo, 1940, br. 2, 3; republished as a separate issue (same title) Architecture in human scale. eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, pp. 51–70. 121 For further discussion see Ali & Bertram, ‘Sarajevo: a moving target’. 122 Vizier, is a high ranking political or religious adviser to a Muslim monarch, such as a caliph or sultan. The Bosnian spelling is vezir. Külliye, is a term that designates a complex of buildings centred around a mosque and managed by a single institution, often based on a vakuf. In Bosnia only the term vakuf is used.
76 Chapter 2
features such as stone facades, with metal clad domes and pencil minarets.123 This city’s organisational structure, which was held together by this architectural uniformity, made the city deeply Ottoman. This alliance became particularly problematic with growing nationalist views that identified it as a residue of colonial times.
This attitude, Grabrijan argued, led to the perception that nothing but a complete demolition and modernisation could overcome the inherent problems of the precinct:
I am listening to local people who say, ‘Let’s demolish aršija, it is all rotten, it is unhealthy, unhygienic, backward. The people living in aršija all suffer from rheumatism, and it is impossible to adjust it to the contemporary standards’. But despite that, [the precinct] possesses so many attractive features, so many architectural masterpieces that one must pause to admire them.124
Rationalising the problematic nature of his attempts to reconcile the historic fabric of Baš aršija with common cultural and historic grounds, Grabrijan’s writings begun to offer a new platform for interpreting the old.125
Attempting to neutralise the problematic connection to Islam, as a starting point for the discussion he wrote, ‘It would be necessary to establish to what extent the
123 Ali & Bertram, ‘Sarajevo: a moving target’. 124 Grabrijan, ‘Arhitektura nadohvat ovje je ruke’ in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, pp. 51–70. 125 Original quote: ‘Kad ovako usporedjujem, ne mogu, a da ne mislim na nastojanje arh. Ple nika u arhitekturi grobova. Njegov rad skoro da se ne može pregledati, a da se ne vidi njegova nadgrobna arhitektura. Njegova težnja u tom radu udnovato se poklapa s tim što su postigli u estetici grobova naši Muslimani. … Ple nik svjesno uklanja sa grobova sve elemente koji pobudjuju u nama osje aj smrti: emprese zamjenjuje brezama, mogile zelenim cvijetnim poljanama, crne mrtva ke natpise nadgrobnika sa živocrvenim I tako dalje.’ Grabrijan, ‘Muslimanska groblja’, in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 106.
77 Chapter 2
Slavic soul influenced our Muslim graveyards’.126 Grabrijan wrote of ‘snow white stones’, describing the scattered old gravestones not through their religious role but as objects in the landscape ‘all uniform’ and seemingly ‘not grounded at all’, as if
‘they bow to each other, on green carpets of grass’.127 Their form, Grabrijan concluded, was ‘maybe the most beautiful in the world!’128 Void of religious connections, the gravestones were ‘artefacts of great craftsmanship and artistic skill’ that represented the achievement of local artisans.129 Having established their value in terms of traditional craft, Grabrijan noted that if not protected they ‘will gradually disappear’, together with the disappearance of the ‘stonemason able to cut a stone in that traditional shape’.130
Ultimately, Grabrijan wrote, referring to the common practice of using local and folk imagery on Muslim gravestones, they ‘depict motives from a pre Islamic period, and
Christian life’.131 Considered as generic objects from the past, the gravestones of
Sarajevo, much like the Roman ruins in Ljubljana, could be incorporated in the new
126 Original quote: ‘Kad ovako usporedjujem, ne mogu, a da ne mislim na nastojanje arh. Ple nika u arhitekturi grobova. Njegov rad skoro da se ne može pregledati, a da se ne vidi njegova nadgrobna arhitektura. Njegova težnja u tom radu udnovato se poklapa s tim što su postigli u estetici grobova naši Muslimani. … Ple nik svjesno uklanja sa grobova sve elemente koji pobudjuju u nama osje aj smrti: emprese zamjenjuje brezama, mogile zelenim cvijetnim poljanama, crne mrtva ke natpise nadgrobnika sa živocrvenim I tako dalje.’ Grabrijan, ‘Muslimanska groblja’, in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 106. 127 Original quote: ‘I sad me ne iznenadjuje više kad se sje am Ple nikovih izjava o muslimanskim grobljima: “Sniježno bijeli kamenovi, svi jednoobrzni, koji se, pošto su bez temelja, jedan drugom klanjaju iznad zelenih ilima, koji im tvore travnjaci: možda najljepša groblja na svijetu!’ Grabrijan, ‘Muslim graveyards’, in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 106. 128 Grabrijan, ‘Muslimanska groblja’, in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 106. 129 Grabrijan, ‘Muslimanska groblja’, in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 106. 130 Original quote: ‘Nišani iznad muslimanskih grobova esto pokazuju motive iz toga predislamskog, kris anskog života. I ovih spomenika bi e sva manje I manje, još malo pa ne ete mo i više prona i klesara, koji bi umio iskelsati taj tradicionalni oblik.’ Grabrijan, ‘Muslimanska groblja’, in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 108. 131 Grabrijan, ‘Muslimanska groblja’, Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 14. 6, 1936; republished in Novi Behar, Sarajevo, 1937, br. 5–6, god. XI. eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 108.
78 Chapter 2
artistic creations. Seizing an opportunity to present the architectural relics of
Sarajevo as a part of broader artistic efforts, Grabrijan wrote:
When I compare [Islam and Christianity] I cannot avoid thinking of Ple nik’s attempts in the architecture of graveyards … Strangely enough his attempts are very similar with what the Muslims have achieved in their aesthetics of necropolis.132
Grabrijan’s search for a less historically charged interpretation of what often were explicitly religious forms of gravestones and like structures, began to offer new possibilities for the integration of historic references in new urban proposals. The emphasis on the universal qualities of architectural responses diminished the significance of the religious differences. Further, it allowed Grabrijan to invest art with the capacity to transcend religious and national barriers.
The modernity of past: ‘Le Corbusier and Sarajevo’
It was in the 1936 article ‘Le Corbusier and Sarajevo’ that Grabrijan directed the relevance of local architectural heritage to the future and modern architecture, unlike Ple nik who directed it to the past.
Despite Grabrijan’s clear admiration of Ple nik’s architectural achievements, he did not share his teacher’s view of modern architecture, or his dislike of Le Corbusier and his promotion of modern architecture’s social agenda. The history and theory curriculum of Ple nik’s school terminated with mid 19th century debates; ‘[the] beginning of our modern style, a new period in architecture’, Ple nik stated to his students, marked the end of his discussion on style, and consequently established a 132 Grabrijan, ‘Muslimanska groblja’, eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 106.
79 Chapter 2
timeframe for his discussion of architecture’s development.133 Ple nik frequently stated his limited enthusiasm towards modern interest in materiality and innovation. Grabrijan recorded Ple nik suggesting to students interested in the modern agenda to look ‘in books [where] you will find on your own what is new [in modern architecture].’134 And with a clear resentment towards the agenda of architects such as Le Corbusier, Ple nik told his students that he was ‘not interested in modern’.135 Admitting the possibility of a wrong stance, he stated, ‘Maybe that is my mistake, but that is how it is, and not much can be done about it?’ 136
Ple nik justified his position by what he saw as a lack of the divine in modern architecture’s focus on the pragmatic. He stated, ‘what they [modern architects] want is a means towards an end, not an idea.’137 Particularly critical of Le
Corbusier’s promotion of the social role of architecture, Ple nik argued that Le
Corbusier ‘all together negated’ architecture as he considered it ‘a social tool, and a tool used in helping man’.138 Grabrijan noted that Ple nik often used a German saying – ‘es ist auch eine Idee, aber kein von Gott kommende!’ [‘It is an idea, but it is not inspired by God’] – when referring to Le Corbusier’s work.139 It appears that he
133 Original quote: ‘1848 nastane v Evropi veliki preobrat. Z njim se za enja naš moderni slog, to se pravi, nova doba v arhitekturi. Tako smo prišli do nekega konca tega premišljevanja, meni zazelenog in vam pri akovanega.’ Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 87. 134 Original quote: ‘Tako prihajmo danes populnoma istih rok v novo dobo. Kulturno življenje je v neki smeri tudi pri nas tako bujno, da lahko iz tega se nekaj ustvarite. Pregledovali pa moderne ne bomo, našli bise sami v knjigah to, kar je novega.’ Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 87. 135 Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 79. 136 Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 79 137 Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 79 138 Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 80. 139 Original quote: ‘Mislim da rejšenje svijeta ne leži toliko u LC koliko u boljim I skoromnijm djelima: ovjek mora ostati ponižen. Što bi Njemci rekli: to je takodje ideja, ali ne dolazi od Boga.’ Grabrijan, Ple nik in Njegova Šola, p. 79.
80 Chapter 2
interpreted Le Corbusier’s outspoken enthusiasm for the profane aspects of life, his interest in efficiency and the economics of cities to be in a direct contrast to his respect for the high arts.140
Despite such hostilities Grabrijan and his colleagues were eager to participate in the modernist debate, especially since the new technical schools and architecture programs within the kingdom attracted the return of a number of architects who had practised abroad.141 Even within the school where Ple nik was teaching,
Professor Ivan Vurnik ran classes that openly promoted aspects of the modern agenda. Grabrijan, like many of his contemporaries, believed that introducing these ideas into contemporary practice brought local and national traditions closer to an international agenda.
In observing and writing about Sarajevo, Grabrijan recognised the urban and formal qualities discussed by Le Corbusier in his Journey to the East.142 Referring to the
140 However, the students, Grabrijan among them, were interested in contemporary debates. In an attempt to keep up with current architectural debates, Grabrijan’s class organised an excursion to the International Exhibition of Modern Decorative and Industrial Arts in Paris in 1925. Ple nik saw this as a challenge to his teaching methods. He declined the student invitation to accompany them, pulling out at the last moment. Prelovšek, Jože Ple nik 1872–1957, p. 160. 141 Tomislav Premerl, in Hrvatska Moderna Arhitektura izmedju dva rata, suggested that Adolf Loos made a significant impact on the Zagreb architectural scene, through architects such as Kovacic and Ehrlich. Zlatko Neumann was Loos’ student and collaborator, and Vlado Poto njak worked with him in Paris. Many other significant European architects disseminated their ideas via the work of their students or colleagues. The influence of Poelzig reached Zagreb via Drago Ibler, Zdenko Strižic and Josip Pi man, while Ernest Weissmann, Juraj Neidhardt, Drago Ibler and Zlatko Neimann promoted of Le Corbusier’s ‘school of thought’. T. Premerl, Hrvatska Moderna Arhitektura izmedju dva rata (Croatian Modern Architecture Between the Two World Wars), Nakladni Zavod Matice Hrvatske, Zagreb, 1989, p. 31. 142 I. Žanki , (ed.), Le Corbusier (Charles Edouard Jeanneret), Journey to the East, MIT Press, Cambridge, Ma.,1987.
81 Chapter 2
architecture of Baš aršija’s mahala, the residential sector that surrounded the old
Ottoman part of the city of Sarajevo, Grabrijan wrote:143
I am looking at Le Corbusier’s first publication. It starts with his sketches from his travels, on which he later based his modern architecture. But that is a Bosnian house! There are the gardens that surround it! The mosque and minarets! There is also the Muslim graveyard and grave stones, with beautiful views through lattice windows framed by the heavy walls!144
Astonished by his own discovery of structures that so much resembled the buildings described in Le Corbusier’s Journey to the East, Grabrijan asked145 ‘Has Le Corbusier been to Bosnia? What are the parallels between contemporary modern architecture and Bosnian houses – between modern and Islamic architecture?’146 Focusing on this relationship, Grabrijan presented multiple analogies between the buildings sketched by Le Corbusier and the Bosnian house, the subject of his discussion.
Arguing for a relationship between Baš aršija and Le Corbusier’s ideas, Grabrijan presented an analysis of specific buildings within the precinct. Both in form and the material used, the fabric of Baš aršija, Grabrijan argued, resembled the context upon which Le Corbusier premised his architecture. With the relationship between
Le Corbusier’s work and local architectural practices often assumed rather than
143 Grabrijan, ‘Le Corbusier I Sarajevo Uo i izložbe njegovog bivšeg asistenta arh. Juraja J. Neidhardta’, (Le Corbusier and Sarajevo), originally published in Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 31. 10, 1936; cited in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, pp. 29–37. 144 Original quote: ‘Gledam Le Corbusieve prve publikacije. Pocinje skicama sa svojih studijskih putovanja, na kojima kasnije osniva svoju modernu. Pa to je Bosanska kuca! To su vrtovi oko nje! Tu džamija I munare! I tu je muslimansko groblje I nišani, sa divnim pogledima kroz zamrežene prozore, usje ene u zidane ograde! Da li je Le Corbusier bio u Bosni? Kakve su paralele izmedju današnje I bosanske ku e – izmedju moderne I islamske arhitekture?’ Grabrijan, in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 29. 145 Žanki , Le Corbusier, Journey to the East. For a discussion of Le Corbusier and Orientalism see Çelik, ‘Le Corbusier, Orientalism, Colonialism’, Assemblage, 17, December1992, pp. 59–77. 146 D. eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 29.
82 Chapter 2
demonstrated, Grabrijan argued that the treatment of materials, construction and lighting in Baš aršija combined with the city’s organisation of spaces and the plasticity of forms were values shared between the Bosnian traditional house and
Le Corbusier’s architecture. The use of concrete, for example, as the ‘material of Le
Corbusier’s architecture’ was relevant to the discussion on materiality of the
Bosnian house;147 but not through the expected similarity of the material but through a similar timber like treatment of the surface. Le Corbusier achieved this by the use of timber’s effect on off form concrete, and in the case of the traditional
Bosnian house by the use of a timber construction system.
Extending this, Grabrijan perceived a resemblance in building systems that lifted the structures above the ground. Le Corbusier used concrete piloti, while traditional
Bosnian structures used timber posts. Despite sometimes tenuous links between the two, Grabrijan concluded that the roof lighting, double height spaces, glass elevation, simple cubic massing and even the placement of buildings within the open greenery were all shared qualities. Relying on the modern authority of Le
Corbusier’s work, Grabrijan implied that the parallels he presented were sufficient to demonstrate the modernity of traditional Bosnian architecture. Presented within the context of modern architectural debates, the built fabric of the old precinct offered new relevance.
147 D. eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 29.
83 Chapter 2
The authenticity of past: ‘Turkish house, its sources and principles’
Grabrijan’s 1937 article ‘Turkish house, its sources and principles’ appeared in Novi
Behar, a paper read mostly by the Muslim population of the city – unlike his ‘Le
Corbusier and Sarajevo’ (1936), published in the pro government journal
Jugoslovenski List.148 This suggests Grabrijan’s increasing awareness of the problematic associations between Baš aršija’s structures and the Ottoman past, and an increasing desire to gain the support from the local Muslim population. In this article Grabrijan admitted that he discovered the Bosnian house in the writings of Swiss architect Ernst Egli (1893–74):
I have seen it [the Turkish house] in the Muslim house of Sarajevo, and was surprised by the extraordinary similarities between its aspiration and those of modern architecture. So, a double interest binds me to the [Bosnian Muslim] house; firstly this house is also our house, and secondly – it contains some long established beauties, that I would like to apply to our modern architecture.149
Referring to Egli’s research, Grabrijan remarked that almost all observations by the
Swiss Turkish architect on the Turkish house could be also applied to the Bosnian house.150 Egli’s most significant assistant was Sedad Hakki Eldem (1908–88), who built his reputation leading the quest for a national expression in modernism,
148 D. Grabrijan, ‘Turska ku a Osnove i porijeklo’ (Turkish house, its roots and origins), originally published in Novi Behar, Sarajevo, 15. 7, 1937; cited in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, pp. 37–43. Hadjijahi suggests that Novi Behar was a family oriented publication catering mostly for the Muslim population of the city. M. Hadjijahi , Od Tradicije do Identiteta (From Tradition to Identity), Svjetlost, Sarajevo, 1974, p. 203. 149 Original quote: ‘No moje zanimanje za tursku ku u ima drugu osnovu. Upoznao sam je u muslimanskoj ku i u Sarajeva, a iznenadila me udnovata sli nost njezinih osnovnih težnji sa težnjama moderne arhitekture. Tako me svezao za nju dvostruki interes; prvi: ovo je ku a i naša ku a, a drugi – ona sadrži neke iskušane ljepote, koje bih htio primjeniti i na našu modernu.’ In eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 42. 150 Egli, suggested Sibel Bozdogan, had replaced the classical Beaux Arts model of education with one based on the rationalist and functionalist principles of European modernism. Bozdogan & Kasaba, Modernism and Nation Building, pp. 57 & 70. Grabrijan explained that Dr. Egli was a Swiss architect who taught architecture at Technical University and practised architecture in Istanbul.
84 Chapter 2
defining and justifying the new professional identity of the architect and promoting the New Architecture as the appropriate expression for the new Turkey.151
Of particular importance to Grabrijan was Egli and Eldem’s interest in the vernacular. The understanding of modern architecture as context sensitive and rational underpinned the architectural discourse of Turkey during the 1930s.
Embedded in the architects’ approach was a belief that ‘modern equals national’, and that the most rational and appropriate response to the region’s climatic, topographical, cultural, social, and economic conditions ‘could not be anything but
‘national’.152 The ideals of modern architecture and the vernacular traditions were, in their view, one and the same. That European modernism was inspired by vernacular traditions only further strengthened this belief.
Grabrijan’s article on the Turkish house relied on a free interpretation of Egli’s thesis, adjusted to fit the case under consideration: the Bosnian house. This technique allowed Grabrijan to position international debates closer to the Bosnian context, as well as to heighten the relevance of his own writings and arguments.
Just as he used the authority of Le Corbusier to affirm the modernity of Bosnian house, Grabrijan presented Egli’s published paper as a confirmation of his own academic views.
151 Bozdogan &Kasaba, Modernism and Nation Building, p. 158. 152 Bozdogan & Kasaba, Modernism and Nation Building, p. 256.
85 Chapter 2
In the context of Bosnia, where national claims were based on the uniqueness and exclusive values of different ethnic groups, the amalgamation of international and national influences within the Bosnian house seemed an appealing model.153
Affirming the East/West, Orient/Occident, nature/culture duality, Grabrijan argued that the Western emphasis on rationality rendered the people ‘cold and distanced from nature’, while the Turkish emotional disposition helped them establish ‘a special connection to nature’.154 Presenting the relation between the house and the surrounding landscape as essential for understanding the underlying conceptual organisation, Grabrijan identified the ‘fence, garden and pavilion’ as the three basic elements of the house.155 The specifics of their relationship, according to Grabrijan, made the Turkish house unique. He suggested that:
… the Turkish house is so different to other [houses]. It developed in a climate where nature whispers to man and man responds with a smile, enjoying it and looking at it within his ordered and framed world. In that relationship between the two, nature becomes an element of composition; and nature transforms into architecture – the house’s external expression becomes architectural plasticity.156
Clearly the modernity of the Bosnian, via the Turkish, house was not only expressed in the formal architectural characteristics, such as the construction system or the material used, but in a complex emotional relationship between the people, house
153 Published in 1936, Grabrijan’s paper ‘Small family home’ discussed the main points of the ‘house with one wall’ as designed by Loos. The same paper also commented on the students’ project undertaken in Grabrijan’s class, which analysed Loos’ house in its relevance to the context of Bosnia. D. Grabrijan, ‘Porodi na mala ku a’ (Small family home), Tehni ar, Beograd, April 1936, br. 7; in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, pp. 161–66. 154 eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 38. 155 eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, pp. 37–43. 156 Original quote: ‘A u tom se odnosu prema prirode turska ku a bitno razlikuje od njih. Ona je nastal u klimi gdje prirode ovjeku šapu e; ovjek joj se smješkom odaziva; uživa u njoj i promatra je u svom omedjenom i sredjenom svijetu. Prema takvom odnosu priroda postaje elemenat kompozicije; prirode prelazi u arhitekturu – ku a se prema vani javlja kao arhitektonska plastika. Grabrijan in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 38.
86 Chapter 2
and land. Grabrijan’s insistence on the capacity of Bosnian architecture to negotiate such diverse aspects of urbanism remained a key aspect of his writing.
Like Riegl, Grabrijan attempted to reach beyond formal qualities and what he referred to as ‘dogma of materialism’; his discussion of heritage’s value to contemporary creations focused the less tangible connections between the people and their art. Practices of daily lives and experience provided the spatial framework for his search. He described the houses and outside shelters for teferi , picnic like gatherings commonly held by the Muslims, arguing that it was in those structures that the creativity of local people and their will to art was most evident:
Ottomans knew about placing the buildings in nature, and that is high art. He [the Ottoman man] places the house not only on hills, or on the most beautiful spots in the middle of gardens, but above the water too (café Bendbaša and Vrbanja) with the structure that allows him to extend above the water into the air, architecture that ceases to be rational and moves into the realm of fantasy.157
It was in structures built for daily routines that the imagination of the people, their regard for practicality and their relationship to nature, were in Grabrijan’s view most clearly expressed. While nature emerged as a significant reference point in
Grabrijan’s writings, a specific description of the natural environment either in terms of garden design or the layout of the landscape was not presented. This approach suggested that nature was seen as an abstract force, one that mediated
157 Original quote: ‘Osmanlija umije ku u plasirati u prirodi, i to je veliki umjetnost! On je stavlja ne samo po brežuljcima, na najljepša mjesta, usred vrtova, ve i iznad same vode (kafana Bendbaša i Vrbanja), a konstrukcije mu pri tome dozvoljava da prostorije izbacuje ak i preko vode u vazduh, ime arhitektura prestaje biti racionalna i prelazi u podru je fantazije.’ D. Grabrijan, ‘Kultura teferi a (osvrt na bosansko islamsku arhitekturu)’ (On Bosnian culture of teferi [picnics], view of Bosnian Islamic architecture), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 8. 7, 1939. Cited in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 46.
87 Chapter 2
the relationship between humans and their buildings. As a result, the built fabric,
Grabrijan suggested, embodied qualities that Western civilisation was still trying to achieve: ‘The principles of the garden city, which European civilisation seeks, have already been established in Turkey (Istanbul) or here in old Sarajevo’.158 This, in
Grabrijan’s view, was further evidence of traditional architecture’s relevance to contemporary endeavours.
Conclusion: role of architecture in establishing national claims
Grabrijan’s professional duty as an architect was to identify and promote values associated with the heritage fabric of Bosnia that were relevant to contemporary architecture and urban planning. Once in Sarajevo, Grabrijan looked for remnants of the past that could be brought to life, in a manner similar to Ple nik’s urban program for Ljubljana. In a belief that such remnants would provide visual cues and connections to the collective history of the people Grabrijan identified the historic precinct of Baš aršija to be of particular relevance. In his writings he sought ways to promote its importance to contemporary urban developments.
But Baš aršija, being historically connected to Ottoman colonialism and gradually outgrown by the new city of Sarajevo, was not considered a place for collective representation. Indeed, by the time Grabrijan started writing about it, the precinct was under a considerable attack – by outright demolition or passive neglect. It appears that Grabrijan soon realised the problematic political potency of Sarajevo’s old fabric, as his writings adopted a different approach to the one promoted by his 158 eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 45.
88 Chapter 2
teacher in Ljubljana. They presented the historic precinct’s fabric not in its relationship to the past and its religious origins, but as modern and authentic, and as an embodiment of the people’s collective artistic will. As this chapter has demonstrated, through these texts Grabrijan established an initial but critical relationship between the city’s Ottoman heritage and the Yugoslav, or more specifically Bosnian, identity. Later chapters will demonstrate that these writings provided the theoretical grounding for his and Neidhardt’s collaborative work. In their first collaborative effort ‘Sarajevo and its Satellites’, however Baš aršija’s
Ottoman fabric found only a limited place.
89
Chapter 3 Baš aršija’s Contribution to the New Master Plan of Sarajevo: the Islamic as Oriental
In 1942, Grabrijan and Neidhardt guest edited an issue of the Croatian architectural journal Technical Gazette (Tehni ki Vjesnik).1 Titled ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’
(Sarajevo i njegovi trabanti), the publication contributed to architectural and urban debates and to the development of the regulatory urban plan of Sarajevo.2 It provided an opportunity for the authors to present their design work and writings – both individual and collaborative – framed by a shared vision of a new master plan for the city of Sarajevo.
This chapter argues that despite the authors’ interest in and fascination with the historic core of Sarajevo, their master plan essentially denied the relevance of the existing city fabric to the growing city. Their discussion of the old precinct demonstrates the authors’ intention to move away from a search for the authentic qualities of the old fabric and the modernity existing within it. Instead, it associated
1 D. Grabrijan & J. Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo i njegovi trabanti’, Tehni ki Vjesnik, br. 7–9, Zagreb, 1942. The publication was partially sponsored by Neidhardt’s employer at the time, the Croatian Mining Company (Hrvatski Rudnici i Talionice). The list of credits includes the Croatian Engineering Society, the editorial board of Tehni ki Vjesnik and the directorate of Croatian Mines and Steel Production. 2 The translation of publication’s title is my own. The word trabant (plural trabanti) means attachment, something that follows. Despite the difference in English between ‘attachment’ and ‘satellite’ (satelit in both Serbo Croatian and Bosnian) the translation of trabanti to ‘satellites’ makes more sense. I am aware of the problematic connotations of ‘satellites’ in the context of 1920s’ debates concerning the urban vs. suburban satellite, particularly Le Corbusier’s hesitation around suburban expansion, as discussed in McLeod, ‘Urbanism and Utopia: Le Corbusier from regional syndicalism to Vichy’.
Chapter 3
Islamic urban forms with stereotypical and preconceived notions based on oppositional relationships between new and old, between progressive and backward. As this chapter demonstrates, the result of this approach was that
Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s master plan assigned only a peripheral role to the old precinct within their proposed vision. This was moderated to some extent by
Neidhardt’s presentation of mining workers’ housing projects. In this he anticipated the shift that became apparent in their subsequent collaborative work, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, published 15 years later in 1957.
An urban vision of a modern city: ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’
The opportunity to edit Technical Gazette provided an occasion for Grabrijan and
Neidhardt to present their ideas to a broad national audience.3 It allowed them to reconsider their previous views, such as those outlined in Grabrijan’s 1936 article
‘Thoughts and comments on the development of Sarajevo’.4 In that article Grabrijan had identified the city’s lack of an overarching urban vision as a serious obstacle to future development, and raised concerns about the haphazard approach of local government when dealing with the heritage fabric of the city. In ‘Sarajevo and Its
Satellites’ Grabrijan and Neidhardt offered guidelines and suggestions that could be used to address those concerns. 3 Technical Gazette was published in Zagreb by the Croatian Society of Engineers (Hrvatsko Društvo inžinjera). Both Bosnia and Hercegovina and Croatia at the time belonged to the Independent State of Croatia (Nezavisna Država Hrvatska; NDH). The Independent State of Croatia was a puppet state of Nazi Germany, created by fascist Italy and Nazi Germany. It was established in 1941, after the Kingdom of Yugoslavia was attacked by the Axis forces and the Kingdom of Yugoslavia was split up by Nazi Germany and fascist Italy. Geographically, NDH encompassed most of modern day Croatia and all of Bosnia and Hercegovina, as well as parts of Slovenia and Serbia. The NDH was ruled by Ante Paveli and his Ustaša military forces. 4 D. Grabrijan ‘Sarajevo se izgradjuje, Nekoliko polemi kih misli o urbanizaciji Sarajeva’ (Thoughts and comments on the development of Sarajevo), in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, pp. 101–05.
92 Chapter 3
The opening statement of ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ – ‘conserve the old – but build a new Sarajevo!’ – created a broad framework for understanding the ideas behind the vision of the city presented.5 ‘Whichever way the city of Sarajevo develops in the future’, the authors argued, certain principles ‘embedded in its historic development ought to be respected’.6 Taking the Acropolis as the root of Greek, and ultimately Western civilisation, the authors declared that their search for the
‘architectural principles’ of new Bosnian architecture would consider equally the old precinct and the modern city.7
For Neidhardt, the study of the old town in relation to issues of contemporary urbanism reminded him of his time spent in Le Corbusier’s office. Neidhardt had worked in Le Corbusier’s atelier at 35 rue de Sevres in Paris from 1 January 1933 until well into 1935.8 He was involved in a wide range of projects, including master plans for Algiers and Nemours.9 Neidhardt was significantly influenced by Le
5 Original quote: ‘Konzervirajmo staro – ali izgradimo novo Sarajevo!’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 210. 6 Original quote: ‘Kakogod se Sarajevo u budu nosti razvijalo, u svakom slu aju iz njegovog dosadašnjeg razvoja ostaju izvjesna iskustva, koja treba uvažavati’. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 201. 7 Original quote: ‘Akropola još I danas živi me u nama, njeni principi su svuda rasijani – jer su vje ni.’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 201. 8 Certificate to J. Neidhardt issued by Le Corbusier: ‘I certify that Mr. J. Neidhardt architect from Zagreb worked in our office from 1 January 1933 until the end of the summer 1935’. Paris, 22 August 1937. J. Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, p. 115. 9 Le Corbusier’s involvement with Algiers spans the period between 1932 and 1942. While working in his office, Neidhardt was involved in a number of projects, including urban proposals for Algiers (1933–34) and for Nemours (Algeria), Anvers (Belgium) and Stockholm (Sweden). He was also involved in studies of the ‘future city’ – La Ville Radieuse – the building of Rentenanstalt in Zurich, a project for the 1937 exhibition (for avenue Kallerman) and research for an agricultural reorganisation scheme (a farm and village). The extent of his contribution to the Algiers project is unclear, but in a letter to his friend Karl Mittel in1933, Neidhardt mentioned his involvement with the Algiers project
93 Chapter 3
Corbusier’s ideas, and was particularly intrigued by the Algerian project, in which the dialogue between ‘Islamic’ and ‘modern’ echoed themes apparent in
Yugoslavia. Convinced that the Swiss French architect had ‘discovered the principle
[of urban planning] somewhere in the Islamic world – somewhere in Algiers’,
Neidhardt was eager to explore the Islamic aspects of Bosnian architecture.10 The opportunity to present an urban plan for the city offered an ideal prospect.
In addition to the timely urban debates, the physical fabric of Sarajevo reminded
Neidhardt of Algiers.11 Like Algiers, Sarajevo consisted of two distinct urban parts: the old Baš aršija, visually marked by small alleys and Islamic monuments, and the modern European quarters, structured along wide, regular streets lined with eclectic buildings. Grabrijan had already noted this oppositional relationship between modern and traditional in his articles. And for Neidhardt, the Occident–
Orient relationship had the potential to enrich his own architectural approach by uniting the ‘rational’ and ‘sensual’ and by developing the themes discussed with Le
Corbusier.
Adding to the similarities of terrain and configuration was the increasing importance of the urban plan on city development. In Sarajevo, as in Algiers, urbanism was becoming a major public concern. In the 1940s, Sarajevo still relied
and suggested that he contributed to the development of Le Corbusier’s brise soleil idea. J. Karli Kapetanovi , Juraj Najdhart, život i djelo, p. 53. 10 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 227. 11 For further discussion of Le Corbusier’s involvement with Algiers and a description of the city see McLeod, ‘Urbanism and Utopia: Le Corbusier from regional syndicalism to Vichy’, p. 335.
94 Chapter 3
on an 1891 plan, developed by the Austro–Hungarian administration (1878–1913).12
It addressed the city as a whole and highlighted the colonial government’s commitment to the city’s westward development, away from Baš aršija.13 The linear structure of this master plan promoted a rational urban organisation, which was introduced by the Austro–Hungarian government. It endorsed zoning and the orthogonal street system that came to replace the irregular Ottoman street layouts.14 The 1891 plan underpinned the basic outline for the city’s urban development until well into the 20th century.15 The destruction and collapse of numerous historic buildings, mentioned in the previous chapter, as well as structures such as Jakub Pašin Mesdžid, which was built in 1491 and demolished in
1936, and a mosque built in 1540, prompted Grabrijan to call for a comprehensive urban plan.16 Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s discussion of an urban plan for Sarajevo consolidated their vision with broader public and professional concerns.
Like Le Corbusier17, who recommended that Algiers retain its basic linear organisation because it was particularly suited to ‘modern life’ and rapid transportation, Grabrijan and Neidhardt retained the linear layout established by 12 Even at the time of its development the 1891 plan had limited scope. It was originally developed in 1879 for the precinct of Baš aršija, but was extended and put in place only after fire destroyed much of the precinct in 1891. 13 M. umruk i , ‘Izrada Generalnog Urbanisti kog Plana’ (The development of a general urban plan), in M. ankovi (ed.), Sarajevo u Socijalisti koj Jugoslaviji od Oslobodjenja do Samoupravljanja, 1945–1950, Istorijski Arhiv Sarajevo, vol. 1, Sarajevo, 1988, pp. 387–88. In its scope the plan extended from Baš aršija, through the newly established urban centre to the suburbs, as far west as Dolac Malta. 14 To facilitate such changes the Austro–Hungarians introduced the regulatory system of cadastre – a system of land ownership registration. 15 Various partial urban regulatory plans were proposed and accepted, but a master plan for the whole city of Sarajevo was only accepted in 1974. 16 For more detailed discussion of the destruction of Muslim heritage see, Koštovi , Sarajevo, Izmedju Dobrotvorstva i Zla Sarajevo, pp. 169–85. 17 McLeod, ‘Urbanism and Utopia: Le Corbusier from regional syndicalism to Vichy’, p. 337.
95 Chapter 3
the Austro–Hungarian planners in their new 1942 master plan proposal. It included the old precinct, as well as the subsequent urban development by the Austro–
Hungarian and the Yugoslav governments. The approach supported the linearity of electric tramways, in operation since 1895, and made provision for the city to expand sideways while remaining connected via a central spine.18 ‘The city is like a human organism’, they wrote: ‘It has its heart (cultural centre), brain
(administrative section), stomach (business section), lungs (green areas), and arteries and veins (communications).’19 This biological analogy was represented in the drawing ‘Schematic representation of the new suburbs of the middle Bosnian mining basin’ [Figure 7]. Evoking the organic foundation of the proposal, the drawing showed a free flowing body of streets and urban centres.
Despite their repeated statements that the urban plan would offer a comprehensive solution for the existing city centre and historic precinct, Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s preoccupation appears to be with the new city –beyond the borders of the old precinct. The proposed plan included a geographically expansive area, which indicated the authors’ interest in large scale planning and regional development.
The inclusion of six new satellite towns showed the extent of their ambition. The satellites’ proximity to Sarajevo varied from Ilidža (2), only about 10 kilometres away from the old town, to Breza (1), Ri ica (3) and Vareš Majdan (6) up to 45 kilometres away, to towns as far as Zenica (7), some 70 kilometres away. On a
18 Horse pulled tramways were introduced in 1884. H. Kreševljakovi , Sarajevo za vrijeme Austrougarske uprave (1878–1918) (Sarajevo During the Austro Hungarian Government), Izdanje Arhiva Grada Sarajeva, Sarajevo 1969, p. 33. 19 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 202.
96 Chapter 3
micro urban scale, the proposal aimed to introduce a regular street network, with as many ‘squares as possible to maximise sun and greenery’.20 It identified hygiene as a ‘necessary [precondition] for the development of any healthy and progressive city.’21 ‘Well organised streets and regular blocks’ were, they argued, the backbone of a successful urban proposal.22
Figure 7: ‘Schematic representation of the new suburbs of the middle Bosnian mining basin’. Map of satellite towns included in the proposal: (1) old and new Sarajevo; (2) Ilidža; (3) Breza; (4) Ri ica; (5) Ri ica; (6) Vareš Majdan; (7) Zenica. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 272.
20 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 241. 21 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 202. 22 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 203.
97 Chapter 3
Only a relatively small section of the plan, labelled ‘Old and new Sarajevo’, related to the existing town of Sarajevo (1). The master plan thus conceptually extended the city boundaries away from Baš aršija, towards the growing Austrian–Hungarian section of the city to the west and out to the developing mining towns of Bosnia.
The mining towns, which were historically independent, were considered new suburbs of Sarajevo, or ‘its satellites’, as suggested by the project’s title.
Even in considering issues related to the existing city, Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s efforts focused on the city at large. The drawing titled ‘East–west artery’ defined the perimeter by existing monuments in a layout that referenced a human body
[Figure 8]. The entry ‘gate’ was marked by the site dedicated to a new railway station.23 The ‘lobby’ was associated with the Catholic church at Marijin Dvor
(Church of St. Joseph, 1940), the ‘foyer’ with the major intersection in front of the mosque of Ali Pasha (1560–61), while other monuments, such as the Orthodox church (Church of the Nativity of the Mother of God, 1874) and the Catholic
Cathedral of the Sacred Heart of Jesus (1889), marked the city centre. The central road that coincided with the existing Paveli eva Street linked the monuments into what appeared a natural and organic bodily form, and the old precinct of Baš aršija was enclosed and connected to the rest of the town only by the main road. 24 With major monuments marking the urban context, the proposal’s visual presentation
23 Grabrijan reviewed the 1935 idea competition for the new railway station in the article ‘Sarajevski željezni ki problem, konkretni predlog’ (The problem of Sarajevo railway station, a proposal), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 1. 7. 1936. 24 This street was named after Ante Paveli , the Croatian fascist leader who headed a Croatian state subservient to Germany and Italy during World War Two. During socialist Yugoslavia the street was named after Josip Broz Tito, the Yugoslav communist leader and the president of the state.
98 Chapter 3
looked more like a tourist map than a professionally designed contribution to a developing urban master plan.
Figure 8: ‘East–west artery’, an urban vision for Sarajevo presented in its relation to significant locations (from top to bottom of the drawing) that include: city gate at Bijela Tabija; bazaar of Baš aršija; King Tvrtko urban square; Stjepan Tomaševi urban square, intersection in front of Ali Pasha’s Mosque, Marijin Dvor and New Railway Station. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 239.
99 Chapter 3
The old precinct and the new city
Grabrijan and Neidhardt present their discussion of Baš aršija in the section of
‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ titled ‘Heritage’ (Predaja).25 Despite the introductory statements suggesting the authors’ interest in and fascination with the precinct, the review of historic development relied on two secondary sources. The first was credited to the well known chronicler of Ottoman times, Evlija elebija, and presented an extract from his 17th century travel journal ‘Sarajevo from 1069–72
(1650–53)’.26 The second was Grabrijan’s free interpretation of the 1916 article ‘The right on view’, originally written by the Austro–Hungarian architect Josip Pospišil.27
Both texts presented positive views of Sarajevo. elebija’s account introduced it as
‘the most beautiful of all’ and ‘one of the greatest Ottoman cities of the time’.28 The comments were extended by Pospišil’s description of the surrounding fabric of the mahala (neighbourhood). It was the harmonious relationship between houses and gardens, Pospišil argued, that demonstrated in urban terms the high ethical values of the people who designed and built those structures. Referring to the customary laws that upheld the keeping of neighbours’ unobstructed views, Pospišil presented the urban fabric of mahala as a physical manifestation of the natural and organic unity of planning and cultural practices [Figure 9].
25 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, pp. 210–25. 26 Reference made to the Hijri (Hidžra in Bosnian) calendar. Years 1069–72 are equivalent to the years 1650–53 in the Gregorian calendar. The Islamic calendar marks years in relation to the Islamic prophet Muhammad's emigration from Mecca to Medina. 27 A note states that the included text is a ‘free interpretation’ of the original discussion by Pospišil presented in Monatschrift für Städtebau, No.617, 1916. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 224. 28 Original quote: ‘Na zemlji ima po imenu ‘Saraj’ nekoliko gradova … ali Bosna – saraj od sviju je najure eniji i najljepši kamene grad!’, in Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 224.
100 Chapter 3
Figure 9: Drawings illustrating the organic unity of terrain and architecture. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 225. elebija’s picturesque vision of the city and Pospišil’s complimentary views of cultural and urban practices offered an idealised image of the old precinct. Despite
Grabrijan having produced his own record of the precinct and its monuments the authors did not include those in their discussion.29 This would suggest that their interests were not in establishing accurate historical accounts, but in identifying this fabric as sensual and charming, distant from the new city. Seeking to unlock the mystique of the Orient, Grabrijan and Neidhardt turned to a search for architectural spaces that they believed captured these qualities. They identified the traditional
Ottoman house as at the core of the intimate life of a Muslim man and, as such, a building type that could potentially provide a key to understanding the ‘Orient’.
29 They included an extensive collection of historic images, sketches and measured drawings in their subsequent book Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity Grabrijan collected some of those images for his classes in the Technical School in the late 1930s.
101 Chapter 3
Searching for Oriental secrets
With no structured analysis of the public section of the old city and limited reference to Grabrijan’s previous studies, the discussion of the old precinct in
‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ focused on the private home. It started with an analysis of an external envelope and parts of the home that were relatively open to public
[Figure 10]. Through an interpretation of the house gained from the street and mahala setting, the authors constructed a vision of domestic life. This imagined interior offered the authors a platform for the discussing what they referred to as the Oriental character of the people who inhabited those spaces, and the secrets it veiled.30
Figure 10: Muslim house, drawing. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 215.
They were certainly not the first to identify the domestic spaces of home as a key to understanding the architectural and cultural context. The Muslim house and its surrounds were topics frequently explored by foreign architects. Most significant were the Austro–Hungarian architects who in their search for an authentic Bosnian,
30 The approach was premised upon stereotypical interpretations of the Oriental, which promoted the oppositional relationship between the Orient and Occident, East and West. For further discussion see E. W. Said, Orientalism, Western Conceptions of the Orient, Penguin Books, London, 1978, pp. 1– 28.
102 Chapter 3
local and indigenous expression identified the traditional house as an architectural embodiment of those qualities.31
The architect Josip Vancaš was officially the first to recognise the political and aesthetic potential of Bosnian vernacular built forms, and in particular the significance of the Ottoman traditional dwelling for a construction of Bosnian identity.32 In 1911, Vancaš tabled to the Bosnian parliament (Zemaljski Sabor) a heritage resolution that aimed to protect, register and describe existing monuments, as well as to give financial incentive (for example, lowering taxes) to the buildings built in what he referred to as ‘Bosnian style’.33 For this purpose
Vancaš designed a prototypical house in ‘Bosnian style’ [Figure 11]. He based his designs on traditional architecture, in particular on the home of the wealthy person 31 It was common for Otto Wagner’s students to take their first journey to the East, where they noted and sketched the beauty of the ‘original’, ‘natural’ and ‘pure’ architectural forms of the ‘Mediterranean house’. Wagner’s first recorded student interested in studying local vernacular, Ernst Lichtblau, upon his arrival in Bosnia in 1904 noted the ‘pure’ qualities and rational grounding of traditional dwellings. (As discussed in chapter two, those qualities were also observed by Grabrijan in his early writings on the city.) On his trip through the countryside Lichtblau produced numerous sketches of the Bosnian landscape and houses, emphasising the geometric simplicity of form of the house. Ernst Lichtblau ‘Studien und Skizzen aus Bosnien und Dalmatien’ (Studies and sketches from Bosnia and Dalmatia), Der Architekt, 14, 1903, p. 85, cited in I. Krzovi , Arhitektura Bosne i Hercegovine, 1878–1918, (Architecture of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 1878 1918), Umjetni ka Galerija BiH, Sarajevo, 1988, p. 231. See also chapter six, ‘The search for a national style’, in A. Moravanszky, Competing Visions: Aesthetic Invention and Social Imagination in Central European Architecture, 1867–1918, MIT Press, Cambridge, Ma.,1997; and R. Besarovi , Iz kulturnog života u Sarajevu pod Austrougarskom Upravom (Inserts from Cultural Life of Sarajevo Under the Austro–Hungarian Administration), Veselin Masleša, Sarajevo, 1974. 32 Josip Vancaš was born in Sopron, Hungary, in 1859 and died in Zagreb, Croatia, in 1932. He completed his architectural degree in Vienna in 1881, and from 1882 to 1884 studied at the Academy of Arts in Vienna. Vancaš’s first major commission in Sarajevo was the design of the Catholic cathedral. Architectural historian Nedžad Kurto suggests that in their search for an architect to design the cathedral the authorities approached the government. Minister Kallay in turn approached Friedrich von Schmidt, professor at the Academy of Applied arts in Vienna, who suggested his student, a Croatian called Josip Vancaš. Vancaš was only 25 at the time, and he settled permanently in Sarajevo in 1894. During his fruitful career in Sarajevo he designed more than 240 buildings, of which most were executed. He became one of the most prominent architects in the Austro–Hungarian personnel, in the city in which almost 600 projects were designed. For further discussion see Kurto, ‘Arhitektura Secesije u Sarajevu’, 1988. 33 Kurto, Arhitektura Bosne I Hercegovine, razvoj Bosanskog Stila, p. 298.
103 Chapter 3
of Ottoman times.34 The design made reference to the spatial organisation of
Muslim houses, with divanhana (large, open planned living spaces), recesses and protrusions on the upper level, white walls and steep, high roofs. It also made reference to public buildings such as hotels (han). Other architects, among whom
Josip Pospišil was the most prominent, continued these efforts. Pospišil made the search for authentic Bosnian style the focus of his work, and saw domestic architecture as the embodiment of cultural relationships.
Figure 11: Josip Vancaš: houses designed in ‘Bosnian style’. Source: I. Krzovi , Arhitektura Bosne i Hercegovine, 1878– 1918, pp. 232 & 235. While Grabrijan and Neidhardt acknowledged the efforts of their predecessors, including a version of Pospišil’s essay on the urban positioning of the traditional
34 In a talk to the Society of Yugoslav Engineers and Architects (Udruženje jugoslavenskih inžinjera I Arhitekata – Sekcija Zagreb) Vancaš criticised the Austro–Hungarian government for the inadequate support it provided to preserving Sarajevo’s heritage fabric. He criticised the authorities for avoiding financial commitment giving only verbal support for preservation. Original quote: ‘Ve ina kulturnih država ima ve ovakovih komisija, a I naša ju je domovina dobila pod naslovom ‘Povjerenstvo za o uvanje spomenika u Kraljevinama Hrvatskoj I Slavoniji’. lanovi su te komisije me u ostalima director uro Szabo I prof. Arhitekt Martin Pilar. Nažalost, ta je komisija kulturna institucija na papiru, jer ne raspolaže dovoljnim nov anim sredstvima, da bi uzmogla poduzimati potrebna nau na istraživa ka putovanja, snimanja, crtanja I publikacije objekata, vrijednih zaštite’. J. Vancaš, ‘Bosansko Narodno Graditeljstvo’ (Bosnian built heritage), published in Tehni ki List (Technical Journal), vol. 31, no. 24, December 1928, pp. 353–56.
104 Chapter 3
house, they perceived the Austro–Hungarian efforts as ‘well meaning’.35 But they argued that the Austro–Hungarian colonial obsession with the ‘exotic in Bosnian architectural expression’ resulted in their failure ‘to understand things’.36 In an attempt to rectify limited understandings of the significance of the traditional house, they focused their discussion on the search for clues embedded in the hidden interiors. Central to this was their assumption that a patriarchal and, by extension, gender relationship between Muslim men and women underpinned family relationships.
The idea of the Islamic home as a shell for daily activities, primarily for women, stimulated their imaginations and promised insights into otherwise private domains.37 Grabrijan and Neidhardt wrote:
To a Muslim man a woman is his joy – and that is why he carefully hides and encloses her. Her divanhana is enclosed by a mesh, and mušepci [timber lattices] framed the best views of the garden for her … Through women, a Muslim man divides the world into a colourful and intimate interior world and a sober and constrained public world.38
35 Original quote: ‘Ne smijemo po i ni putem, koji je pošla bivša Austrija, putem dobronamjernim, ali bez pravog shva anja stvari. Austrijski arhitekti vidjeli su u Bosni samo egzotiku, pa su mislili, da e Bosnu usre iti egzoti nim gradnjama u maurskom slogu I nekoj kolonijalnoj arhitekturi.’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 241. 36 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 241. 37 For further discussion of the Islamic home as a shell for daily activities and other ‘lessons’ for modern architecture and urbanism, which architects such as Le Corbusier found in Algiers, see Çelik, Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations, Algiers Under French Rule. For a further discussion of the significance of the indigenous house in broader modernist discourses see Z. Çelik, Displaying the Orient, Architecture of Islam at Nineteenth Century World’s Fairs, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1992, pp. 87–113. 38 Original quote: ‘Muslimanu je žena užitak – pa je zbog toga toliko ljubomorno uva I zatvara. Zbog nje divanhana u mrežama, mušepci, za nju najljepši I najbiraniji vidici i izgledi u prirode. Ovako može musliman uzeti od toga svijeta sve, što god mu godi, a da ga ništa ne ometa u njegovu – eifu. … Kroz nju je musliman podijelio svijet na dva dijela: šareno intimni i trijezno suzdržljivi javni život.’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 212. Two different spellings appear in this text: divhana and divanhana.
105 Chapter 3
Believing the private space of the home reflected the broader social and gender relationships in which they were interested, the authors centred their analysis on architectural elements that enclosed domestic life. As this interrelationship took place within the Muslim home, understanding spatial qualities was assumed to provide insights into interpersonal interactions: ‘It’s through his relationship to women that the Muslim defines [his] world’, they suggested. Identifying sexual dynamics as at the core of gender interaction within a Muslim family, and a woman as the main ‘subject that is always same’, they wrote:39
A woman is for a Muslim man a piece of paradise on Earth. Because of her he accumulates all the wealth around her. The Oriental carpet, ilim, is [spread] for her, the embroidered towels and cushions [also] for her, the water fountains, šadrvans, and gardens of Eden – all for her.40
‘In that world’, wrote Grabrijan and Neidhardt, ‘Muslim man finds his joy and pleasure merak without anything disturbing his mood eif’.41 By associating the domestic interior and its occupants with merak – a feeling of irrational and leisurely joy and pleasure – and eif – mood or temperamental behaviour – they presented the house as a spatial enclosure of the emotional, if somehow unpredictable,
Muslim world.
Abandoning Grabrijan’s earlier writings on the intimacy and ease by which Bosnian
Muslims created and enjoyed the domestic environment, the authors presented the
39 Original quote: ‘Subjekt ostaje uvijek isti, mijenja se samo objekat, pa je mreža prema tome uvijek druga ija.’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 212. 40 Original quote: ‘Muslimanu su obe ana nebesa sa hurijama, t.j. zamamnim ženama. Zbog nje I oko nje nagomilava on sve bogatstvo. ilimi – radi nje, peškiri I urešeni jastuci – radi nje, šadrvani i rajske baš e – sve radi nje. U tom se svijetu musliman nasladjuje t.j. predaje svom eifu.’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 212. 41 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 212.
106 Chapter 3
house’s austere public elevations as reflective of what they perceived as the controlling nature of Muslim men over women. Using an analogy of the intriguing nature of cover, the authors suggested that in relation to the house, ‘fences and various other screen like structures’ hide the interiors just like ‘Just like the veil that reduce[d] a [woman’s] appearance to a neutral shape’ [Figure 12].42 Opening up those layers of privacy, like unveiling a woman, would provide the insight needed by the authors to understand the hidden qualities of house. These findings, in turn, provided the conceptual structure for their master plan presented in ‘Sarajevo and
Its Satellites’.
Figure 12: The Orient as inspiration. Face cover and veil, (zar and vala). Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and its Satellites’, pp. 212 & 213. The discussion of Baš aršija’s business section, as stated earlier, did not focus on the historical development or the importance of specific monuments to the area’s overall fabric. Instead it considered the precinct’s relevance to the new urban
42 Original quote: ‘Ženu musliman ne pušta u svijet bez vale t. j. koprene ispred lica, koja je imunizira pred javnoš u , bez zara t. j. ogrta a, koji sve žene svodi na isti trijezni, monumentalni oblik, I time ih sve izjedna uje I neutralizira. The English translation in full: ‘The Muslim man does not let his women go out on the street without a cover. That way he reduces her appearance to a general shape that presents all women within the same monumental form, making them all same and neutral.’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 212.
107 Chapter 3
development. Like their mentor Le Corbusier, Grabrijan and Neidhardt identified the exploration of the religious practices as a key to understanding the private and spiritual life of the city. They focused their attention on what they saw as religious norms that had shaped the development of the urban fabric. The assumption that
Islamic faith subsumed all other forms of socio cultural norms governed their analysis; the ‘artistic physiognomy of Sarajevo’, they wrote, was determined by religious beliefs.43
Ahead of many other towns, Sarajevo has a special disposition for architecture. And that specifically comes from Islam. Islam forbids figural representation, and through that discourages sculpture and paintings as art forms, ultimately Islamic art is focused on abstraction; i.e., in ornament instead of painting, in architecture instead of sculpture. 44
Unaware of the diversity within Muslim faith, their discussion of the impact Islam made on Sarajevo referenced a drawing of the mosque in Medina (now in Saudi
Arabia). The burial place of Muhammad, Medina represented the epicentre of
Islamic religion [Figure 13].45 Recalling Le Corbusier’s reference to Kaaba, the inclusion of this sketch highlighted the authors’ belief in the overarching power of
Islam to negate regional diversities. The reference visualised Serbian and Croatian nationalists’ argument that suggested, due to the transnational nature of Islam, that
Bosnian Muslims’ allegiance was not to the local population but to the greater 43 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 227. 44 Original quote: ‘Ispred svih drugih gradova Sarajevo ima posebno dispoziciju za arhitekturu. To specijalno proizlazi iz Islama. Islamska nauka naime zabranjuje prikazivanje prirodnih uzora I likova u umjetnosti. Na taj na in onemogu uje razvoj slikarstva I kiparstva, pa se islamski svijet tim intenzivnije iživljava u apstrakciji t.j. u ornamentici umjesto u slikarstvu, u arhitekturi umjesto u kiparstvu’. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 227. 45 Muslims revere the city of Mecca for containing the Masjid al Haram (Sacred Mosque), considered the holiest site of Islam. Medina is the second holiest city in Islam. The city is the burial place of Muhammad and the place where he and his followers fled after being expelled from attacks against Mecca, now known as the Hijira. Both Mecca and Medina are located in what is now Saudi Arabia.
108 Chapter 3
world of Islam. Based on that rationale, the nationalists argued, Bosnian Muslims possessed no sense of national or regional belonging.
Figure 13: Medina mosque. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 210. [Image republished in Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity].
The generalised and stereotypical views of Islamic art and architecture that framed
Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s discussion of Baš aršija pervaded their perception of the local population. Despite the precinct’s historic inclusiveness of diverse religious beliefs, the discussion presented in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ focused on Muslims, whose values, the authors argued, were in opposition to Western society’s.
‘Western man’, they argued, approached ‘art rationally’, considering it ‘an intellectual activity’.46 This approach that celebrated ‘technology’, they continued,
46 Original quote: ‘Zapadnjak pristupa likovnoj umjetnosti nekako posredno: ona mu je delekcija intelekta: razumije je. Odatle e nam biti shvatljiva I glorifikacija tehnike na zapadu I pojava u likovnoj umjetnosti kakva je na primjer konstruktivizam.’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 211.
109 Chapter 3
provided the context ‘for the emergence of art such as constructivism’.47 Suggesting that this relationship is evident in the built fabric, they wrote:
When I look at the supporting arches of the gothic cathedral, I am immediately aware that without them the building would fall down, or that the spaces of the gothic cathedral would be impossible without them. When I look at the thin columns of concrete structure that support large concrete volumes – I can see a work of engineering. And the dome and cube – they all have a clear geometry. 48
Unlike ‘his’ Western counterparts, ‘Eastern man’, according to the authors, ‘was different’ and ‘engage[d] in art directly, approaching everything, including technology, with emotion’.49 The evidence of this they found on the built fabric of
Baš aršija:
Arabesque I am never able to decipher – even though it is all interwoven with geometry. And these rollers and arches, cones and calottes, even cubes are never clearly determined – they always vary, going up and down – always appearing differently in regards to their position.50
Supporting their statement were images of arabesques and writings presumably in
Arabic [Figure 14]. The level of abstractness presented in the drawing neutralised the meaning of the image, highlighting the problematic relationship between art and religion evident in Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s discussion.
47 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 211. 48 Original quote: ‘Kad god pogledam potporne lukove na obodima gotske katedrale, osje am odmah, da bi se bez njih zgrada srušila ili da je bez njih nemogu prostor gotskog profila. A kad pogledam tanko armirane betonske stupove, koji nose glomazne gradjevne mase – onda uvijek mislim na inžinjera I njegovu statiku. I kupola I kubus sve su to odredjene geometrijske tvorbe. Ali na Orijentu nije tako!’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 210. 49 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 211. 50 Original quote ‘Arabesku ne mogu nikada odgonetnuti premda je sva isprepletena geometrijom. I ovi valjci, I lukovi, injevi I kalote, pa kubusi, nikada mi nisu kona no odredjeni – uvijek oni variraju na više ili na niže – svaki put druga iji prema svom položaju’. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 210.
110 Chapter 3
Figure 14: Sketch of an arabesque. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 212.
The impact of Le Corbusier’s views
For Neidhardt at least, this interest in the Oriental can be explained by his time spent in Le Corbusier’s office. Architectural historian Zeynep Çelik has argued that in projects such as Algiers, Le Corbusier showed a genuine, if biased, interest in local culture.51 Defining the East as emotional, irrational, ahistorical and timeless, and the
West as rational, progressive and dynamic, Le Corbusier established an oppositional relationship between Orient and Occident.52 His observations of the East conformed to what Edward Said has referred to as an Orientalist construction of the Other.
Inspired by Foucault’s Archaeology of Knowledge and Discipline and Punish, Said has argued that the Orient was a virtually European invention, a system of representation framed by Western political power.53 He defined ‘Orientalism’ as a mode of thought based upon an ontological and epistemological distinction 51 For a discussion on Le Corbusier’s work during this period see: M. McLeod, ‘Le Corbusier and Algiers’, Oppositions, 19/20, winter/spring 1980, pp. 53–85; and Çelik, Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations. Mary McLeod argues that Le Corbusier’s involvement with the syndicalist movement significantly informed his approach to urban studies and subsequent proposals for Algeria in the years 1931 to 1942. 52 Z. Çelik, ‘Le Corbusier, Orientalism, Colonialism’, pp. 59–77. 53 Said acknowledged his debt to Foucault, particularly his Archaeology of Knowledge, Routledge, London, 1989, c1972 and Discipline and Punish Penguin, Harmondsworth, England, 1979. E. Said, Orientalism, Western Conceptions of the Orient, pp. 3–4.
111 Chapter 3
between ‘the Orient’ and ‘the Occident’. In Europe from the 18th century on,
Orientalist thinking underpinned understandings of the East–West relationship.54
Said’s thesis has provided a framework through which the work of many modern architects, including Le Corbusier, has been critiqued.55
In the article ‘Le Corbusier, Orientalism, Colonialism’, Çelik further demonstrates that Le Corbusier’s engagement with the Orient was heavily informed by such biases. He accepts models of the Orient promoted through literature, travel accounts and paintings.56 Popular authors such as Théophile Gautier and Pierre Loti shaped Le Corbusier’s expectations of the places he studied.57 The impact of the
Orientalist tradition fuelled his desire to confirm, on location, his preconceived mental images of places encountered through literature.58 Çelik suggests that Le
Corbusier’s desire to reconstruct a perception of Istanbul promoted in 19th century travel books framed his own experience of the city.59
Building upon Europe’s historic fascination with Islam, Le Corbusier attempted to explain architectural and urban form in terms of religious belief. In an attempt to enrich his own architectural approach, he saw the oppositional relationship as having the potential to unite the ‘sensual’ he associated with the East and Orient with the ‘rational’ of the West. Defining the local and Islam as something Other to
54 Said, Orientalism, Western Conceptions of the Orient, p. 40. 55 Çelik, ‘Le Corbusier, Orientalism, Colonialism’. 56 Çelik, ‘Le Corbusier, Orientalism, Colonialism’, pp. 59–77. 57 Çelik, ‘Le Corbusier, Orientalism, Colonialism’, pp. 59–77. 58 Çelik, ‘Le Corbusier, Orientalism, Colonialism’, pp. 59–77. 59 Çelik, ‘Le Corbusier, Orientalism, Colonialism’, pp. 59–77.
112 Chapter 3
the West (more specifically French, Çelik argued in the case of Algiers), Le Corbusier labelled local culture as different, and by extension inferior.60 Unversed in Muslim philosophy, Le Corbusier, Çelik argues, often recycled clichéd views of religion’s importance in structuring social and cultural formations.61 To demonstrate the overarching role of religion in shaping urban form, Le Corbusier – in a way prefiguring Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s efforts in Sarajevo – referred to Kaaba in his discussion of the ‘unity of religion as expressed in the physical and symbolic’ form of
Istanbul.62
Unlike Le Corbusier, who in his attempts to gain knowledge of other places and cultures relied on secondary sources and French colonial policies, Grabrijan and
Neidhardt were in theory much closer to their subject of investigation. Bosnia was an integral part of their home state, the Kingdom of Yugoslavia. The kingdom’s main policies and constitution were defined in relation to the Ottomans’ colonial occupation of the Balkans, from the 15th to the 19th century. While the Ottomans
60 Çelik, ‘Le Corbusier, Orientalism, Colonialism’, pp. 59–77. In contrast, scholars such as Sibel Bozdogan have attempted to liberate Le Corbusier from what they describe as the misunderstandings of the Orientalist approach, arguing instead for genuine, if at times problematic, interest in the local context. The Journal of Architectural Education recorded a debate between Richard Ingersoll and Sibel Bozdogan. Bozdogan, attempted to distance Le Corbusier from the ‘Orientalist sin’ by arguing that his involved and engaged representation of the Orient was a critical and exploratory vehicle rather than an affirmative and expository one. See S. Bozdogan, ‘Journey to the East: ways of looking at the Orient and the question of representation’, Journal of Architectural Education, vol. 41, no. 4, summer 1988, pp. 38–45. However, Ingersoll questioned Bozdogan’s argument and insisted that Le Corbusier indeed ‘proved in every instance to be on the side of his white fathers’. See R. Ingersoll, ‘Letter to the editor’, Journal of Architectural Education, vol. 42, no. 4, 1989, p. 61. Subsequently Bozdogan responded in, ‘More on Le Corbusier’s Orientalism’, Journal of Architectural Education, vol. 43, no. 1, fall 1989, p. 63. Ingersoll and, by extension, Çelik have persisted in stating that Le Corbusier’s experience of the East, which accepted the Orientalist framework, was aimed at extolling his own culture. Unwilling to give away his position of power, Le Corbusier, among others, was thus almost inevitably associated with what Ingersoll called the ‘original sin’ of Westerners. 61 Çelik, ‘Le Corbusier, Orientalism, Colonialism’, pp. 59–77. 62 Çelik, ‘Le Corbusier, Orientalism, Colonialism’, p. 63.
113 Chapter 3
never reached Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s home towns of Lož and Zagreb, respectively, their legacy was felt widely and formed a strong part of the history of all Southern Slavs. However, in Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s exploration of the city’s cultural context, they never acknowledged their relative closeness to their subject, if it ever existed. If anything, their approach confirmed that their Slovenian and
Croatian Christian backgrounds excluded them from the Islamic cultural and religious milieu of Sarajevo. In an article published in 1940, Grabrijan acknowledged the difficulties they had accessing the interiors of Muslim homes: ‘Muslim houses are too enclosed to allow free observations and to draw conclusions from them.’63
Unfazed by the lack of access, they identified an alternative approach ‘via the study of Muslim public buildings: hans [inns] and coffee shops’.64 Their sense of exclusion coupled with their preconceptions about Islam determined their understanding of the Oriental within the Bosnian context. Their observations of local culture presented in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ were framed by an inquiry into social norms, particularly religious and sexual norms – the realms that Çelik has argued defined Le Corbusier’s Orientalist approach.65
63 Original quote: ‘Muslimanske ku e su nam suviše zatvorene, a da bismo mogli na njima pasti svoje o i I stvarati neke zaklju ke. Do njih treba do i I indirektnim putem, tj. preko muslimanskih javnih zgrada: hanova I kafana.’ Published in ‘Baš aršija – jedna nova alternativa’ (‘Baš aršija – a new alternative’), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, vol. 30, no. 6, 1940; republished in eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 67. 64 eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, p. 67. 65 Çelik refers to work of historian Norman Daniel, which identified enquiry into social norms such as religious, sexual and power as the three realms that have characterised Islam in European discourses. Çelik, ‘Le Corbusier, Orientalism, Colonialism’, p. 60.
114 Chapter 3
Baš aršija: ‘surgery or medication’
Despite the interest in local context expressed in Grabrijan’s writings, ‘Sarajevo and
Its Satellites’ revealed the historic precinct was given very limited value in their master plan. In keeping with their problematic reading of the Oriental nature of the old city and its inhabitants, the East–West Artery bypassed the Baš aršija precinct, compounding its isolation. A high wall of larger structures was proposed to redefine the outer perimeter of the area and to enhance its separation from the rest of the city. To support the re zoning (from city centre to marketplace), an improved internal street network was proposed. This was to facilitate the newly projected image of the precinct as a tourist centre with ‘bazaars’ that produced ‘bijouterie
[imitation jewellery]’.66
In contrast to Grabrijan’s earlier attempts to establish an argument of relevance, here they highlighted the artificial nature of the precinct. ‘In relation to today’s life’, they wrote, Baš aršija had no value:
[Its built fabric] is like a stage set where nothing is real. The precinct’s purpose is unclear and its existence is irrelevant. With no other purpose than to hide the lack of content behind the surface; the ornaments [and arabesque] have only superficial meaning. Their purpose is to cover up the poor quality and the absence of relevance. It is all false and deceptive. It has all lost its purpose. Baš aršija, is [not real] but a ‘mirage’.67
66 The Merriam Webster Online Dictionary defines bijouterie as a collection of trinkets, ornaments or jewels; and also decoration. In Serbo Croatian and Bosnian the word implies imitation, and, by extension, low quality and cheap design. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 203. 67 Original quote: ‘Današnja Baš aršija je prema životu kao apstrakcija prema realizmu, t. j. kuliserija, gdje je sve neopipljivo. Svi su ti odnosi nejasni I zbog toga nesolidni. Svaki ornament tu zastire nešto, što nije realno. Svrha je tih šara, da zavaraju, I da prikriju slabu kvalitetu. Lažan je taj ornament, jer je izgubio svoju nužnost, svoju potreba I svoju smisao I pošto se toliko udaljio od svojih izvora, da nema
115 Chapter 3
In the final analysis, the precinct’s existing fabric had little to offer to their new master plan: ‘If the purpose of going to Baš aršija is to do historical research’, they argued, ‘then something should be learnt’.68 ‘But if the idea is to search for new ideas’, there was ‘nothing new to be found…’69 Reducing Baš aršija to little more than a two dimensional backdrop or a ‘scenographic display’, the master plan focused on the new city.70 The discussion of the old precinct’s future, labelled
‘surgery or medication’, was concluded with the statement ‘Baš aršija is dead’.71 In a damning assessment of the built fabric’s condition, the authors stated, ‘Wherever you look into the avlija [courtyards] – everything stinks of dirt and rot, and many pests are walking around, even in broad daylight’.72
In contrast with this, the authors associated the new city with the terms ‘efficiency’,
‘circulation’ and ‘standardisation’, demonstrating that their belief in a rational and pragmatic approach aligned with the modern. Presenting themselves as responsible social scientists, not simply architects acting upon aesthetic ideas, they argued that the experts would confirm their analysis of the old precinct. Calling upon educated
s njima prave veze. Sva ta Baš aršija, koja se na tim šarama, jeste kao neka ‘fata morgana’’. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 218. 68 Original quote in full: ‘U koliko se ide za otkrivanjem ostataka stare tradicije, može se nešto nau iti u Baš aršiji. Ali nešto idejno novo se tu ne može otkriti. Tužno se vra a iz Baš aršije onaj koji je pošao da nešto nova vidi I nau i, jer sve što tu vidi, mogao je pregledati za prvih 14 dana.’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 218. 69 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 218. 70 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 218. 71 Original quote: ‘Baš aršija je umrla kao city.’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 255. Original quote: ‘Kirurgija ili medicina. Kucnuo je dvanaesti as – treba pristupiti regulaciji Sarajeva’. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 201. 72 Original quote: ‘A da ne govorimo o neodrživim higijenskim prilikama. Gdjegod zavirite u avliju – svuda zaudara po plijesni I gnjilo i, a množina no nih životinjica I posred bijela dana plazi po zemlji’. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 256.
116 Chapter 3
professionals who lived or worked in the precinct to support their views, they wrote:
If we consult doctors, fireman, insurance experts, or tradespeople and businesspeople who live in Baš aršija, they will all agree about the unbearable conditions that are present there ... Today’s Baš aršija is like sick lungs, full of cavities. There are empty holes left from the burned down hans, courtyards and ruins of all kinds of baths and residences that should no longer have any place in this bazaar.73
With limited prospects for the precinct’s reintegration in the new city, the authors stated that ‘any attempt to revitalise Baš aršija and include it in the new city would be contrary to natural development’.74 Their ‘diagnosis’ – a term they used to present their conclusions – was to surgically remove the offending elements of the old city. ‘Summarising’ the position of Baš aršija within the master plan, they stated:
… we realise that medication cannot help here any longer. Trying to heal the existing situation by correcting, repairing, mending and filling in the empty places would only result in a half mended and weak solution. Here, surgical intervention can help, i.e., the demolition of deteriorating and weak structures, followed by zoning. A zone of high rise buildings surround the precinct of aršija [Baš aršija] from outside – a zone of low structures making the inner circle, to be followed by a zone of old cultural buildings, all finally unified by a park!75
73 Original quote: ‘Današnja Baš aršija nali i bolesnim plu ima koja su puna kaverna. Tu su praznine od pogorjelih hanova, pa razna dvorišta I ruševine kojekavih kupališta I stanbenih ku a, kojima u ovakvom bazaru nije mjesto. Na taj nacin današnja Baš aršija nije skoro ni na polovicu iskorištena za trgova ke svrhe!’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 256. 74 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 255. 75 Original quote: ‘Ako sve rezimiramo, dolazimo do uvjerenja, da tu lijekovi više ne pomažu. Lije enje postoje eg stanja ispravljanjem, opravljanjem, krpanjem, I ispunjavanjam porušenih mjesta, dalo bi samo iskrpanu polovi nu I slabu stvar. Pomo i može tu samo kirurski zahvat, t.j. Rušenje svega trošnog I nevaljalog, pa onda sprovesti urbanizaciju, t.j. podjelu u zone. Zona sa podru jem visokih gradjevina došla bi oko aršije, zona niskih gradjevina I bazara unutar ove zatim zona starih
117 Chapter 3
The proposal suggested the clearance of all but the most ‘important buildings built of solid material’ [Figure 15].76 The complex of the Gazi Husref Beg, inclusive of a mosque, a šadrvan (water fountain), two turbes (mausoleums, tombs of the founder and his family) and a kutubhana (library) were to be kept.77 Two other mosques, Baš aršija and Careva (Tsar’s) mosques, would also stay, as would the nearby medresa (religious school). Basing their judgment on the quality of the physical fabric, Grabrijan and Neidhardt hesitated in including the Mori a Han (an inn), as the structure was ‘partially built out of timber’.78 Ultimately they suggested retaining it, but on the condition ‘all remnants of the past’ that surrounded the building were cleared.79
Figure 15: Design proposal for urban regulation of Baš aršija. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 212. The proposal, however hypothetical, extended the already diminishing capacity of the financial institutions supporting Baš aršija’s urban development, and the vakuf kulturnih gradjevina te park, koji bi povezao sve navedene elemente u cjelinu!’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 257. 76 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 257. 77 There have been two spellings used for this name: Gazi Husref Beg and Gazi Husrevbeg. Gazihusrevbeg’s Vakuf (comp.), Spomenica Gazi Husrevbegove etiristo Godišnjice’ (Four Hundred Years of Gazihusrevbeg’s Vakuf), Sarajevo, 1932, p. 57. 78 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 257. 79 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 257.
118 Chapter 3
in particular. With a limited interest in protection and preservation of the existing structures, Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s master plan proposed significant clearing of architectural fabric deemed in poor physical condition.
Unlike Grabrijan’s earlier writings, which challenged the authorities and called for a review of preservation policies and urban development approaches, the master plan complied with the official line. It too, proposed preservation of individual monuments, but not the surrounding fabric. The surrounding structures lacked the capacity to generate income needed for preserving monuments, and so the proposal undermined the interdependency of the Baš aršija’s built fabric instilled in the principles the vakuf institution. Further, the Baš aršija’s proposed change of role – from an economic, cultural and trade centre into a retail zone of ‘bazaar bijouterie’ – confirmed Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s lack of belief in reviving the ailing fabric and economy. The plan’s overall focus on modernisation, efficiency and rational planning of the city at large, demonstrated that their interest in urban planning was in the development of new satellite towns – not the old town.
The new satellite mining towns
As stated, the proposals in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ emerged from Grabrijan and
Neidhardt’s interest in urban debates.80 However, the projects included in the publication were commonly actual projects or competitions in which Neidhardt was involved as an architect. When he came to Bosnia in 1939, after years of working in
Western Europe, he did so to become company architect in the mining 80 Between 1939 and 1942 Neidhardt was employed full time by the ‘Jugo elik’ steel company.
119 Chapter 3
conglomerate Croatian Mines and Steel Production (HRUDAT), a successor of the
German backed iron and steel company Yugoslav Steel (Jugo elik).81 From 1939 till
1942 Neidhardt worked on numerous proposals for the development of mining towns. They included large urban plans for the Middle Bosnian basin, master plans for the towns of Zenica, Vareš Majdan, Ljubija, Breza, Podbrežje, Ilijaš, Zenica and
Ilijaš, and design proposals for workers’ housing [Figure 16].82
81 Jelica Karli Kapetanovi suggests a number of reasons for Neidhardt’s arrival in Bosnia, the main one being his need to obtain a secure job and commissions. In addition, his wife was Bosnian and his close friend Grabrijan was living in Bosnia. Soon after it opened in 1937, Jugo elik became a state enterprise. The company was one of the largest in the Independent State of Croatia (NDH). Lampe, Yugoslavia as History, Twice There Was a Country, p. 180. Upon its creation the NDH took over some sections of the company. The takeover included all branches in Bosnia, including Breza, Zenica, Ljubija i Vareš, considered in Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s urban proposal. The production changed the name to HRUTAT d. d. an acronym for Croatian mines and steel production (Hrvatski rudnici I talionice). I. Mamuzovi , ‘Croatian metallurgy, past, present and future’, Metalurgija, 43, 1, 2004, pp. 3–12; also at: http://public.carnet.hr/metalurg/Metalurgija/2004_vol_43/No1/MET_43_1_003_012_Mamuzic.pdf 82 Some houses in Ilijaš were built in 1942. The proposals were presented in Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, pp. 273–322; most of the housing projects were presented again in Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity. In some instances, such as the design of Neidhardt’s workers’ housing, both publications presented the same project in order to support the respective urban visions. In ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ the housing projects represented the power of rational plan and efficiency, while in Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity they were proof of the socialist government’s efforts to accommodate the proletariat.
120 Chapter 3
Figure 16: Map of satellite towns included in the proposal. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and its Satellites’, p. 274.
Neidhardt saw developing mining towns not in relation to the relatively limited scope of the architectural task, but within the broader context of Yugoslav social and political changes. Jugo elik was established amid Yugoslav Prime Minister Milan
Stojadinovi ’s broader efforts to revitalise the state economy.83 The German backed iron and steel complex at Zenica was expected to transform the region into a
‘Yugoslav Ruhr’,84 and Neidhardt’s design proposals for the towns aimed to establish a connection between urban planning and social change.
83 Faced with serious political challenges, Stojadinovi sought to combat declining agricultural prices by increasing industrial and processed agricultural exports to Germany. Lampe, Yugoslavia as History, p. 180. 84 Lampe, Yugoslavia as History, p. 180.
121 Chapter 3
For Neidhardt, urbanism was based on a connection with the land and the natural environment, and with regional industry. While this model did not recognise the specifics of culture and history as significant, it expected dramatic socio economic changes would underpin the urban changes. The proposal for the mining towns of the Bosnian basin was thus premised on re zoning land ‘to achieve organised and regular blocks of a contemporary city’.85
While this grandiose gesture was in some ways reminiscent of aspects of Le
Corbusier’s urbanisation of Algiers and the desire for ‘a spontaneous and total symbiosis of man, architecture and the landscape’ within the context of Bosnia, the proposal to ‘expropriate’ the land and introduce new subdivisions demonstrated the limitations of Neidhardt’s political awareness and knowledge of local conditions.86 The issue of land rights and divisions cut deep into the existing debate on land ownerships.87 The problem was a vestige of Ottoman feudalism and the practice of distributing arable land along religious lines.88 Upon the introduction of
Ottoman governance, the feudal estate holders could be Christian or Muslim, but due to a long process of religious and social polarisation, by the 19th century ‘all the big landowners were Muslims and the great majority of the non land owning
85 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 201. 86 McLeod has argued that Le Corbusier’s new social and political commitment to the regional syndicalism in evident in the six projects that he developed for Algiers in the period between 1932 and 1942. McLeod, ‘Urbanism and Utopia: Le Corbusier from regional syndicalism to Vichy’, pp. 333– 63, with the reference to the syndicalist movement, p. 342. 87 Original quote: ‘U interesu je cjelokupnosti, da se u gradu provede komasacija’. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 201. 88 For further discussion see I. Banac, The National Question in Yugoslavia, Origins, History, Politics, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1984.
122 Chapter 3
peasants were Christians’.89 These historical conditions made land distribution or the ‘agrarian question’ one of the central Yugoslav political dilemmas, which, as historian Ivo Banac has stated, ‘could be solved only at the expense of one confessional community’ – the Muslim community.90
Indeed the post Ottoman governments of Austro–Hungarian Empire and Yugoslavia did attempt to address the agrarian question. The full complexities of these attempts, however, are beyond the scope of this thesis.91 Suffice to say, the Austro–
Hungarian government realised that taking the land away from the Muslim landlords would further deepen the ideological divide between Muslims and
Christians, and undermine its political agenda. The possibility of this outcome prevented the government undertaking the reforms. According to the land ownership census of 1910, Muslims, at that time, made up 91.15 per cent of landlords, their lands tilled by customary tenants (the common native term kmet, usually translates as ‘serf’). Some 73.92 per cent of kmets were Orthodox and 21.49 per cent Catholic.92 In 1919, the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes abolished serfdom, decreeing serf families should be given legal title to the land they worked, prompting a major political shift in the Bosnian Muslim community.93 Roughly 4000
89 Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, p. 94. 90 Banac, The National Question in Yugoslavia, p. 367. 91 For a thorough discussion of those issues see Banac, The National Question in Yugoslavia. 92 Banac, The National Question in Yugoslavia, p. 367. 93 Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, p. 164.
123 Chapter 3
Muslim landowning families were affected by this reform, some were reduced to poverty.94
It appears that Neidhardt was aware of the problems associated with land ownership, and saw government intervention ‘to the advantage of all’ and central to its resolution.95 But it is unclear whether he considered the ethnic and religious background of the landholders or of the housing project users as relevant to his design deliberations. The discussion of the proposals suggested that the projects were designed for ‘the non traditional worker, not a proletarian but a peasant who left his village, following the metamorphosis from working on the land to going underground’.96 In the light of the agrarian reforms of this period, it was possible that Neidhardt was designing for a Muslim population who, depleted of political and economic power, could move into the newly designed towns. While Neidhardt did not specify the ethnicity of the proposed users of the housing project, repeated references to the traditional ‘Turkish’ house suggest a keen interest in reminding housing inhabitants of Bosnia’s Islamic past. However, the church proposed for the middle of Ljubija’s town square reinforced the presence of the Christian Croatian government of the Independent State of Croatia [Figure 17].
94 The ‘agrarian issue’ polarised the Yugoslav political scene. Mehmed Spaho, the leader of Yugoslav Muslim Organisation, fought hard to soften the blow of agrarian reforms on Muslim landlords and ensure their compensation. Spaho’s commitment to this issue allowed his critics to denounce his party as representative of old feudal class. Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, p. 164. 95 Original quote: ‘U interesu je cjelokupnosti, da se u gradu provede komasacija’. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 201. 96 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 282.
124 Chapter 3
Figure 17: Urban development of Ljubija, with a newly designed church located in the centre of town. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 280.
Neidhardt’s concerns for hygiene and workers’ health further neutralised the political dimension of the proposal. Those issues informed the urban organisation of the plan, and in many instances brought forward the introduction of sporting facilities and extensive recreational space. Ultimately, by assuming responsibility for improving housing conditions for mining workers Neidhardt was able to focus his attention on the less politicised issue of individual dwelling design.
Individual houses: modern houses with Oriental parts
A key component of Neidhardt’s proposal for individual housing in the mining towns was this modern focus on health and hygiene: ‘Instead of looking like army barracks’, he wrote, the new residential complexes ‘should be more like sanatoriums correctly positioned in orientation to the sun and wind’.97 It was assumed that hygienic living conditions, light and an organised way of life would
97 Some houses in Ilijaš were built in 1942. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 289.
125 Chapter 3
‘ensure the bodily and physical health’ of workers, while bringing them ‘closer to the Western European way of life’.98
It was in the design of workers’ housing that reference to the traditional house began to be included. In response to a brief that called for collective housing for almost 160 single men working in the town of Zenica, Neidhardt suggested that the
‘principles’ of oriental architecture would allow Bosnia to be connected to the progressive world while retaining its cultural integrity. Without access, as foreigners and non Muslims, to the interiors of Muslim homes, Grabrijan and Neidhardt based their conclusions on observations and interpretations of daily life from the outside.
They acknowledged their lack of access to Muslims’ private domains and sought to understand the spatial interrelationships through analysis of what they perceived were the like spaces of hans.99 While this acceptance of the ‘old’ informing new architecture marked a significant adjustment in Neidhardt’s architectural approach, it also highlighted the authors’ reliance on visual cues and formal analysis.
In architectural terms, Neidhardt conceived of the workers housing as comprising individual space making elements and enclosures. These were significantly defined by meshes and shading devices, sitting elements and stairs – the same ‘elements’ already described by the authors as the primary enclosures of the ‘Oriental’ family home. Still, the discussion supporting the proposal is void of references to the origin of those ‘elements’. The stairs (basamci), the semi enclosed spaces (divanhana) and 98 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 282. 99 In the article ‘Le Corbusier and Sarajevo’ Grabrijan stated that it is ‘hard to enter the Muslim house’ and offered ‘looking into like places’ such as inns etc as an alternative.
126 Chapter 3
the mesh of traditional latticework (mušepci) were all shown as free floating elements used in a modern expression, abstracted form their context and presented individually [Figure 18].
Figure 18: Neidhardt’s development of the ‘elemental’ architectural vocabulary of Bosnia. Single man housing project for Zenica. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, also published in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 317.
The drawings make reference to the formal qualities of the traditional house’s spaces. In order to provide a place for gathering and conversation, a divanhana – a wide, semi enclosed entry space in the traditional house described in Grabrijan’s earlier writings – formed the first point of contact and an entry point to the dwelling. In the housing proposal for Zenica, this space took the shape of a balcony.
Unlike in the traditional house, where the divanhana connected all the surrounding spaces, here it formed a separate area. What was an intimate and enclosed space in the traditional house, here was strictly limited to the front of the building. It became its public facade. The comfortable sofas (divans) of divanhana were
127 Chapter 3
replaced by a narrow bench space on the inside of the railing. The ornate timber detailing was replaced with horizontal louvres, and pictures of workers and village life replaced the pictures and simple objects conventionally used to decorate the walls of the traditional house. The space of divanhana was still connected to the ground level by a single flight of stairs, but unlike in the traditional house, where the stairs mediated a series of spatial experiences from open to enclosed, here the stairs functioned only as a physical connection linking the upper and lower levels
[Figure 19].
Figure 19: Single man housing project for Zenica. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, also published in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 292.
In terms of building layout, the sitting space of what in earlier discussion had been referred to as an oriental home, the divanhana, opened into a long, linear corridor with a reception desk at one end and a large common toilet block at the other
[Figure 20]. On both floors, two large common bedrooms were located on either
128 Chapter 3
side of the corridor, each accommodating 20 single beds, totalling 160 beds in each building. The initial design proposed tilt up beds, but in later proposals metal beds replaced them. Presumably to provide some privacy, lightweight partitions separated each bedroom into two parts. Celebrated for the flexibility of its furniture and the multiple uses of spaces, the traditional house did not seem able to provide a model for this arrangement. Unlike in the traditional house, the individual rooms in this design were assigned just one function.
Figure 20: Single men’s housing project for Zenica. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, also published in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 292.
129 Chapter 3
In Neidhardt’s transformation of the private house into a public residential building, the image of veiled women gave way to young men. The sensuality of the traditional house was replaced by the masculinity of the new. The pictures of the design model show a number of young men inhabiting the space of divanhana. They appear comfortable in their new roles, enjoying themselves, their bodies relaxed, and engaging in an active relationship with their surroundings. On the divanhana edges, the delicate timber lattices of the traditional Muslim house, so well described and analysed in Grabrijan’s writings, were replaced by metal screens along the external wall [Figure 21].
Figure 21: Single men’s housing project for Zenica. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, also published in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, p. 287. This context of workers’ housing allowed Neidhardt to accept the influence of old fabric on new design. In these projects, the architectural elements of heritage fabric were abstracted, modernised and then absorbed in the pragmatic and modular modern approaches. By reducing the architectural characteristics of traditional
130 Chapter 3
fabric to patterns and ornaments, the heritage was, like in the master planning of
Baš aršija, still assigned a background role of ‘scenographic display’. Despite the apparent limitations of the scale of domestic dwelling and Neidhardt’s emphasis on formal aspects of architecture, the designs of the mining housing projects marked a recognition and acknowledgment of the old fabric’s value in creating the new.
Conclusion: The Orient of the old town and the modernity of new suburbs
The vision of a master plan presented in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ demonstrated
Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s commitment to a modernist approach to urban planning over an in depth study of the relationships between people, culture and architecture. The plan for Sarajevo prioritised effective transport networks, urban organisation and zoning, disregarding specific urban and historical conditions. This highlighted their aspiration to locate their work within the context of modern urbanism rather than the site specific approach promoted by architects such as
Ple nik. This meant that the Baš aršija precinct’s importance to new urban planning went unrecognised.
In the analysis of his old Baš aršija, Neidhardt, and by extension Grabrijan, did not question Le Corbusier’s approach, accepting it as a sound starting point for investigating the Islamic heritage of Sarajevo. During 1930s Grabrijan had published a series of articles that argued that authentic and original values were embedded in the old precinct. In this collaborative publication, however, the authors presented the old fabric within concepts that highlighted it as generic and non specific in
131 Chapter 3
nature. Their discussion placed a building’s physical form in opposition to the emotional life that took place within it, undermining Grabrijan’s earlier argument for an organic integration of architecture and people – the two inexorably connected. ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ demonstrated the great influence of
Neidhardt’s formal and architectural approach over Grabrijan’s cultural and theoretical explorations.
‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ viewed the local population of Bosnia, and Baš aršija in particular, through preconceived notions of Muslims living their lives within the framework of Islam. Its emphasis on the gender and the indulgence of the Muslim family in particular served to compound the sense of otherness of the existing context. Ultimately Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s position reinforced a stereotypical and Orientalist vision of Islam and the Muslim population of Bosnia.
At a distance from the ‘dilapidated’ and ‘dirty’ ‘Oriental’ precinct, the master plan for the new city focused on an efficient traffic artery, on rational planning and on hygiene. When the old city precinct was considered, the master plan proposed either its eradication or significant modification of the very traditions that had shaped it. The ‘static world’ of the Orient was relegated a secondary place, with modernisation as essential to the new urban visions. Ultimately Grabrijan and
Neidhardt’s plan proposed urbanisation as a way of changing the community and its way of life.
132 Chapter 3
Despite limited engagement with the city’s historic fabric, Neidhardt’s historical referencing in the mining housing design provided an important connection to the context in which the two architects operated. Their subsequent book, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, was built upon those explorations.
133
Chapter 4 Bosnian Oriental as an Architectural Expression of Socialist Ideology
Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s research on Bosnian architecture culminated in
Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity (Arhitektura Bosne i Put u
Suvremeno), published some 15 years after ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, in 1957.1
The book gained broad recognition in Titoist Yugoslavia (1945–92), and its socialist policies made it one of the seminal texts on modern Bosnian architecture.2 Unlike the thesis developed in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, which marginalised the relevance of Baš aršija to the new urban plan, the discussion presented in this book identified it as a catalyst in creating a new and modern city. It argued that the
Islamic architecture of Sarajevo represented a uniquely Bosnian Oriental architectural and cultural expression.
This chapter examines the position of Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards
Modernity in relation to the changing political environment of the post–World War
Two period and the formation of a new Yugoslav state. The state’s 1946 constitution articulated its political cornerstones as the socialist system, the right of
1 Dušan Grabrijan died in 1952, five years before the publication of Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, Ljudska Pravica, Ljubljana, 1957. It appears that the book was ready for publication as early as 1953, as the publishing company Država Založba Slovenije placed an advertisement in the professional journal Architect that year; cited in Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, p. 314. 2 In 1946, the state was named the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia, and in 1963 re named the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. This state disintegrated in the wake of Yugoslav war that started in Slovenia and Croatia 1991 and in Bosnia in 1992.
Chapter 4 national self determination and the Communist Party’s domination in public life.3
Fulfilling Tito’s wartime commitments, the constitution officially recognised five
Yugoslav nationalities: Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Macedonians and Montenegrians.
Bosnian Muslims were not included, for the official party believed Muslims were a separate group, without a national identity. Six republics were established: Serbia,
Croatia, Slovenia, Macedonia, Monte Negro and Bosnia and Hercegovina.4 Bosnia and Hercegovina was the only one with no majority nationality or national name
[Figure 22].
Figure 22: Territorial divisions of the former Yugoslavia, 1945 1991. Source: Lampe, Yugoslavia as History, p. 231. 3 For further discussion on post–World War Two Yugoslavia see Donia & Fine, Bosnia and Hercegovina – A Tradition Betrayed; Lampe, Yugoslavia as History, Twice There Was a Country,; and N. Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, specifically the chapters ‘Bosnia and the Second World War, 1941– 1945’ and ‘Bosnia in Titoist Yugoslavia, 1945–1989’. 4 The new territorial borders closely corresponded to the historic units brought together in 1918 to form the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History.
136 Chapter 4
In this political context the interplay between the cultural and national identities of
Bosnia was particularly important. The mixed cultural and religious heritage of
Bosnia simultaneously represented a secular, modern Yugoslavia and a uniquely
Bosnian regional identity. Consequently, when Architecture of Bosnia and the Way
Towards Modernity identified the built fabric of Baš aršija as an active force capable of negotiating the conflicting ideological agendas of Yugoslav socialism, Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s artistic agenda appeared to offer political solutions. This chapter presents the gradual but strategic alignment between their views of culture and architecture and the political themes that dominated the Bosnian scene in the
1950s. Through this relationship, I argue, they made architecture an active ingredient in the nation making of socialist Yugoslavia.
The Yugoslav communist artistic agenda and a resistance to the particular
Immediately after World War Two, the Yugoslav government considered artistic endeavours promoting the specifics of ethnic national identities mostly irrelevant; a national arts promoting the exclusive values of one national group contradicted the multiethnic and multinational agenda of the new Yugoslavia. The government’s ideal new society was predicated on the disappearance of any expression of loyalty to a particular nation state.5 Marxist opposition to nationalism as bourgeois, and its belief in an international communist society provided further theoretical support to the government’s resistance to individual national expressions.
5 For further discussion on post war Yugoslavism see A. Djilas, The Contested Country, Yugoslav Unity and Communist Revolution 1919–1953, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Ma., 1996.
137 Chapter 4
Perceiving tradition as ‘the surviving past’, the Communist Party denied its relevance to the modern and progressive society they believed was being constructed.6 Moreover, the search for connections with the past was considered detrimental to progress. As Tito said in 1942: ‘The main obstacle for full achievement of our brotherhood and unity are those who look backwards, who try to re establish what used to be before the destruction of [the Kingdom of]
Yugoslavia’.7 In this context, Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s exploration of the historic fabric’s relevance to the new city had no apparent purpose.
The primary objective of the post war communist government was to establish the new Yugoslavia as a secular, united and independent state. Religious and nationalist affiliations were seen as contrary this objective.8 Accordingly, a campaign was launched that saw the suppression of the courts of Islamic law in 1946; the introduction of law forbidding women to wear the veil in 1950; and the closing of religious schools, with the teaching of children in mosques becoming a criminal
6 Raymond Williams argues that the concept of tradition has been neglected in Marxist cultural thought. I here use Williams’ notions of traditions developed in ‘Traditions, institutions, and theories’ to discuss Marxist discourses of socialist Yugoslavia. For further discussion see, R. Williams, Marxism and Literature, Oxford University Press, New York, 1977, p. 115. 7 Josip Broz Tito, ‘NOB I nacionalno pitanje u Jugoslaviji’, Tito’s 1942 speech, published in A. Isakovi , O ‘Nacionaliziranju’ Muslimana, 101 godina afirmiranja i negiranja nacionalnog identiteta Muslimana (101 years of affirmation and negation of Muslim national identity), Globus, Zagreb, 1990, pp. 130–31. 8 Scholarship on Yugoslav approaches to resolving the ‘national question’ have been articulated in the following periods: 1944–51, teleological industrialisation: it was believed that rapid industrialisation would reduce the disparity between regional living standards and thus erode national antagonism; 1951–60, Yugoslav nationalism: it was believed industrialisation would alleviate nationalism in the long term, although more immediate strategies focused on strengthening Yugoslav nationalism; and 1960–69, the articulation of Yugoslav nationalism based on community of nations. R. V. Burks, ‘Nationalism and communism in Yugoslavia: an attempt at synthesis’, in H. Birnbaum & S. J. Vryonis (eds.), Aspects of the Balkans, Continuity and Change, The Hague, 1972, pp. 397– 423; proceedings of an international conference held at UCLA, 23– 28 October 1969. While seemingly operating with the parameters of 1950s Yugoslav nationalism, Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s views promoted a different agenda.
138 Chapter 4 offence. Many Catholic and Orthodox churches, monasteries, convents and seminaries were also closed.9 While all religions suffered, Islam was hardest hit, as the practice of praying five times daily was seen as mixing religion with everyday life and Islam was considered ‘backwards and Asiatic’.10 Muslim cultural and educational societies were also abolished, the Muslim printing house in Sarajevo was closed, and no Islamic textbook was issued in Yugoslavia until 1964.
With regards to the arts, the new government expected artistic production would address the specifics of the communist agenda and follow Soviet trends.11 Stalin saw culture as the most effective way of influencing mass consciousness and assigned artists a revolutionary role in promoting the values of communism.12
Reflecting the Soviet view, Yugoslav artists and writers were expected to depict, in 9 Malcolm notes that the Communist Party took a softer approach towards the Orthodox Church, as some of its clergy served as ‘progressive’ priests in Tito’s army. He also indicates that some of the measures introduced by the communists were covertly resisted: Islamic texts continued to circulate, children were taught in mosques, the dervish orders kept up their practices in private homes, and the Young Muslims, a student organisation, resisted the campaign against Islam until several hundred of its members were imprisoned in 1949–50. Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, pp. 195– 96. 10 Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, p. 195. 11 The majority of Yugoslav Party members spent their formative years in the USSR, so the ‘bolshevisation of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia’ was felt strongly in the early post war years. In discussion of the impact of Soviet artistic debates on Yugoslavia, historian Pekovi identified the Second International Writers Conference, held in the Soviet town of Harkov (Kharkov) in 1930, of particular importance. The conference highlighted the role of the ‘proletariat’ in promoting the communist agenda, but because strict adherence to the ‘Harkov agenda’ and promotion of socialist realism was slightly delayed in Yugoslavia it lost its original strength and potency. R. Pekovi , Ni Rat Ni Mir, Panorama književnih polemika 1945–1965 (Neither War nor Peace, [Yugoslav] Literary Debates of 1945–1965), Zavod za izdava ku delatnost ‘Filip Višnji ’, Beograd, 1986, pp. 7–8. 12 Sketched out by Lenin, socialist realism became a dominant mode in the period between 1946 and 1953. It was presented as a strict ‘code of law’ of Soviet aesthetics, philosophy and theory of art. The main promoter of the new cultural policy was Andrei Zhdanov. He justified this turn from proletarian internationalism to Russian nationalism during his speech at the Central Committee conference with Soviet composers and musicians (February 1948), saying ‘Internationalism is engendered where national art flourishes. To forget this truth means to lose the guideline, to lose one’s face, to become rootless cosmopolitans.’ The wave of cultural pogroms in 1946 in the Soviet Union swept away all those opposing the official views, who, in the official party views, distorted and negated the significance of national cultural heritage. I. Golomstock, Totalitarian Art in the Soviet Union, the Third Reich, Fascist Italy and the People’s Republic of China, Icon Edition, Great Britain, 1990, pp. 140–43.
139 Chapter 4 an optimistic light, the major social changes that were taking place. The approach required the creation of art that reflected daily life and experience in the new society.
Responding to the new political climate, Neidhardt took an active role in the post–
World War Two urban debates. In 1945, he moved from his pre war position in the steel industry to a position in the Ministry of Building, where he stayed until
November 1946. He was so eager to contribute to the changing society that when the first Society for Cultural Collaboration with the Soviet Union was established, in
May 1945, he served as secretary.13 He enthusiastically contributed to the stage sets for political events, and designed propaganda material for what was considered
‘manifestation architecture’, or architecture that supported communist ideology.
He often worked without a commission and for free. His stage set designs were used for the celebration of the socialist holiday of 29 November 1947; for Tito’s visit to Sarajevo [Figure 23]; for the inauguration of the railway built by the Yugoslav youth free labour [Figure 24]; and for numerous communist occasions, from May
Day to the Yugoslav Army Day. All of these reveal an embracing of the Soviet style generic worker’s imaginary.14
13 Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, p. 271. Kapetanovi stated that in May 1945 the Action Committee (Akcioni Odbor za osnivanje saradnje sa SSSR) in charge of cultural cooperation with the USSR was established. Its president was Minister Dr Nedo Zec; the secretaries were Juraj Neidhardt and Slavko Mi unovi . 14 Karli Kapetanovi , Juraj Najdhart, život i djelo, pp. 272–82.
140 Chapter 4
Figure 23: Stage designed by Neidhardt for Tito’s visit to Sarajevo. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 321.
Figure 24: ‘People build, state helps’ poster designed by Neidhardt. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 320.
141 Chapter 4
At the same time Neidhardt focused his architectural production on what he saw as the social agenda of socialism, leaving aside his earlier preoccupation with
Baš aršija. He argued that the quality of living conditions was crucial for improving workers’ productivity, and he renewed his involvement in some of his pre war projects. Without official appointment or pay, he resurrected his designs for the mining workers’ housing of Ilijaš, Breza, Zenica, Ljubija and Vareš, and later published them in Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity as studies of workers’ housing.
Despite Neidhardt’s efforts, the communist government did not recognise the vision of modern architecture he was promoting as complementary to their cause, nor did it approve of Neidhardt’s family background. Unlike the previous pro Nazi coalition government of the Independent State of Croatia, the early post war communist regime considered Neidhardt’s Croatian, Catholic and German heritage a serious disadvantage to his ability to contribute to the new state. His lack of involvement in the ‘liberation war’ (World War Two) and his pre war employment with the mining company under the previous government further stigmatised his political profile.
The extent of political opposition to Neidhardt was so great that he was arrested in
1947 and imprisoned for 42 days. He was accused of not blending into the new socialist state and for excessively using drawing materials at the time when such material was scarce.15 While ultimately he was released without trial, Neidhardt
15 Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, p. 281.
142 Chapter 4 was presented as a person incapable of contributing to the revolutionary course of the new country.
Professionally, Neidhardt was also marginalised. Kapetanovi quotes the engineer
Vaso Todorovi , who, in a job reference for Neidhardt, presented him as an
‘individualist’ and as someone who ‘dedicated himself to the tasks that only he considered important’.16 Individualism was not an attribute associated with the new socialist character; it had capitalist connotations in its concern for individual over collective needs. Todorovi ’s reference noted that while Neidhardt was a ‘capable artist and an excellent draftsman’, he was ‘unable to adjust to the professional tasks
[required by the new government]’.17 Ultimately the Ministry demoted Neidhardt to
‘interior decorator’ – a role perceived as inferior to the professional one of architect.18
In 1948, Neidhardt was publically criticised by Communist Party official Radovan
Zogovi .19 In a speech at the Fifth Congress of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia,
Zogovi condemned Neidhardt’s urban design proposals as framed by ‘the Western
16 Original quote: ‘Zalaže se u poslu koji sam izabere I koji mu se svidi. Likovno spreman I odli an crta neprilaogodljiv našim prilikama u stru nom poslu’. Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, p. 300. 17 Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, pp. 297–81. 18 Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, pp. 297–81. 19 Full quote: ‘Decadency and formalism in architecture in our context, are expressed, amongst other things, in a series of new, recently constructed or designed architectural objects [the designs for new streetscapes of Sarajevo, etc] as well as in formalist theories that proclaim that the so called functional constructivism … is the architecture of the new socialist society. The fight against the remnants and recidivism [sic.] of the Western formalism and decadency … included so far and will include – to a certain extent – in the future fight for popularization of the great traditions of Soviet art, and the fight against any attempt to intellectually undermine Soviet artistic production.’ R. Zogovi , originally published in Arhitektura, nos. 11–12, 1948, p. 56; cited in I. Štraus, Arhitektura Jugoslavije, 1945–1990, (Yugoslav Architecture, 1945 1990), Svjetlost, Sarajevo, 1991, p. 12.
143 Chapter 4 decadency and formalism’, and therefore incapable of representing the
‘architecture of the new socialist society.’20 Such an approach, Zogovi suggested, promoted Western formalism and decadency and the values that the Yugoslav Party will ‘fight against’.21 ‘Our Party’, Zogovi concluded, ‘has always successfully fought this battle [against individualism in architecture] and it will continue, of course, with the same success in the future’.22
The growing level of Soviet propaganda arguing that international modernism was an expression of capitalism heightened the negative perception of Neidhardt’s professional work. Neidhardt’s Western education, particularly his association with the modernist architectural scene and most notably Le Corbusier, was seen as a hindrance to his ability to contribute to the architecture of the new socialist revolution. As architectural historian Greg Castillo has argued, this discourse would result in the perception of two competing design vocabularies – socialist realism and international style modernism – as antithetical signatures of Eastern and
Western European architecture respectively.23 This oppositional relationship formed a significant part of Cold War discourse, and expressed alternative constructs of post–World War Two national identities.24 While Grabrijan was held in higher regard by the communist government than Neidhardt, his move from
20 Štraus, Arhitektura Jugoslavije, p. 12. 21 Štraus, Arhitektura Jugoslavije, p. 12. 22 Štraus, Arhitektura Jugoslavije, p. 12. 23 G. Castillo, ‘Socialist realism and built nationalism in the Cold War “Battle of the Styles”’, Centropa: A Journal of Central European Architecture and Related Arts, vol. 1, no. 2, 2001, pp. 85–94. See also, G. A. Castillo, ‘Constructing the Cold War: architecture, urbanism and the cultural division of Germany, 1945–1957’, PhD thesis, University of California, 2000. 24 Castillo, ‘Socialist realism and built nationalism in the Cold War’, pp. 85–94.
144 Chapter 4
Sarajevo to Ljubljana in 1945 contributed to the significant decrease in the public presence of their ideas.25 It was only within the context of the dramatically changing political terrain of late 1940s’ Yugoslavia, that Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s work on
Sarajevo’s heritage fabric would gain relevance.
The changing political context: Tito–Stalin conflict
In the mid 1940s the relationship between Yugoslav leader Josip Broz Tito (1892–
1980) and Soviet leader Joseph Stalin (1878–1953) deteriorated, causing a fracture in the ideological grounding of the Yugoslav Communist Party (KPJ).26 The political turmoil was prompted by Soviet allegations that the KPJ was departing from the communist agenda. It ended with the 1948 expulsion of Yugoslavia from the
Cominform [Communist Information Bureau].27 Rejected by the rest of the Eastern
Bloc, the KPJ found itself politically and ideologically isolated from other communist countries.
25 Upon the beginning of the World War Two Grabrijan stayed in Sarajevo, teaching at the Technical School until 1945. He was imprisoned by the Germans for some time during the war, considered a supporter of the resistance movement. Soon after the end of the war, in 1945, Grabrijan left Sarajevo and returned to Slovenia to take up an academic appointment at the University of Ljubljana. In 1946 he was appointed Associate Lecturer, in 1947 Docent and 1951 Associate Professor of history of architecture and principles of design at the Faculty of Architecture in Ljubljana. 26 The conflict resulted in the Cominform Resolution of 28 June 1948, which expelled the Communist Party of Yugoslavia from Cominform. Extensive literature on this issue suggests the Cominform Resolution arose from Stalin’s attempts to control other communist states, as well as Tito’s unwillingness to obey Stalin’s instructions. In particular, Yugoslavia was considered to be pushing too fast towards unification with Bulgaria and Albania. Although following Stalin's proposal for a series of such unifications, Tito was seen to be proceeding without proper consultation with Moscow. Another issue was Tito's eagerness to ‘export the revolution’ to Greece. For an overview of this political conflict see Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, pp. 194–95. 27 Cominform is an abbreviation from ‘Communist Information Bureau’. The word ‘Informbiro’ is the Yugoslav name of the Cominform. The Cominform was a network made up of the communist parties of Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, France, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Romania, the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia (until 1948). In the history of Yugoslavia, Informbiro refers to the period between 1948 and 1955, and is characterised by conflict with the Soviet Union.
145 Chapter 4
The separation put pressure on the party to redefine its identity both nationally and internationally. Particularly challenging was the task of conveying the fact that the break had had no negative effect on the country’s determination to embrace communism. Contrary to previously held beliefs, the party argued that it was possible for Yugoslavia to build its own brand of communism. While the public portrayal of Tito as independent, liberal and anti Stalinist was intended to set the leaders apart, the process of identifying unique political approaches that would confirm those differences proved more difficult.28 Adding to the pressure was the need to identify a uniquely Yugoslav artistic expression that supported the political changes.
In the artistic debates this dilemma was exacerbated, at least partly, by the fact that unlike in the Soviet Union, the KPJ never identified the avant garde as a constituent and necessary part of the revolutionary project.29 Yugoslavia bypassed the approach set by the October Revolution (1917) and the Soviet Union (1922), which presupposed the creation of a new art as necessary in establishing a new society. In the Soviet context, this necessity set in motion a range of avant garde movements, such was constructivism.30 So once the Yugoslav Party denounced its short lived
28 For several years after the conflict, Tito’s policies were closely modelled on those of Stalin. Unclear about its goals, the party affected a balance between a unique Yugoslav approach and an appeal to the Soviet block, to regain its support. The Yugoslav federal constitution proclaimed in 1946 was a copy of the Soviet constitution proclaimed 10 years earlier. The 1949 communist leadership’s rapid collectivisation of peasant smallholdings demonstrated the hesitancy of Yugoslav leadership at the time. Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, pp. 194–95. 29 S. Musabegovi , ‘War – the constitution of the totalitarian body’, PhD thesis, European University Institute, 2004. 30 Musabegovi , ‘War – the constitution of the totalitarian body’; and S. Musabegovi , Rat konstitucija ratnog tijela, Svjetlost, Sarajevo, 2007, pp. 13–14.
146 Chapter 4 dedication to Soviet style social realism in art and architecture, it was left with a theoretical and ideological void as to what kind of art reflected of its program.31
Tito’s search for ‘our’ architecture
The vacuum created by the political shift provided opportunities not previously available to local artists, and Grabrijan and Neidhardt appeared aware of this new potential. While the desire to incorporate a social agenda had underpinned their work since the very start of their collaboration, it was only in 1947 that Grabrijan openly acknowledged the political potential of their architectural work. In a letter to
Neidhardt he wrote, ‘The more I think about Tito’s search for “our architecture” the more it becomes clear to me that our path to local architecture via the modern is very fortunate!’32 Confirming his belief in his original ideas of Bosnian Kunstwollen to represent the unique nature of local art, Grabrijan encouraged Neidhardt ‘not to lose faith’ and to persevere in the promotion of what they now referred at as
31 The ambiguity of the artists’ position was reflected in the alternating support and resentment of the Soviet government. In a letter to the conference of the Society of Artists of Bosnia and Hercegovina, held in February 1949, artists stated their commitment to ‘the exploration and definition of socialist realism in the arts’ as well as their rejection of ‘the untrue statements and the [Stalinist’s] campaign against our people’. Quoted in Prilike 1945–1974, Umjetni ka Galerija BiH, Sarajevo, p. 15. The Communist Party committees such as Agitprop [agitation and propaganda] that previously supported the Soviet agenda shifted their interest towards defining the parameters of authentically Yugoslav artistic production. For further discussion see M. Markovi & G. Petrovi (eds.), Introduction, Praxis, Yugoslav Essays in the Philosophy and Methodology of the Social Sciences, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, D. Reidel Publishing Co., Holland, 1979. 32 Original quote: ‘Što dalje, toliko uvidjam da je ovaj zahvat preko doma e do moderne vrlo stretan! I kad Bežek (ljub.arhitekt, D. Grabrijanov prijatelj, prim.aut.) koji je dobronamjeran uje da Tito traži ‘našu’ arhitekturu, veli više je našega u onom gdje se Najdhardt približio Bosni nego li u Ravnikarovom klasicizmu’. English translation: ‘The more I think about it [Bosnian Oriental architecture], the more it becomes clear to me that this path to local architecture via the modern is very fortunate! When Bežek (a Slovenian architect from Ljubljana and Grabrijan’s friend) who is very well intentioned, heard that Tito was after ‘our’ architecture, he said that there was more of ‘our’ [architecture] in Neidhardt’s interpretation of Bosnian architecture than in [Slovenian architect] Ravnikar’s classicism’. Letter dated 8 June 1947, cited in Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, p. 297.
147 Chapter 4
Bosnian Oriental architecture.33 Grabrijan suggested that their ideas were ‘twenty to fifty years ahead of their time’ and that their further development could only enhance their public standing.34
Over the next five years they put sustained effort into promoting their work through public exhibitions, lectures and professional engagements. Grabrijan, who by then was in Ljubljana, kept up his writing, and published supportive reviews of
Neidhardt’s architectural projects, such as his competition entry for the design of the Slovenian Parliament in Ljubljana (1948).35 At a national urban symposium held in Dubrovnik in 1950, he presented a paper that argued for the importance of the
Oriental architecture of Bosnia and Hercegovina.36 The argument was further advanced through numerous articles on Oriental heritage in other parts of
Yugoslavia, such as in Macedonia.37 Neidhardt, for his part, advocated the Bosnian
33 Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, p. 297. 34 Grabrijan suggested that their approach had been already recognised by some, such as his Slovenian colleague Bežek who, according to Grabrijan, had suggested that Bosnian Oriental represented the qualities sought from ‘our’ architecture. Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, p. 297. 35 The designs for the workers’ housing in Vareš Mejdan were executed in 1954, Kralupi in 1952 and Brezik in 1947. The competition entry for the Slovenian Parliament was done in 1947–48. 36 D. Grabrijan, ‘Misli o Naši Dediš ini v Zvezi z Referati s Posveta, Arhitektov v Dubrovniku’, Slovenski Etnograf, no. 5, 1952, pp. 101 106; originally presented as ‘O naši orientalski in sodobni hiši, at a symposium on historic heritage of Yugoslavia, Dubrovnik, 1950. 37 A list of articles that specifically dealt with the topic of Oriental heritage in Yugoslavia is included in the collection of Grabrijan’s reprinted articles presented in Dž. eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo. It includes following titles: ‘Orijentalna hiža v Sarajevu’, Arhitektura, nos 23– 24, Zagreb, 1949; ‘Naša orijentalna i savremena ku a’, paper presented at a conference ‘Problemi arhitekture in urbanizma LRS’, I posvetovanje FLRJ, Dubrovnik 1950; ‘Misli o naši dediš ini v zvazi z referati s posveta arhitektov v Dubrovniku Ljubljana, 1950’ presented also under the title ‘Dediš ina narodov FLRJ v arhitekturi’, Likovni svet, Ljubljana, 1951; ‘Arhitektura v merilu loveka’, Arhitekt, Ljubljana, May–June 1952; ‘Arhitektonsko nasljede naroda Jugoslavije’, Arhitektura, br. 5, Zagreb, 1952; ‘Organski urbanizem’, Arhitekt, Ljubljana, November–December 1952; ‘Le Corbusier’, Naši razgledi, Ljubljana, 4 October 1952; ‘Obeležje makedonske civilne arhitekture in njeni tvorci’, Naši razgledi, Ljubljana, 18 October 1952.
148 Chapter 4
Oriental agenda through his modern architectural designs. Their efforts culminating in the book Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity.
Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity: a ‘synthetic integration of the old experiences and new socialist needs’
The very title of Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s book, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way
Towards Modernity, served to link Bosnia, modernity and the progressive nature of their ideas. Confident that the unique qualities of Bosnian architecture contributed to the new society under development, Neidhardt and Grabrijan considered the book a manifesto of new times:
Today, we stand on the threshold of a new civilization. We live in a time marked by the transition of capitalism into socialism. At this stage we have to deal with specific difficulties. The transitional time needs a clear position.38
The critical point about Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity is that Neidhardt and Grabrijan were not interested in ‘bringing’ modernity to Bosnia, but in showing that Bosnia’s uniqueness represented the essence of what they considered modern. In ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ they had sought to connect to the principles of modern urbanism – its rational planning and efficiency – to support and carry forward their own urban ideas. But this book focused on the specifics of
Bosnian heritage and on promoting the modernity they claimed was already there.
Re introducing Grabrijan’s early discussion of the Bosnian fabric’s modernity they wrote:
38 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 14–15.
149 Chapter 4
Is aršija not a source of modern architecture? Why do we look for inspiration elsewhere, continually getting it from second hand sources, when we are at their origins? … Aren’t musandere like modern built in wardrobes? Aren’t se ije like modern built in couches and modern low furniture? [Aren’t elements of Bosnian Oriental architecture, such as] the double height space, the single flight of stairs, and the vegetation which spills into our dwellings [all elements of modern architecture].’39
The book does not address debates on modern urban planning previously considered important, but rather focuses on the historical and political issues particular to Bosnia. It presents the authors’ views on questions regarding the origin of the Bosnian population, Muslims in particular, and the value of Baš aršija’s heritage. All of these were pertinent to the growing search for a unique socialist
Bosnian identity.
As in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ the book includes an historical overview of the built fabric, as well as a discussion of the people. Unlike the first publication, however, which addressed the issues separately, here the urban and cultural issues are folded into one; the analysis of built fabric is presented through a discussion of cultural practices and historical changes that shaped the urban forms. This approach is illustrated by a drawing of a tree, a graphic metaphor for the theoretical and conceptual organisation of the book [Figure 25]. The tree’s root system includes various social and emotional factors, such as temperament, tradition and religion to
39 Original quote: ‘Zar nije takav izvor savremene arhitekture sarajevska aršija? Zašto da izvore tražimo na drugim mjestima, da neprestano primamo iz tre e ruke, kada smo na izvoru? Zar nisu musandere – savremeni uzidani ormari? Zar nisu se ije savremeni kau i? I savremeno nisko poku stvo, te dvoetažni prostori i jednakokrake stepenice, pa vegetacija, koja ulazi u prostor i stan, koja se prelijeva u prirodu itd.’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 14.
150 Chapter 4 physical aspects such as materials, climate and topography. Growing out of the roots, the tree trunk shows a blending of factors from the root system and the mediation of those by additional factors, such as ‘people and their land’ and the
‘unwritten laws’ – a reference to customary building practices.40 The city is the result of all such influences, represented by the two large branches of the tree. The branches represent the typical Ottoman division of Sarajevo – the business district of aršija (Baš aršija) and residential quarter of mahala.41 The drawing presents the city as a natural, organic and historical process that integrates a diverse range of biological, physical, material, social and emotional factors, providing the theoretical grounding for the book itself [Figure 26].
40 The ‘unwritten laws’ included: local building practices (gradjevni postupak); rights to a view (pravo na vidik); relationship to nature (odnos do prirode); spatial architecture (prostorna arhitektura); ‘growing’ houses (ku e koje rastu); houses without furniture (ku e bez mobilijara); surface structure (površine struktura); dome and cubes (kupolasta I kockasta arhitektura) [abstract form]; architecture in human scale (arhitektura u mjerilu ovjeka). 41 The words used in this drawing are ‘Turcism’; they are not the Serbo Croatian or Bosnian words but ‘loans’, words most commonly from Turkish but transformed and pronounced as Bosnian/Serbo Croatian.
151 Chapter 4
Figure 25: Structure of the book as represented as a tree. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 4.
152 Chapter 4
Figure 26: Drawing of a panorama of Sarajevo, showing an harmonious connection between the terrain and the city. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 5.
The introduction concludes with the statement that this new analysis of the old fabric marks a ‘rebirth’ of ‘a historic condition’ and a re emergence of the qualities that have always been there.42 Justifying the contemporary relevance of the historic fabric, they wrote:
While for the last half of the century we have been studying all the significant Roman monuments, in Bosnia we have done nothing for the architecture of our recent past. It is the last moment to do something about it, to protect, study, and reveal its principles, which are ours, good and contemporary, and to translate them into contemporary life. Why? Because they [these principles] are human, because they reach for connection with nature, because they respect neighbours, are democratic, unpretentious and non pathetic. 43
The first part of the book presents an interpretative analysis of historic Baš aršija, and the second part its relevance to modern architecture. The five chapters in the first part are titled ‘The people and land’; ‘The city’; ‘The market place’; ‘The
42 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 14. 43 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 13
153 Chapter 4 neighbourhood’ and ‘The house’.44 Drawing on many secondary sources from the fields of ethnography, historiography, architecture and art history, Grabrijan’s research provided documentation, description and historical recording for those chapters.
Part two comprises chapters six and seven: ‘Unwritten laws’ and ‘The revival of
Bosnian and Hercegovinan architecture’.45 These chapters present Neidhardt’s interpretation of the essential relationship between traditional and modern architecture. The section includes almost 50 design proposals, which range in scale and type from large urban master plans to individual details, and from large public buildings to the design of picnic pavilions. Their conceptual grounding, Neidhardt argues, is in the Ottoman heritage fabric of Bosnia. Chapter seven includes an ‘up to date architectonic dictionary’, which aims to present a ‘model of architecture that shows the way by which we could eventually arrive at our own new architecture’.46 Almost exclusively focused on the relevance of Baš aršija to the new city, the book, in both structure and conceptual approach, highlights the timely nature of the authors’ renewed interest in the historic fabric of the precinct.
44 Chapter one ‘The people and land’ (Narod and Zemlja); chapter two ‘The city’ (Grad); chapter three ‘The market place’ ( aršija); chapter four ‘The neighbourhood’ (Mahala) and chapter five ‘The house’ (Ku a). 45 Chapters six ‘Unwritten laws’ (Nepisani Zakoni) and chapter seven ‘The revival of Bosnian and Hercegovinan architecture’ (Preporod Arhitekture u Bosni I Hercegovini). 46 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 318. The book features a range of visual material, including photographs, sketches and drawings by the authors’ as well as children’s and students’ drawings. A section titled the ‘Specification of collaborators and graphic material’ presented a detailed list of illustration credits. The list suggests that both Grabrijan and Neidhardt provided illustrations for the historical research presented in the introduction and first five chapters. The drawings of the last two chapters were credited to Neidhardt only. Most commonly historic and technical/architectural drawings were contributed by Grabrijan, interpretative sketches and three dimensional drawings by Neidhardt.
154 Chapter 4
Redefining the grounds upon which a nation is constructed
The origin of Bosnian Muslims that opens the book is presented as a series of dialectical questions and answers that seek to highlight the subjective nature of historic interpretation and the shifting grounds upon which those views are constructed. ‘Who are these people?’ the authors ask. The answer, they state, cannot be provided definitively, but rather in a rhetorical question such as, ‘[Are they] Turks who settled here’ or ‘the local population’ of Bogumils? And if indeed they are the Turks who came with the Ottomans, ‘What happened to all the
Bogumils from Bosnia after the Turks arrived? Did they convert and accept Islam?’47
In response, the authors stated, ‘These people’ [referring to a collective of local population, not necessarily Muslims] ‘at one moment belonged to a Serbian, then at another to a Croatian state’.48 This marked a conceptual shift, away from presenting
Bosnian Muslims in an inseparable relation to the religion of Islam to discussing the
Muslim community through the inevitable forces of history. This represented a major change in Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s approach to the issue of culture as well as built heritage, and was timely given the party’s growing frustration with its inability to overcome national differences and create a new friction free society. It also questioned the essentialist notions of identity promulgated by nationalists.
As already discussed, within Bosnia the issue of Bosnian Muslims’ national identity was of particular importance. Through its specific historic circumstances Bosnia
47 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 23. 48 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 23.
155 Chapter 4 escaped transformation into a nation state. As a result, unlike neighbouring Serbia and Croatia, which were inhabited by the predominant Serb and Croat populations respectively, Bosnia was not a land of Bosnians; throughout its history it remained inhabited by Bosnian Muslims, Serbs (Orthodox), Croats (Catholics) and Jews.49 By the 20th century the nationalist movements of Serbia and Croatia had managed to tie the Bosnian Orthodox and Catholic population to Serb and Croat national identities, causing significant confusion over the national status of the Bosnian
Muslims.
In the context of Serbian nationalism, liberation from Ottoman colonial power in the 1830s had propelled its nationalist ideology. The nationalists portrayed the
Serbian struggle against Ottoman foreign domination as a reflection of their superiority over other national and religious groups, and associated the change of political structure with a victory of Christianity over Islam. Among the most cited examples of Serbian literature supporting nationalist discourse is Petar Petrovi
Njegoš historical play, the Mountain Wreath.50 Centred on the extermination of all
‘Turks’, not only those of Turkish origins but also those who, like the Muslims of
Bosnia, converted to Islam, the plot encouraged religious cleansing as a way to purify Serbian ethnic space.51 The subsequent ideology supporting the growing desire for the territorial expansion of Greater Serbia presented Bosnian Muslims as
49 Buturovi , ‘Producing and annihilating the ethos of Bosnian Islam’, pp. 29–33. 50 For a broader discussion of the Mountain Wreath see A. Wachtel, Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation, pp. 40–45. 51 Wachtel, Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation, pp. 40–45.
156 Chapter 4 either traitors who ought to be expelled or as converts who ought to return to their
Christian origins.
While Croatian nationalism emerged from a different political framework, it too questioned the existence of a collective Bosnian political identity and the role of
Muslims within it. Croatian nationalism developed in response to a long cultural subordination to Austro–Hungarian rule and more specifically its policies of cultural assimilation. Eventually liberated from such historical and cultural constraints,
Croatian nationalists promoted their cultural superiority and focused on religious membership as a powerful common denominator of all Croats.52 Significantly, while both Serbian and Croatian nationalisms were premised on a sense of the exclusiveness of their own cultures, they did not necessarily exclude Bosnian
Muslims. Many indeed, such as Antun Star evi , advocated Croatian identity that included Bosnia.53
It was, therefore, the Muslim community that Serbian and Croat nationalists expected to change. Considered a religious group with no national character,
Muslims were required to ‘decide’ on their national affiliation and ‘choose’ their national belonging. As a result of what Buturovi named ‘a triangle of contending forces’ pulling in different directions,54 the Bosnian Muslims were caught between three different and overlapping national identities: some accepted Serbian identity,
52 Wachtel, Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation, pp. 40–45. 53 Buturovi ’s ‘Producing and annihilating the ethos of Bosnian Islam’ presents a summary of the issues related to the position and role of Islam in Bosnia. Wachtel also discusses the issues of Islam in relationship to Yugoslav cultural development. 54 Buturovi , ‘Producing and annihilating the ethos of Bosnian Islam’, pp. 29–33.
157 Chapter 4 some Croatian and some promoted uniquely Bošnjak national identity.55 Others, however, argued that Islam was more important than any nation, or alternatively recognised their Slavic origins and membership of a Serbo Croatian tribe as the most important aspect of their identity.56 This process of ‘internal nationalisation’ of the Bosnian community fractured its cohesion, making each of the three main groups seek alliances outside the country’s borders.57
The communist government’s frustration with its failure to resolve this issue and the persistence of nationalist formations resulted in a change of the party’s approach.58 The issue was no longer one of overcoming the nationalist divisions, but of controlling and administering the national grouping. Admitting the presence of national divisions and searching for their acknowledgement, an official at the 1940s’ 55 Although Bošnjak national identity included the three main religious groups of Bosnia’s Muslims, Serbs (Orthodox) and Croats (Catholics), in reality it relied on Bosnian Muslims. Bosnia’s Austro– Hungarian administrator, Finance Minister Benjamin Kállay – the head the Bosnian Bureau between 1882 and 1903 – first introduced the concept. Kallay believed the formation of a political nation, such as collective Bosnian nation, would unite all different people within a common administrative and political structure and deny or diminish the relevance of national unity based on national identity. For further discussion see T. Kralja i , Kalajev Režim u Bosni i Hercegovini 1882–1903 (Kallay’s Governance of Bosnia and Hercegovina), Veselin Masleša, Sarajevo, 1987. 56 The JMO, the strongest Muslim party, recognised and accepted the difficulties of competing with the Serb and Croat nationalist agenda and suggested that its members choose between the two, based on the economic prospects offered by either side. Illustrative of the curiousness of this arrangement is the often cited example of JMO 18 deputies (and their alternatives elected in 1923 election) who all, but for party president Dr Mehmed Spaho, declared themselves as Croats. Mehmed Spaho, who in his student days declared himself a Serb, later refused either the Serb or Croatian label, while his brother Fehim, the reis ul ulema (Islamic religious head) of Yugoslavia’s Muslims from 1938 to 1942, was a Croat and his third brother, Mustafa (an engineer), was a Serb. Banac, The National Question in Yugoslavia, p. 375. 57 The term ‘internal nationalisation’ is elaborated in Buturovi , ‘Producing and annihilating the ethos of Bosnian Islam’, pp. 29–33. Malcolm uses like term in relationship to a search for a ‘national’ identity among different confessional groups that he argues were inspired and moved by the forces outside Bosnia. Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History. 58 In an attempt to transform itself, the structure of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia changed in the 1950s. In 1952, its name was changed to League of Communist of Yugoslavia, and the Politburo was re named Executive Bureau. The leadership decided the party should be transformed into a movement of socialist forces, that ‘should not command, but offer ideological leadership’. The change in approach decreased the party’s control over the public domain. Djilas, The Contested Country, p. 174.
158 Chapter 4 first party congress stated, in his speech, that Bosnia needed to accept those divisions:
Bosnia cannot be divided between Serbia and Croatia, not because Serbs and Croats live mixed together on the whole territory, but also because the territory is inhabited by Muslims who have not yet decided on their national identity.59
Attempting, through official organisation and administration, to provide political platforms for communities that would neutralise the impact of nationalist debates, the 1948 Yugoslav census presented Muslims with three options for declaring their nationality: Muslim Serbs, Muslim Croats or ‘Muslims, nationally undeclared’.60 This showed the government’s willingness to recognise Muslims as a separate community but not with a separate national identity.61 The next census, in 1953, produced a similar result. But with official policy moving towards greater support for a spirit of ‘Yugoslavism’, the category ‘Muslim’ was removed from the census altogether; the new category of ‘Yugoslav, nationally undeclared’ was introduced.62
The 1961 census stopped short of recognising Muslims’ full national rights, but it offered a category of ‘ethnic Muslim’, which was seen as more appealing than previous options. The long standing debate was eventually resolved by the 1968
League of Communist of Yugoslavia, which recognised Muslim claims and offered the option of identifying as Bosnian Muslim in the sense of a nationality. It would only be in the 1971 constitution that the change was officially instituted and the
59 Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, p. 197. 60 Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, p. 198. 61 Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, p. 198. 62 Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, p. 198.
159 Chapter 4
‘double’ identity for Muslims introduced: Muslim with a ‘capital M’ indicating national affiliation, and muslim with a ‘small m’, indicating religious affiliation.63
Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s questioning of Muslim origins problematised rather than confirmed the nation state model as the only way by which communities can be structured. Their argument sought alternative factors that could define a national bond: ‘Only Europeans look for totality and classify an individual by the sum total of religion, nationality and extraction [heritage].’64 And it was for that reason that
‘Europe had so many difficulties’ with the Islamic world.65 Unable to comprehend the ‘non European’ way of thinking about a nation, foreign rulers of Bosnia, they argued, misinterpreted the Muslims of Bosnia and perceived them always as
‘somebody else’.66 The Austrians, they stated, identified ‘them with the Turks, the
Kingdom of Yugoslavia found them to be Serbs, and Croatia to be Croats, etc.’67
Presenting Bosnian identity within a long history of misconceptions and misunderstandings, Grabrijan and Neidhardt acknowledged the transient and changing nature of identity formation. They also challenged the government’s lack of capacity to finally resolve the issue, and resist and overcome nationalist pressures.
63 The change was officially recognised in the 1971 constitution. For further discussion see Donia & Fine, Bosnia and Hercegovina, pp. 178–79 and Buturovi , ‘National quest and the anguish of salvation: Bosnian Muslim identity in Meša Selimovi ’s Dervish and Death”’. 64 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 23. 65 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 23. 66 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 23. 67 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 23.
160 Chapter 4
Grabrijan and Neidhardt perceived the socialist government’s ongoing changes to the classification of the Muslim community as new grounds upon which the concept of a nation could be established. No longer was identity defined by a framework of national, ethnic or religious belonging, but it could be assembled, albeit within given limitations, and constructed upon one’s own choosing. Neidhardt stated that the interpretative and personal nature of such a process helped him to discover his own identity; he claimed to be ‘Croatian by birth and Bosnian by choice’.68 He encouraged his students to combine the various traditions of Bosnia into a new experience, promoting collective gatherings to celebrate various religious and cultural holidays. These varied from early morning gatherings of uranak, associated with Morning Prayer for Muslims, to the celebration of Vidovdan Day, a special day in the Serb calendar.69 This rethinking of the nationalist paradigm provided for a more sympathetic and nuanced interpretation of not only the origins of Muslims but also their place in the new Bosnian society. Once the collective identity of
Bosnia was constructed, it was possible for the authors to search for their authentic arts and architecture.
Unlike the discussion presented in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, which connected the local Muslim population to focal points of Islam outside of Yugoslavia, the discussion presented in Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity
68 Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, p. 239. 69 Vidovdan or St Vitus' Day is a religious holiday observed on 28 June. Vidovdan is also a date of historical importance, marking Serbia’s battle against the Ottomans, as well as the assassination of the Austro–Hungarian crown prince Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria, which triggered World War One among the most significant events. Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, pp. 324–26.
161 Chapter 4 focused on the Muslims links to regional and local traditions. The authors argued that the evidence of Bosnian Muslim rejection of the trans historical associations to the world of Islam was readily found:
You confuse the Bosnian Muslim the most by asking him to declare his nationality. How much confusion and pain has that kind of association/declaration caused since it was first introduced by the former regimes. And when [the Muslim] confusion was noticed it was often interpreted as meanness.70
This transformation of alliances from Mecca and Islam at large to a specifically
Bosnian context was reflected in the redrawing of the Medina mosque, originally published in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ [Figure 13].
The new drawing showed the Medina mosque, a symbol of religious belief, replaced by a drawing of a Mecca pilgrimage, a symbol of Muslim community gathering and shared values. Positioned at the edge of the composition, Mecca’s pilgrimage square was is a distant and remote place, connected to Sarajevo via a sea [Figure
27]. This weakened the visual connection between Sarajevo and the core of the
Islamic world, shifting the focus on the city itself. In fact, it could be argued that the intent of the drawing was not to suggest the impact of mainstream Islam on the city formation, but rather to empower the local context, terrain and people to modify and alter the Islamic canon into new regional expression. The inclusion of diverse daily experiences, such as praying, sitting, eating and walking, all highlighted
Sarajevo’s connection to the specific context and not, as previously suggested, fanatical dedication to Islam.
70 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 23.
162 Chapter 4
Figure 27: Sketch showing the Mecca–Sarajevo link. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 60.
Without explicitly changing the terms by which Grabrijan and Neidhardt referred to
Bosnian Muslims, the transformation of a general notion of ‘Oriental man’ into a more local or specifically Bosnian Oriental is significant for my argument. This transformation re focused the discussion on the local and organic connection between the people and artefacts, re igniting Grabrijan’s earlier discussions, as well as downplaying the importance of external influences. No longer was the Muslim population presented as Oriental and foreign, but rather it became a community appreciated for its special cultural contribution. In addition, the authors argued, the community presented an ability to transform foreign influences into a deeply and uniquely Bosnian condition – one distinct from its Serbian and Croatian neighbours.
Vesting Bosnian Muslims with the sense of regional identity provided a direct link between the local community and the land it occupied. Despite territorial claims being one of the most ‘important categories through which nationhood can be
163 Chapter 4 explored and articulated’, in the case of Bosnia, Buturovi has argued, discussions of territorial continuity were conspicuously absent.71
Against trends that disregarded the correlation between people and territory as important to nation building, Grabrijan and Neidhardt presented an analysis of the country’s cultural and architectural heritage as a key to understanding the Bosnian people and culture. Using an archaeological framework, the authors presented a vertical examination of artefacts and objects found in Bosnia. To accommodate the long historical span, the structures were used as markers of select periods, or physical evidence of the developing and long spanning culture. Not unlike Ple nik, whose inclusion of specific objects in his urban plan of Ljubljana served to remind
Slovenes of their historic origins, Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s inclusion of objects and landmarks helped Bosnians construct a common past.
A prehistoric house (sojenica) above water marked the starting point. The sojenica structures, the authors stated, ‘act[ed] as reminders of a peaceful community that lived and worked there’, but whose ‘open city was destroyed by more aggressive people’72 [Figure 28]. While discussed, subsequent periods of wars against Celts,
Gaul and Romans were not associated with specific visual markers or structures from those periods, but the medieval structures of ste ci were assigned a significant role.73
71 Buturovi , Stone Speaker, p. 128. 72 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp.10 &15. 73 For a detailed discussion of ste ak, its history and role the tombstones played in the collective imagination of Bosnia see Amila Buturovi ’s Stone Speaker. Buturovi ’s study presents an overview
164 Chapter 4
Figure 28: Drawing of sojenica structures. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 4. The Middle Ages in Bosnia already occupied a prominent role in the collective understanding of Bosnian history. Discussion centred primarily on the ‘traditional’ and popularly accepted theory of the role the medieval Bosnian Church played when faced with the Ottoman takeover.74 The theory originally presented by 19th century Croatian scholar Franjo Ra ki claimed the Bosnian Church was an offshoot of the Bogumils, a Bulgarian heretical movement founded in the 10th century by a priest called ‘Bogumil’ (beloved by God).75 The Church preached a Manichean
‘dualist’ theology, according to which Satan and God were of almost equal power; the visible world was Satan’s creation and the only way for humans to free themselves of the flaws of the material world was to follow an ascetic way of life.
of various hypotheses on the origins and symbolism of ste ak. It also situates the archaeology of ste ak within the interpretative frameworks that located theories in scholarly as well as lay circles. 74 For further discussion see Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, particularly the chapters ‘The medieval Bosnian state, 1180–1463’ and ‘The Bosnian Church’. 75 Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, pp. 28–29. Ra ki’s theory gained significant popularity among both historians and politicians. There were, of course, rival theories proposed by mostly Serb and Croat historians who argued that the Church of Bosnia was only a branch of the Orthodox/Serbian or Catholic/Croatian Church respectively, or a combination of the two.
165 Chapter 4
Also important, the Church rejected the traditional hierarchy of church structure and wealthy monasteries.
As argued by Malcolm, Franjo Ra ki’s Bogumil theory was popular for many reasons.
It offered an answer to the large conversion of the Bosnian population to Islam under the Turks.76 It interpreted the mass conversion as a reaction to the centuries of persecution by the competing Catholic and Orthodox Churches.77 Thus Bogumil theory became attractive to Muslims as they were no longer seen as ‘renegades from Catholicism or Orthodoxy’, but descendants of ‘an authentically and peculiarly
Bosnian Church’.78 Turning to Islam was not an act of betrayal, but a rejection of the oppressive nature of the Christian Churches.79
More importantly, the Bogumil theory explained the presence of large, limestone, medieval monoliths distinguished by figural and scenic imagery, found in parts of
Bosnia.80 Known as ste ci (plural of ste ak) the gravestones have become generally accepted as common in pre Ottoman and early Ottoman times [Figure 29]. They
76 A commonly accepted view, often promoted by members of the Muslim community, suggests that Bosnian Muslims are converts of the former Bosnian Church and therefore, if not the only then the most, righteous carriers of the Bosnian nation. Donia & Fine present this view as a threefold argument underlined by the assumption that 1) the Bosnian Church was Bogumil; 2) the majority of Bosnians were members of Bosnian Church; and 3) at the time of conquest the Bogumils, frustrated by the Catholic Church passed over, without hesitation, to the new religion of Islam. Demonstrating that conversion to Islam was gradual, taking Bosnia almost 150 years to gain a majority population of Muslims, undermines the argument that acceptance of Islam in Bosnia was a result of mass conversion of the Bosnian Church. Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, pp. 51–52; and Donia & Fine, Bosnia and Hercegovina. 77 Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, p. 29. 78 Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, p. 29. 79 Malcolm states modern scholarship presents comprehensive evidence demolishing claims of massive conversions to Islam by members of Bosnian Church. Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, p. 29. 80 For a detailed discussion of ste ak, its history and role in the collective imagination of Bosnia see Buturovi , ‘The archaeology of the ste ak, historical and cultural considerations’, in Stone Speaker, pp. 51– 79.
166 Chapter 4 were used by all religious and social groups in medieval Bosnia, betraying, Buturovi has argued, ‘class and status only in lapidary representations’.81 Their presence in areas of Bosnia associated with the activities of the Bosnian Church helped establish historical links between them and Bogumil theological beliefs.82 Despite subsequent historical accounts presenting conclusive evidence that undermines those links, the issues concerning the Bogumils’ tradition became entangled with popular myths and ideologies.
Figure 29: Ste ak from Radimlje, Bosnia. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 19. Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s discussion of the Bogumils appears aligned with those understandings. The book made extensive references to ste ci and associated imagery, and argued that the tombstones were visual reminders of the transformations of local artistic endeavours. The reference to the Bogumils added 81 Buturovi , Stone Speaker, p. 53. 82 Bosnia and Hercegovina is not the only territory where ste ci are found, and about 12 per cent of ste ak cemeteries are found in other parts of former Yugoslavia, namely southern Croatia, Montenegro and Serbia. According to Buturovi , the number of ste ak cemeteries in former Yugoslavia is 2988, while individual ste ci number 66,663. Buturovi , Stone Speaker, p. 53.
167 Chapter 4 another anchor to their contention of the genuine and organic relationship between territory, artistic expression and the people of Bosnia. The authors pointed to the
‘unique technique of shallow relief’ used on the ste ci, which arguably demonstrated the artists’ connection with the technique of ‘deep carvings of the
Roman sarcophagus’ [Figure 30].83
Figure 30: Neidhardt’s sketch of ste ak, a medieval tombstone. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 18.
Referencing Riegl’s theories of the interconnected nature of artistic development, the authors presented ste ak as a local transformation of the ‘plasticity of antique decorations’, and a reference point in the world development of art.84 The diverse decorative ornament offered proof of the Bogumils’ ‘capacity to accept the influences that came about’ and adapt them as ‘their own expression’.85 In the subsequent discussions Grabrijan and Neidhardt considered similar qualities to be at the core of the Bosnian culture [Figure 31].
83 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p.20. 84 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 20 85 Original quote: ‘Radi se dakle of narodu koji je … prilagodljiv I dovoljno nadaren, da preuzme postupke okoline, ali toliko samosvjestan, da ne govori kao ostali nego se izražava na svoj vlasti na in’. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 20.
168 Chapter 4
Figure 31: Neidhardt’s sketch of ste ak ornaments and decoration. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 18. Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s insistence on establishing a chain of reference to explain the historical development of Bosnian art not only undermined nationalist views, but also offered an acceptable conceptual place for the remnants of the Ottoman legacy. Interpreted within what historian Maria Todorova has referred to as the
‘separatist’ view, the Ottoman legacy was commonly presented as residue of a religiously, socially and institutionally alien society.86 Absorbed within the general title of ‘Oriental’ artistic expression the Ottoman architectural heritage was presented as synonymous with those of the Islamic and Turkish, and thus of questionable authenticity.87
86 This view was based on a perception of incompatibility of Christianity and Islam, and by extension between the essentially nomadic Ottoman society and the old, settled, urban society of the region. Some aspects of this approach supported the ‘mechanical’ or ‘separate spheres’ approach to the Ottoman legacy, which identified different aspects of cultural or political life. Todorova, ‘The Ottoman legacy in the Balkans’, in C. L. Brown (ed.), Imperial Legacy, The Ottoman Imprint on the Balkans and the Middle East, Columbia University Press, New York, 1996, pp. 45–77. 87 Todorova identifies two broad interpretations of this legacy: the separatist and the organicist. The organicist presents the Ottoman legacy as the complex symbiosis of the many influences that impacted on the region, namely Turkish, Islamic and Byzantine/Balkan traditions. The underlining rationale is that despite apparent religious, social and other differences, the centuries of coexistence must have produced a common legacy that would have been the same for all the constituent parties of the Ottoman legacy. Todorova, ‘The Ottoman legacy in the Balkans’, pp. 45–77.
169 Chapter 4
Willing to accept the historical condition from which this architecture emerged,
Grabrijan and Neidhardt acknowledged its origins:
By all means this architecture developed under the influences of the Orient, but its elements are not simply [trans]planted from there to here, but grew out of our people and our soil. Bosnia was on the periphery of the Ottoman Empire … Turkey is all in gold. [In contrast] Bosnia is simple.88
Changing the basic premise upon which artistic authenticity could be constructed allowed for a new interpretation. As Grabrijan had already argued in his paper on the Bosnian house, historical changes made a crucial impact on the transformation of this architecture from its ‘Turkish’ origins to an authentic Bosnian expression. The book extended Grabrijan’s previous discussion concerning the impact of Bosnian
Muslims cultural practices on the transformation of the traditional house (changing
‘Turkish ness’ into genuine ‘Bosnian ness’) and presented culture as powerful agent in the re configurations of Ottoman architecture.
Through gradual modifications and the evolution of artistic experience, Bosnian art was presented as the embodiment of collective qualities and a reflection of the society:
He [the Bosnian man] makes his pottery, space, city according to himself, in human scale, he is not a mystic, but a realist and that is from where all this realistic architecture [emerges], which is at the same time comfortable, humble and democratic.89
One statement significantly expanded Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s discussion of this art, suggesting that while this architecture and art was built by ‘local artisans’ using
88 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 12. 89 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 13.
170 Chapter 4 the local materials, the work was conducted ‘by Dalmatian stone masons – i.e., all our [Yugoslav] people’.90
By including Croatian/Dalmatian stone masons in their consideration of Bosnian identity, the authors confirmed their interest in going beyond a model of nation framed by strict boundaries of ethnic and religious belonging. Finally dismissing the validity of a nationalist argument and their own earlier views, which considered local art only in its relations to its ‘origins’, they wrote:
It is of secondary importance who sponsored this architecture [at the time] and
who used it [at the time]. [What is important is that] It came out of our people and
we can confidently say that it is the people’s art.91
Identifying the human values of Bosnian Oriental expression, they presented the architecture not as parochial and inward looking but as expressive of the open and democratic principles of the new nation of Bosnians. Highlighting the communal and the collective qualities of this art, they wrote:
All roofs and doors of these houses are almost the same, we could call them homes for anyone, all of them are designed in human scale, have grown out of the land ... [the structures represent] – architecture that is warm, natural and locally built.92
The balance between universal and local qualities of Bosnian Oriental expression finally demonstrated that this architecture is a unique contribution to the world of modernity. It was local, produced by all irrespective of their ethnic background, inclusive of all and the Muslims in particular. The artistic expression of the new 90 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 12. 91 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 12. 92 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p.13.
171 Chapter 4 socialist society was established in a war that was fought by diverse ethnic and national groups of Yugoslavia, with all participants subsequently having equal rights in the new state. Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s emphasis on collective involvement recognised a connection between construction of the arts and society.
The qualities embedded in Bosnian Oriental
Bosnian Oriental, Neidhardt frequently stated, would become like ‘French, Nordic
[Scandinavian], Brazilian and American architecture’, in that each ‘contribute[s] to the world architecture’.93 Neidhardt’s drawings, such as the one titled ‘From old to new pyramid’ [Figure 32], presented Bosnian artistic achievements on equal standing to those of the rest of the world. The drawing represents the ‘five millenniums’ or human architectural achievements and developments, with Bosnia represented by Ali Paša’s Mosque [no. 12 in Figure 32]. Sarajevo’s mosque appears alongside the world’s major historic monuments such as the pyramids (no. 1) and
Parthenon (no. 2), and more contemporary achievements such as Sydney Opera
House (no. 22). This confirmed Neidhardt and Grabrijan’s adherence to Riegl’s notion of the importance of small cultures in the development of world art. It also presented Muslim architectural heritage as a valuable contribution to collective
Yugoslav and Bosnian culture.
93 J. Neidhardt, ‘Putevi nacionalne arhitekture’ (Paths to national architecture), Naši Dani, November, 1954, p. 5.
172 Chapter 4
Figure 32: Illustration titled ‘From old to new pyramid 5 millenniums’. Source: Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’; p. 464.
The drawing titled ‘Urban and architectural analysis’ depicted Bosnia geographically in the middle of Yugoslavia, cut in two with a line representing the religious schism of Christianity and Islam [Figure 33]. The ‘western’ side was defined by the rational principles of regularity, symmetry, ‘rigid planning’ and ‘corridor like’ streets; the
‘eastern’ side by irregularity, fluidity, organic planning and intimate spaces. Bosnia, with its ‘in between’ position, was shown as capable of negotiating all differences.
173 Chapter 4
Figure 33: Bosnia as a place of negotiations, ‘Urban and architectural analysis’. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 322. The authors’ faith in the capacity of Bosnia to accommodate and mediate various changes was reflected in the drawing titled ‘Three conceptions of forming the room’
[Figure 34]. Its depiction of a mosque’s spatial transformation into a church and then a monument to Lenin implied Bosnia’s ability to negotiate significant ideological transformations. The final transformation, represented in a monument to Lenin, accommodated the positive values of the two previous transformations, namely the ‘unity of spatial organisation of a church’ with the ‘human scale’ of a mosque. The drawing confirmed the importance of communist ideology to
174 Chapter 4
Neidhardt’s work, as well as his commitment to the secularisation of socialist
Yugoslavia.
Figure 34: Mosque, church and the monument to Lenin. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 238.
Contribution of Bosnian Oriental to Yugoslavia
Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s contribution started to gain public recognition. When, in the 1950s, Bosnia began to occupy a special locus in the emerging ‘Non Alliance’ movement Tito was developing, the Muslim representatives played a significant role.94 In an organisation that included many Muslims from India and North Africa,
Tito’s ability to have a delegation made up of local Muslims was a benefit. It was not considered relevant that the Muslims Tito sent as representatives to various forums were often Communist Party members who had largely abandoned their religion during the internal secularisation project. With the small ‘m’ Muslim sense of religious belonging marginalised, the big ‘M’ Muslim identity that was previously
94 The opportunity Tito found was on a tour in Ethiopia, India and Egypt in 1955. Soon after, Tito joined Nasser and Nehru in constructing the new movement, in which being a Muslim was considered beneficial. Malcolm, Bosnia – A Short History, pp. 196–98.
175 Chapter 4 seen as an obstacle to genuine participation in the development of a Bosnian nation was considered an asset.
Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s views echoed a socialist agenda that supported the vision of Bosnia as a multicultural, secular yet formally national culture. Their architectural endeavours also built upon a growing acceptance of the modernist architectural agenda promoted in the west. The political changes of 1948 provided a sudden opening for ‘democratic views’ and the acceptance of ‘individual freedom’ in architectural design. These were the very influences that had been strongly negated in the early years of socialism.95 Growing acceptance of such ideas was reflected in the selection by the Society of Architects of Yugoslavia of Neidhardt’s work for inclusion in the International Union of Architects (UIA) exhibition held in Rabat,
Morocco in 1950.96 These designs comprised the anti tuberculosis hospital in
Travnik (1947), the skiing house (1947) on the mountain of Trebevi [Figure 35], bachelors’ housing in Zenica, Vareš and Ljubija, workers’ housing in Ljubija, a
95 I. Štraus, Arhitektura Jugoslavije, 1945–1990, (Yugoslav Architecture, 1945 1990), Svjetlost, Sarajevo, 1991, p. 23. Štraus sites numerous influences of Le Corbusier’s and Mies van der Rohe’s contemporary buildings on Yugoslav architects. Referring to buildings such as 1953 design for Army Printing Services (Vojna štamparija) by architect Milorad Macura (of which building commenced even before World War Two); urban ideas embedded in the design of Sajmište by Milovan Pantovi or the design of ‘Hempro’ and Social Insurance buildings by Aleksej Brki , Štraus suggests a greater recognition of the influences of western architects to Yugoslav context, as well as the acceptance of architectural expression associated with the International Modernism. For further discussion see I. Štraus, Arhitektura Jugoslavije, pp.23 33. 96 Neidhardt’s work was selected to represent the country where all republics of Yugoslavia presented their work. The exhibition brochure showed geography, people, folklore, traditional architecture, and historic parts of Yugoslavia, and included a selection of modern buildings, among which were some of Neidhardt’s. When the anti tuberculosis hospital in Travnik was built in 1948, the name of the architect was not mentioned in any of the daily papers (Borba, Oslobodjenje); however, three years later the project and the architect were selected to represent of the new Yugoslavia. Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, p. 311.
176 Chapter 4 regulation plan in Zenica (model) and some of his collaborative landscape architecture projects.
Figure 35: House on the mountain of Trebevi (1947). Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 279. By the 1950s Neidhardt’s design projects were starting to materialise, and were publicly promoted in professional papers. His Sarajevo projects such as the residential blocks in Djure Djakovi Street were finalised and the Museum of Young
Bosnia was completed.97 In 1953, Neidhardt commenced his involvement with the large urban development of the new Grbavica residential suburbs. These urban proposals formed part of the Yugoslav display at the World Fair in Brussels in
1958.98 The ‘selection of Neidhardt’s work in the artistic representation of
Yugoslavia evidenced a significant recognition of his achievements that had gone unnoticed for many years prior’, commented Neven Segvi in his article ‘The
97 Kapetanovi suggests the housing in Djure Djakovi street was completed in 1952–53. The project was designed and commenced in 1947 and Museum of Young Bosnia was completed in 1952. 98 The Brussels World Fair (Expo 58) was held from 17 April to 19 October 1958. It was the first major World Fair after World War Two.
177 Chapter 4 creative forces in the architecture of FRY [Federative Republic of Yugoslavia]’.99
Published in a professional journal of the branch of the Society of Architects and
Engineers of Yugoslavia, the article marked a public rehabilitation of Neidhardt’s architectural approach.100 It also made an impact on his academic career.
In 1952, Neidhardt’s academic career started with his appointment to a lecturer position at the newly founded Architectural Faculty in Sarajevo.101 In 1953, he was promoted to associate professor, and in 1962 became a full professor at the same institution. A series of high socialist awards followed: in 1959–60, Neidhardt received Orden Rada (Medal of the Work), a significant award; in 1963, he became a member of the Academy of Art and Science of Yugoslavia (art section); in 1964, he was a recipient of the prestigious socialist 27th July Award; and in 1965 a recipient of the City Award for his work on Sarajevo. While it is not feasible to list the numerous articles in daily and professional journals that were published throughout
Neidhardt’s career, it is worth mentioning that he initiated a publication series on
Bosnian heritage, which received significant attention. The series included Naše
Starine (Our Heritage) and Slovo Gor ina (The Gor in Letter), which promoted the relevance of Islamic cultural heritage and the mediaeval past, respectively, for modern Bosnian culture.102
99 N. Šegvi , ‘Stvarala ke komponente arhitekture FNRJ’, Urbanizam/Arhitektura, nos. 5–6, 1950, pp. 5–40; cited in Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, p. 309. 100 Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, p. 310. 101 The suggested date of his official appointment to a position of associate professor was 22 June 1953. Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, p. 310. 102 Among some examples are: J. Neidhardt & D. eli , ‘Stari most u Mostaru’, (The old Mostar Bridge), Naše Starine, no. 1, 1953, pp. 133–40; J. Neidhardt & D. eli , ‘Rješenje Marindvora I Narodne Skupštine’, (The solution for Marindvor and the National Parliament), Naše Starine, book I, 1956; ‘Baština I novo’, (Heritage and new), Slovo Gor ina, Stolac, 1972; ‘Smjena kultura’, (Transition
178 Chapter 4
Personally, Neidhardt revelled in his newly discovered popularity and his ability to publicly present his views. His unconventional teaching methods led to interaction with students that was not common at the time. When in November 1954
Neidhardt presented his work at the Second Conference of Students of Architecture of Yugoslavia under the title ‘Directions in national architecture – studio work as the most contemporary way of studying architecture’, the audience showed great enthusiasm. A review of the event noted that he received ‘Long standing ovations and many positive comments’, followed by ‘tears and words of support from other academics and students alike.’103
The popularity and the growing political support for Neidhardt’s approach did not, however, directly translate into uniform professional support. Particularly prominent in his criticism was Ivan Štraus, a high profile Bosnian architect and architectural critic from Sarajevo, who argued that Neidhardt’s reliance on ‘the traditional’ reflected an ‘uncritical promotion of regionalism.’104 Štraus argued that by following an approach based on principles of the ‘Bosnian Oriental’ Neidhardt and his followers negated the creative power of the individual designer and would ultimately derail work ‘from the creative path.’105 Neidhardt’s own resistance to the broader influences of the world’s architectural trends, Štraus wrote, made his
of cultures), Slovo Gor ina, 1973, pp. 13–20; ‘Rekreacija duha I tijela’, (Recreation of mind and body), Slovo Gor ina, 1974, pp. 25–34. 103 Neidhardt, ‘Putevi nacionalne arhitekture’, p. 5. 104 I. Štraus, 15 Godina Bosanskohercegova ke Arhitekture (Fifteen Years of Bosnia & Hercegovina’s Architecture), Svjetlost, Sarajevo, 1987, p. 26. 105 Štraus, 15 Godina Bosanskohercegova ke Arhitekture, p. 26.
179 Chapter 4 approach ‘self referential’ and not open to the technological and theoretical challenges of contemporary modern architecture.
Searching in his own practice for global values of modern architecture, Štraus remained a lasting critic of Neidhardt’s focus on traditional and local values.
Neidhardt’s ‘mannerism’, Štraus wrote, became accessible to ‘any individual with any technical education’ willing to promote a language of the ‘Bosnian Oriental’.106
Clearly not supportive of such an approach, Štraus commented that the buildings designed to adhere to the application of the ‘Bosnian pole of modern architecture’
[Bosnian Oriental] became visual reminders of the ‘formalistic approach to design’.107 Štraus believed that Neidhardt’s discussion of the ‘language of Bosnian
Oriental’ stylised the architectural expression to the point that dampened rather than enlightened the modern debate. Similar criticism was addressed to the architects who at the time adhered to Neidhardt’s ‘Bosnian school’, or ‘Bosnian pole of architecture’. Nevertheless, Neidhardt’s career continued to advance.108
In his numerous academic and civic roles, Neidhardt perceived his work at the interface between design and national narrative making. His images of the Bosnian landscape presented new ways of mapping the terrain and towns of Bosnia. The 106 I. Štraus, Nova Bosanskohercegova ka Arhitektura 1945–1975 (The New Architecture of Bosnia and Hercegovina 1945–1975), Svjetlost OOUR Izdava ka Djelatnost, Sarajevo, 1977, p. 26. 107 Štraus, 15 Godina Bosanskohercegova ke Arhitekture 1970–1985, p. 26. 108 While his interest and enthusiasm for design competitions appeared high at all times, the success of his entries varied. In 1945 Neidhardt won the design competition for a village library (1945); his 1950s’ proposal for a monument to the Liberation Army on the mountain of Trebevi was also awarded a prize, but it was not executed. From 1950 to 1953 Neidhardt participated in a series of urban competitions, which included proposals for the towns of Konjic (competition entry), Trebinje (plan accepted) and Zenica (partially executed). For a comprehensive list of design projects and competition entries see Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, pp. 647–65.
180 Chapter 4 drawings connected the old towns, mostly those of Ottoman origins such as Po itelj and Mostar, in a way that disregarded both their real scale and context. The trajectories in the drawings connected places of tourist interest to those of historical relevance [Figure 36]. The approach aimed at highlighting Bosnian cultural diversity, as well as the interconnectedness of the community. The territorial containment of the maps, within the geographical boundaries that resisted national divisions, visually confirmed Neidhardt’s belief in the importance of the territorial integrity of Bosnia. Together the geography and the material culture established the boundaries of a new nation of Bosnians, people united by land and common culture
[Figure 37].
Figure 36: Tourism and recreation zones. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 484.
181 Chapter 4
Figure 37: Map highlighting important architectural sites. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 442.
Conclusion: Architecture is a carrier of the political message of multicultural Bosnia
The inclusion of specifically Muslim references in Architecture of Bosnia and the
Way Towards Modernity open up the possibility to incorporate Muslim heritage in the Yugoslav synthesis. Marking a significant shift away from the nationalist approach, the book presented a view of the Bosnian nation as forged through a collective artistic expression.
182 Chapter 4
As discussed in the following chapter, ultimately Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s conflation of ethnic identity and religious meaning reflected their ambivalence about culturally specific architecture in general and Bosnian national identity in particular. The significance assigned to the old fabric in creating the new, however, demonstrated their genuine interest in connecting Ottoman heritage to the specifics of Bosnian identity debates.
Neidhardt presented the principles of Bosnian Oriental as the theoretical foundation of his architectural approach. The transformation of his theoretical agenda into an architectural one is discussed in Part Two of this thesis. Chapter five presents the specific nature of this transformation, and Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s development of an architectural ‘dictionary’ of Bosnian Oriental expression. Chapter six analyses the dictionary’s application to large urban projects: the hypothetical but influential proposal for the development of Baš aršija and the winning proposal for the Bosnia and Hercegovina Parliament building and its surrounds.
183
PART TWO: Application
Chapter 5 Transforming the Theoretical into an Architectural Agenda: the Mahala and aršija as Architectural Prototypes of Bosnian Modern Expression
Grabrijan and Neidhardt grounded their discussion of Bosnian Oriental architectural expression upon the architectural and spatial principles which they identified with the historic fabric of Baš aršija. Presenting this fabric as inherently rational pragmatic and modern. The pair connected their architectural discussions to the values promoted and appreciated by the Yugoslav socialist government. This chapter argues that such an alignment provided a framework for Grabrijan and
Neidhardt to present the built fabric of Baš aršija’s mahalas (residential area) and
aršija (business sector) as appropriate reference points for the development of a uniquely Bosnian modern architecture. The chapter presents the process by which
Grabrijan and Neidhardt transformed their theoretical concepts into architectural and spatial constructs.
Transforming Baš aršija: a new approach to the study of aršija and mahala
In his preface to Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, Le
Corbusier noted that Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s integration of the old fabric within new architectural expression went against the ‘common’ and superficial method of
Chapter 5
using a ‘varnish’ of old fabric on new designs.1 Their approach, he stated, presented a deeper and more meaningful relationship between old and new in architecture and urban planning. This method, Le Corbusier claimed, promoted the role of creative arts in the development of the human condition, reflecting the ‘continuity of spirit and evolving changes’.2 As such, Bosnian Oriental expression, he concluded, was not only a local expression but also a contribution to the development of modern architecture of the world.
Grabrijan and Neidhardt, also, perceived their work as integral to the advancement of modern society and its artistic expression. The grounding of contemporary works upon the old fabric of Bašcaršija, they argued, advanced the Marxist ‘dialectical position’, which promoted the identification and separation of ‘positive from negative values’.3 Presenting Marx’s concept of history as a record of an ongoing and ever improving human development, allowed them to argue that the urban fabric of Baš aršija was cleansed of religious associations by the passage of time.4
The study of the architectural heritage with hind sight allowed them to foreground the valuable lessons from the past whilst rectifying past mistakes.5 Thus,
1 Full quote: ‘It is easy, by this method, to give buildings and interiors a “vanish” of culture, which seems automatically to invest them with a definitive character, a kind of national local, patriotic value, etc. Lazy and stupid people are satisfied [with this approach], first because they make a good business this way, and others because they feel that they have saved themselves any efforts of thinking and searching for their own [architectural] expression’. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 6. 2 Full quote: ‘There is still another method, method of continuity – continuity of spirit, continuity of evolution … Grabrijan and Neidhardt have felt all this. The extraordinarily copious book they are publishing needs no commentary. These pages will speak eloquently of their sentiments, their technique, their aesthetics’ values, etc.’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 6. 3 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 11. 4 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 11. 5 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 11.
188 Chapter 5
overcoming their initial hesitation towards the Ottoman and Islamic past, expressed in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, their study of the historic fabric presented in
Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity identified Baš aršija’s built fabric as a ‘source for modern architecture’ and ‘inspiration’.6 The approach was documented through a series of detailed urban maps and elaborated through individual buildings analysis.7
Unlike their earlier major publication, in which Baš aršija was described as a ‘bazaar bijouterie’ and no elaboration of its working life was presented, here the discussion centred on its daily life and associated patterns of human labour. A series of analytical maps documents the diverse crafts that were traditionally practiced in this precinct. The symbols representing old crafts are superimposed on the urban fabric, recalling the original associations between craft guilds and the urban context
[Figure 38]. An extensive list of trades accompanies these maps highlighting the diversity of craft groups and manufacturing techniques in the old precinct.
6 Full quote: ‘Is aršija not a source of modern architecture? Why do we look for inspiration elsewhere, continuously getting it from second hand sources, when we are at its origins?’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 14. 7 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 11.
189 Chapter 5
Figure 38: Division of precinct based on crafts. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 64. The professional and economic organisation of the guilds, or esnaf that originated in
Ottoman times supported the precinct’s production of goods.8 While essentially craft associations, esnaf also had a strong social role. Behija Zlatar’s study of 16th century Sarajevo suggests that more than half of the city’s income earners were 8 Esnaf is an Ottoman term commonly replaced with the local word ceh. For a thorough discussion of the Sarajevo’s esnaf organisation, see H. Kreševljakovi , Esnafi i Obrti u Starom Sarajevu, Narodna Prosvjeta, Sarajevo, 1958, pp. 47–65. The word esnaf, Kreševljakovi suggests, is the plural of the Arabic word sunufun, which means class, order or, broadly, organisation. For a wider discussion of this organisation, see N. Todorov, The Balkan City 1400–1900, University of Washington Press, Seattle, 1983, p. 108.
190 Chapter 5
members of esnaf, making it the economic support structure of the time.9 As
Sarajevo grew and demand for production increased – from supporting daily life to meeting the more extensive needs of the Ottoman army – the social influence of the institution of esnaf also amplified. Consequently, over time certain esnaf became more powerful than others, and certain crafts associated with specific ethnic groups. For example, the lucrative metal making craft (kujundjije) was under the control of Orthodox Christians. Jews exclusively operated the sheet metal trade, but were also pot makers and tailors.10 While the ethnic based associations in some ways threatened to undermine the integrity and egalitarian values of the institution, the esnaf’s organisational focus on finance and professional experience offered a structure that transcended ethnicity.
Grabrijan and Neidhardt praised the organisation’s success in accommodating a multicultural system of craft based production. They identified 72 crafts operating within the precinct, ranging from sword cutters to sandal makers [Figure 39]. Their maps presented the precinct as an urban whole that almost solely relied on the established relationships and interdependency of artisan production.
9 Zlatar, Zlatno Doba Sarajeva, p.129. 10 Kreševljakovi , Esnafi i Obrti u Starom Sarajevu.
191 Chapter 5
Figure 39: Division of precinct based on crafts. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 65. Providing evidence to the collaborative and cooperative nature of artistic production were the historical photographs, most commonly taken by Grabrijan, of individual stores, storeowners and street life in Baš aršija [Figure 40]. These focused on the intimate relationship between owners/sellers and the street, and were meant to suggest the important role crafts played in the daily life of the city. The images are suggestive of the authenticity of local labour and production, and the
192 Chapter 5
harmonious relationship between the two. Further by showing the shop owner as a product maker as well as a seller, allowed Grabrijan and Neidhardt to downplay the capitalist economic structure that underpinned Bašcaršija’s small scale business.
Indeed the identification of the business owners with the crafts they produce, and not the profit they potentially make, provided grounds for reconciling the old modes of production with socialist values. They particularly emphasised the efficient nature of specialised labour that, in their reading, was inherent to this mode of production:
In the aršija the production was planned and organized. The aršija was made up of artisans specialists each of which was allowed to manufacture only one definite article so that we might compare the works done here with that on the assembly line. Thus, for example, a rider with his horse had to pass 14 different trades until both were completely outfitted [Figure 41].11
Figure 40: ‘Store beside store, handicraft beside handicraft’. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 66.
11 Original quote: ‘U aršija mogao je svaki od njih izradjivati samo odredjeni dio cjelokupne proizvodnjetako, da se radova u aršiji mogu usporediti sa proizvodnjom na teku oj vrpci. Bilo je, na primjer, za izradu opreme vojni kog konja s konjanikom potrebno etrnaest zanata koji su jedan drugog dopunjavali.’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 67 & 77.
193 Chapter 5
Figure 41: Baš aršija as a production line. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 66.
By establishing a new reading of Baš aršija’s organisational structure as prefiguring modern production methods, Grabrijan and Neidhardt were providing conceptual grounds upon which their shifting interest in this old fabric could be validated as beneficial to both the multiculturalism of the new state and the associated desire for efficient and collective systems of production.
The values of monuments: abstraction, light and scale
In addition to maps, aerial images of Baš aršija presented the precinct as a complex and highly integrated entity. The locations of the significant monuments were made more legible by superimposed outlines of their parameters. An additional sketch presented the monuments as free form objects extrapolated from their surrounding context [Figure 42].
194 Chapter 5
Figure 42: Monuments and significant structures of the old precinct. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 61. It was the modernist fascination with form and the presentation of buildings as isolated objects that characterised Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s analysis here. As discussed in chapter two, in his article ‘Le Corbusier and Sarajevo’ (1936) Grabrijan argued that the forms of the traditional Bosnian architecture presented commonalities between the local expression and the universal qualities of modern architecture. Similarly, Neidhardt’s mining workers’ housing in Zenica made use of the ‘elements’ of the traditional house, extending the argument that the existing fabric presented formal qualities in accord with the modernist vocabulary.
195 Chapter 5
Building on this, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity devoted an entire chapter to the analysis of the formal qualities of the precinct’s monuments.
The sketch of the main mosque, for example, highlighted the relevance of its form to the search for a universal language of modern architecture. Referencing Auguste
Choisy, whose approach to architectural history Grabrijan had studied, the drawing of Gazi Husref Beg’s mosque shows the building sliced open and seen from above
[Figure 43].12 Like Choisy’s drawing of Hagia Sophia, Beg’s mosque was shown not as a mosque but as a drawing of an ‘idea of a mosque’ [Figure 44].13
Figure 43: Beg’s Mosque, cross section and axonometric. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 83. 12 Grabrijan was aware of Choisy’s work as he published a textbook titled Zgodovina Arhitekture, svobodno po Choisyju (Historic Architecture, Based on Choisy), by University of Ljubljana 1949. A. Choisy, Hagia Sophia, from Historie d’Architecture (1899); reprinted in A. Forty, Words and Buildings, A Vocabulary of Modern Architecture, Thames & Hudson, London, 2004, p. 23. The section and a plan drawing [Figure 43 ]were credited to an engineer, I. Štrukelj. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 83–84. 13 Forty, Words and Buildings, pp. 23–24.
196 Chapter 5
Figure 44: A. Choisy, Hagia Sophia, from Historie d’Architecture (1899); reprinted in A. Forty, Words and Buildings, A Vocabulary of Modern Architecture, Thames & Hudson, London, 2004, p. 23.
Describing the mosque’s interior, the authors focused on the formal and structural qualities independently from the program. Their emphasis disassociated the architectural work from its religious function. Further, the formal qualities of the work were aligned with universal geometric principles rather than the particularities of religious practices:
The structure is neither large nor small. The interior is a hollow cube covered with a calotte. The entrance lies in the longitudinal axis of the structure. The pulpit, showing clean straight geometrical lines, stands free … Since this art has adopted man for its basic yardstick we shall call it here human scale architecture’.14
Presenting the mosque as an abstract form, free from its specific context, the discussion presented monumentality of this structure as an outcome of diverse spatial relationships. This mode of analysis continued with reference to other themes such as scale:
Beg’s mosque is a huge structure that towers over the precinct. However, despite its size, the structure gives the impression of being accessible. It rises like a pyramid
14 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 84.
197 Chapter 5
from the narrow streets, from a human scale to the scale of small shops, to the basilica like han structures, up to the small domes of fountains, and still higher to the huge central dome and the minaret.15
In this reading the monument is presented as worthy of attention because it exemplifies an ‘accessible’ monumentality, mediating the human scale and the grand architectural gesture. Free hand interior sketches further elaborate the interior spatial sequence and quality. An interior sketch of the mosque, for example, describes the relationship between the sky light apertures and inner curve of the dome, suggesting the dynamic character of the interior space. [Figure 45]
Figure 45: Lighting in Beg’s mosque. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 87. The atmospheric quality implied in this sketch is characteristic of the broader representational techniques employed in the book, whereby descriptive orthographic drawings are complemented and contrasted with Neidhardt’s free
15 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 83–84.
198 Chapter 5
hand sketches. The latter generally offer abstracted renderings of the studied forms, championing their contemporary relevance.
This manner of formal abstraction is for instance evident in the sketch of the mosque’s internal elements, the mihrab (qibla wall) and mimber (pulpit).16
Presented in three dimensions the drawings emphasised the effects of day light on these architectural elements. Their presence is here noted not for their important roles in religious ceremonies, but for their spatial and atmospheric impact on the mosque interior, once lit [Figure 46].
Figure 46: ‘Mihrab, pulpit, carpet’, abstracting the space. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 284.
The approach deliberately avoided the religious significance attached to these built components, foregrounding instead, the aesthetic importance of abstract beauty. In elaborating the formal sophistication of Baš aršija’s historic monuments, Grabrijan
16 A mihrab is a wall niche in a mosque indicating the direction of the Kaaba in Mecca, and hence the direction that Muslims should face when praying. A mimber is the pulpit in a mosque where the religious leader Imam stands.
199 Chapter 5
and Neidhardt’s discussion in this text, displayed a radical departure from their position in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, where they critiqued the precinct for its impoverished standards and amenity and dismissed its contemporary relevance.
The values of the traditional house (Bosanska ku a)
The discussion of the traditional house in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ primarily relied on external sketches of the mahala fabric. In Architecture of Bosnia and the Way
Towards Modernity, the representational strategies became more extensive and detailed. They included measured drawings and diagrams of the layouts, presenting the interior workings as central to understanding the typology.
In the early years of socialist government Neidhardt avoided making explicit reference to the traditional house, presenting his mining housing projects not in relation to the traditional model but in terms of its capacity to accommodate the proletariat. With the official priority for architects described as providing ‘a roof over the heads’ of the thousands made homeless by war, Neidhardt focused his attention on developing a standardised housing solution and considered mass production as the appropriate way of responding to the specifics of the Yugoslav condition.17 His 1945 design for temporary homes proposed buildings made from
17 Štraus, Nova Bosanskohercegova ka Arhitektura 1945–1975, p. 8. Despite collective efforts, the post war urban conditions of Sarajevo were improving more slowly than expected. According to 1954 census there were still about 2,240 families with their homes left in ruins, and 13,000 families who lived in unacceptable conditions in various kinds of temporary housing stock. As plans for the housing development lagged, at least 10,000 families were in a need of appropriate accommodation. For further discussion see L. Zub evi , ‘Sarajevo (Area, population, employment, communications, traffic connections)’, in M. ankovi (ed.), Sarajevo u Socijalisti koj Jugoslaviji od Oslobodjenja do Samoupravljanja, 1950–1963 (Sarajevo in Socialist Yugoslavia for the Liberation till Self governance, 1950–1963, Istorijski Arhiv Sarajevo, vol. 2, Sarajevo, 1988, pp. 9–23.
200 Chapter 5
‘bent cane sticks’, a system that would provide efficient, cheap construction appropriate for a country founded on guerrilla resistance. Importantly, such structures were free from historical association [Figure 47].18
Figure 47: Neidhardt’s proposal for temporary shelters, 1945. Source: Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, p. 269. Presenting a significant shift in attitude, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way
Towards Modernity identified the traditional home as a valuable model for housing within the new city fabric. Under a series of headings, including the ‘Organisation of dwelling spaces’, ‘Furnishing and utensils’, ‘Sanitary installations’ and ‘Methods of construction’, the discussion offered the house as a model of rational, contemporary living. Numerous plans and sections, diagrams and analytical drawings identified the relevance of this building type to the contemporary society.
18 Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’.
201 Chapter 5
The pragmatics of Bosanska ku a: the secular values and rational grounding of the traditional house
Reference to traditional architectural types, Grabrijan and Neidhardt argued, when approached through dialectical analysis, allowed for the separation of the ‘positive from negative’ and presented a critical conceptual device for developing new ideas.
Accordingly reference to the traditional house, they claimed, offered a productive model for integrating the positive values of the old fabric and that of the new.
Of central importance was the recognition of the house’s organic development. This idea was schematically illustrated in a drawing titled the ‘Embryonic development of an old house in Sarajevo’ [Figure 48]. The house’s internal layout was presented as an outcome of progressive permutations, from simple to complex basic room arrangements over time. Using the analogy of stone fruit, Neidhardt and Grabrijan identified the hajat (anteroom) as the pip and the halvat (room) as the surrounding flesh. The terms ‘embryonic development’ in the title of their drawing suggested that this simple addition of spaces within the house aligned with the biological development of a living cell.19
19 A version of this discussion was presented in D. Ali , ‘The role of rational and scientific arguments in the promotion of ideology through architecture’, in F. G. Leman, A. J. Ostwald, A. Williams (eds.) Innovation, Inspiration and Instruction: New Knowledge in Architectural Sciences, Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Conference on the Australian and New Zealand Architectural Science Association (ANZASca), Newcastle, Australia, 26 28 November 2008, pp. 161 168.
202 Chapter 5
Figure 48: Embryonic development of an old house in Sarajevo. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 166.
This idea was reinforced by the drawing’s focus on the house plan as the key factor in its transformation from hajat into hall. Analogous to biological development from single cell to multi cell organisms, the simple one room traditional house was transformed into a multi functional family home, an expansion presented as a natural and organic process. Framed within an evolutionary paradigm, the discussion presented a rational yet apolitical interpretation of the layout. This view, in turn, offered an alternative to the more common association of the house with the socio economic position of the Muslim elite that historically inhabited it.
203 Chapter 5
In addition to the lengthy discussion of the functional and pragmatic values of architecture and built fabric, the chapters on the house also addressed cultural and everyday practices associated with its interiors. A series of scaled drawings presented an inventory of household items and utensils [Figure 49]; grounded in an anthropological approach, the drawings highlighted the delicate and detailed nature of objects for everyday use. Their simplicity over usefulness implied their relevance to the needs of contemporary dwelling.
Figure 49: Furnishings and utensils of a traditional house. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 204–05. Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s discussion of the Bosnian house served to support the government’s increasing interest in opening the private interiors of the traditional house to general public.20 In a declaration passed by the National Committee of the
20 Numerous new institutions were established and new laws passed that aimed to preserve and maintain the nation’s material heritage. In July 1945, the law for the Protection of Cultural and
204 Chapter 5
Liberation of Yugoslavia in February 1945, the state claimed responsibility to
‘protect all objects of artistic and scientific value, that included, (but was not restricted to) public monuments, sculptures, libraries and archives…’21 By extending an understanding of heritage beyond major monuments, a context for a more focused approach to heritage protection was established. The Museum of Sarajevo
(Muzej Grada Sarajeva), for example, which was founded in 1949, defined its main purpose as ‘assembling, studying, preserving, publicising and presenting the social, economic and cultural history of Sarajevo’.22 Its ethnographic collection, comprising items of ‘domestic, craft and factory production’, was intended to illustrate the
‘material and spiritual culture of the city’.23 Within it, the traditional or the ‘Turkish’ house, its interiors and domestic items, played a significant role. The Museum of
Sarajevo included a diorama of a Muslim family in a traditional home setting, and the ethnological collection of the Zemaljski Museum was updated to include a similar display. Placed in relation to government initiatives studies such as Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s, these displays provided the necessary links between the materials collected by institutions and their relevance to the contemporary society.
Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity incorporated sketches of internal layouts of numerous historic homes in the city recently opened to the
Natural Heritage (Zakon o zaštiti spomenika kulture and prirodnih rijetkosti u Bosnia I Hercegovini) was introduced. It was followed by additional laws designed to protect heritage items under threat. The Institute for Research and Protection of Cultural Monuments and Natural Resources started operating independently in 1947 (Zemaljski Zavod za Zaštitu I Nau no Prou avanje Spomenika Kulture i prirodnih rijetkosti BiH). Serdarevi , Pravna zaštita kulturno historijskog naslijedja BiH, p. 35. Also see N. Šipovac, Kultura u Socijalisti koj Republici Bosni i Hercegovini (The culture of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Hercegovina), NISP Oslobodjenje, Sarajevo, 1976. 21 Serdarevi , Pravna zaštita kulturno historijskog naslijedja BiH, p. 37. 22 Vodi kroz Muzej Grada Sarajeva (Guide Through the Museum of the City of Sarajevo), Muzej grada Sarajevo, Sarajevo, 1976, p. 5. 23 Vodi kroz Muzej Grada Sarajeva, pp. 17–21.
205 Chapter 5
public [Figure 50 & Figure 51].24 Combined with an extensive collection of
Grabrijan’s unpublished primary research on the traditional house, the discussion of the conceptual and physical foundations of Sarajevo’s old homes offered to provide the grounds for their integration within the new and modern city.
Figure 50: Neidhardt’s drawing of Svrzo’s house; layout and cross section. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 183.
24 Vodi kroz Svrzinu ku u (Guide Through Svrzo’s House), Muzej Grada Sarajeva, Sarajevo 1976. Svrzo’s house became a property of the Museum of the City of Sarajevo (Muzej Grada Sarajeva) in 1952; by 1953 it was opened to the public as a museum house.
206 Chapter 5
Figure 51: Inner courtyard and a room in Svrzo’s house (Svrzina ku a), opened to the public in 1953. Source: Muzej Grada Sarajeva, Stambena Kultura Starog Sarajeva, DES, Sarajevo. http://www.muzejsarajeva.ba/content/view/37/52/lang,en/
Transforming religious into secular values
In an attempt to avoid a discussion concerning the impact of religious practice on the spatial configuration of the traditional house, Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s analysis deliberately presented the interior in pragmatic terms. This approach is for example evident in their description of treatment and frequency of the ‘sanitary areas’.
Termed abdesthana, these spatial alcoves were associated with each individual room and traditionally facilitated the Muslim practice of ablution (abdest) proceeding daily prayers [Figure 52].25 The authors interpreted the multiple abdesthana as indicative of the superior hygienic nature of the traditional house.
The religious rituals crucial to the logic of this spatial organisation were however overlooked. Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s desire to retain abdesthana in the 25 In relation to the discussion of ‘wet areas’ Grabrijan and Neidhardt alternate the terms ‘banjica’ (usually related to a slightly larger wet area) and abdesthana (smaller alcoves usually within a larger room).
207 Chapter 5
contemporary domestic space was described not as the promotion of religious practice, but as reflective of ‘the culture’s high standard of living’.26 This interpretation is suggestive of their determined effort to secularise the domestic house, presenting it as relevant to their vision for a contemporary socialist home.
Figure 52: Abdesthana and banjica space in Svrzo’s house. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 138. A similar approach was taken in relation to the division of internal spaces into
‘men’s and women’s houses’. Contradicting their earlier interpretations of the female interior as the exotic core of the house, they now attributed this reading to somewhat naive and uninformed foreign visitors. They wrote: ‘Europeans are prone to regard the harem as a hotbed of carnal pleasures, whereas in reality it is nothing but that part of the house which is occupied by the family’.27 Without mentioning the historical or religious reasons governing the division of the house along gender
26 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 167. 27 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 181.
208 Chapter 5
lines, the authors reframed the centre core as private family quarters. The expansive layout of the ground floor was also not presented in relation to gender separation, but rather in its resemblance to ‘icons of modern housing’ [Figure 53].28
Figure 53: ‘Modernity of the traditional house’s interior’, erzelez house. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 208. Ultimately it was the framing of the traditional house within the modern and rational values of the socialist government that allowed Grabrijan and Neidhardt to negotiate Muslim culture within the Marxist search for universal culture. Making use of Grabrijan’s early writings, which connected the Bosnian house with houses designed by Le Corbusier, the book presented numerous drawings that offered visual proof of the modernity of traditional forms. These drawings included a cross section that identified an efficient passive ventilation system in a generic two storey house design; and a sketch of the kitchen area, which showed the benefits of good internal organisation to the overall efficiency of the design [Figure 54].
28 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 183.
209 Chapter 5
Figure 54: Modernity of the traditional home: cross ventilation and an interior of a mutvak (women’s kitchen) of the Djerdjeles family house. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 208. The authors’ emphasis on the building type’s organisation, their discussion of its development and the documentation of the house’s architectural qualities was presented as a search for universal values in the existing fabric. The relationship between specific cultural and religious values – in this case the connection to Islam and socialism’s search for its own ideological grounding – was presented not as a clash of disparate identities, but as what political theorist Ernesto Laclau has described as ‘a part of an all embracing and epochal struggle between universality
210 Chapter 5
and particularism’.29 In this instance, the specific cultural and religious values attached to Islam and to Muslim identity were included within the broader search for Yugoslav culture. As a result, it was no longer possible to differentiate between the particularism of traditional architecture and the universalising notions of modern architecture. However as Laclau has suggested the problematic aspect of
Marxist rejection of the relationship between particularity and universality is that the ‘universal had found its body, but this was still the body of a certain particularity’.30 By negating the differences between the universal values promoted by socialism and the traditional values embedded in the house, Grabrijan and
Neidhardt universalised the house’s particularity.
The emotional values attached to Bosanska ku a
Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s analysis of the traditional house also extended to the impact of this accommodation on the psychological mood of the inhabitant. The socialist interest in this topic was well known to Neidhardt through his involvement in the propaganda efforts of ‘manifestation’ architecture. Architects such as Hannes
Meyer considered that building is ‘a factor in mass psychology’, and promoted certain approaches, such as intensifying the raw quality of materials, as necessary tactics used in advancing the Marxist agenda.31 In his Über marxistische Arhitektur,
Meyer argued that ‘the elements in a building that have a telling psychological effect (poster area, loudspeaker, light dispenser, staircase, colour, etc.) must be
29 E. Laclau, ‘Universalism, particularism and the question of identity’, in J. Rajchman (ed.), The Identity in Question, Routledge, New York, 1995, p. 97. 30 Laclau, ‘Universalism, particularism and the question of identity’, p. 97. 31 K. M. Hays, ‘Diagramming the New World, or Hannes Meyer’s “Scientization” of architecture’, in P. Galison & E. Thompson (eds), The Architecture of Science, MIT Press, Cambridge, Ma., 1999, p. 246.
211 Chapter 5
organically integrated’ into design, as those effects ‘accord with our most profound insights into the laws of perception’.32
In his 1937 article ‘Turkish house, its sources and principles’, Grabrijan had argued for the connection between the emotional values of people and the spatial qualities of the houses they inhabit.33 However, in the discussion of this relationship in
‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ he and Neidhardt equated the emotional with the sexual, presenting the house as an enclosure that encapsulates the man’s power and his dominance over women. Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards
Modernity underplays these sexual references, returning to Grabrijan’s earlier position, which highlighted the house’s capacity to care for the emotional well being its inhabitants.
The dictionary: integrating the pragmatics and poetics
Concluding the discussion on the capacity of the heritage fabric to provide spatial prototypes useful in the development of modern architecture of socialism was a table of 24 sketches accompanied by individual, succinct and directive captions
[Figure 55]. The table presented a summary of the ‘positive’ values identified in their analysis.34
32 Hays, ‘Diagramming the New World, or Hannes Meyer’s “Scientization” of architecture’, p. 246. 33 D. Grabrijan, ‘Turska ku a Osnove i porijeklo’ (Turkish house, its roots and origins), in D. eli , Grabrijan i Sarajevo, pp. 37–43. 34 For a related discussion of ethnographic and architectural studies of the ‘Algerian house’ and the prototypes that emerged, see Z. Çelik, Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations, Algiers Under French Rule, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1997, pp. 87–113.
212 Chapter 5
Figure 55: The city, aršija, mahala, house, 24 sketches. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 56–57.
213 Chapter 5
For example, the caption to the sketch no. 1 referred to the openness of the suburban layouts of mahala, as ‘a neighbouring unit in a contemporary sense’.
Likewise, the caption to the sketch no. 15 referred to the layout of internal spaces as ‘the meander and the atrium – the two fundamental forms’. Most significantly, subtitles such ‘Koran proclaimed neighbourliness – next to Allah thou shall love the neighbour most’ made explicit the capacity of new urban forms to absorb the former values, thus translating specific references to Muslim families into secular values relevant to all.35
The note to the drawing of an urban mahala layout, the caption to the sketch no.
13, explained its relevance in terms of ‘contemporary urbanism of micro regions’.
The caption to a typical site of suburban blocks stated that the three aspects of
‘house, courtyard [avlija], and garden’ were the ‘most essential elements of
[contemporary] urbanism’.36 These images, and associated short captions, presented a powerful summary of Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s analysis; making explicit their argument for the contemporary relevance of Ottoman architectural precedents.
In developing these propositions, Neidhardt proposed a system of modular elements titled as ‘dictionary’. Unlike the freehand sketches in Figure 55, which commonly included the built form, the context and the occupants, the ‘dictionary’ sketches formalised the relationship by attaching a three dimensional shape to each
35 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 56–57. 36 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 56–57.
214 Chapter 5
concept. The drawing titled ‘Up to date architectonic dictionary alphabet of the carpet town’ presented a series of three dimensional building typologies as a dictionary for new architectural forms [Figure 56]. The intent was stated in the subtitle: ‘The glossary complied in an attempt to find a new vocabulary based on the experience of the past’.37
Figure 56: Neidhardt’s ‘Up to date architectonic dictionary alphabet of the carpet town’. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 324. Grabrijan and Neidhardt suggested that using these forms would allow for the integration of the old fabric’s values into new developments. The dictionary offered to capture an important correlation between the physical qualities of rooms – their depth, shape and level of lighting – and the emotional and psychological effect they have on people. Neidhardt and Grabrijan argued that combining dictionary entries in mathematical equations could provide successful and useful formulas for new creations. For example, Neidhardt presented his ‘design idea’ for a pavilion for 37 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 325.
215 Chapter 5
picnics, or teferi , as an architectural solution that combined the ‘relationship to nature’, with the ‘right of view’, the ‘water as the soul’ and a ‘right to sun’.38 Many other architectural propositions presented in the book Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity stated their reliance on such formulas. The use of the
‘dictionary’ of Bosnian Oriental architectural expression, they claimed, provided for the translation of collective memory imbedded in traditional house to the modern context.
The dictionary represented a substantial extension of ‘elemental analysis’ presented in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’. As with the ‘elemental analysis’, the dictionary prototypes reference the formal and aesthetic qualities of historical buildings, but only in the latter the authors attempted the more ambitious task of incorporating the emotional and psychological factors. Their reliance on a seemingly rational argument in pursuit of emotional, arguably subjective, impact allowed them to absorb local Islamic cultural references into the ‘civilising mission’ of the communist government. Most importantly and despite the authors’ previous insistence on divesting the urban form of religious meaning, the spatial constructs in the
‘dictionary’ included explicit reference to Islam albeit muted by the rational framework of this device. The urban fabric of Baš aršija, formerly associated with the colonial and feudal society, became representative of the architectural language associated with the new socialist society.
38 The formula was presented as a design idea equalling a series of concepts: IP=ODP+PNV+VDN+PNS+UP+ANDR+KK+KNS+JS. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 333.
216 Chapter 5
Demonstrating the capacity of the traditional house to accommodate significant social changes was a drawing of a young girl within the domestic setting [Figure 57].
The sketch shows a girl at home holding a violin. The picture of a mosque on the wall and the lattice window screens suggests the interior of a Muslim home, but the scene is suggestive of a contemporary period. The young girl holds a Western instrument, and she seems free and unconstrained within the environment of the traditional home. In contrast to the static and disengaged images of covered women in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, the young girl shown here encapsulates the societal change brought about by the new social structures.
Figure 57: Neidhardt’s illustration of a traditional interior. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 230.
Conclusion: the universal and the particular of the Bosnian Oriental house
Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s ‘dictionary’ of Bosnian Oriental architecture referenced specific formal relationships present in the traditional architecture of Baš aršija. In this interpretation the traditional house embodied the socialist objectives of rationalism and pragmatism. This emphasis informed the systematic character of
217 Chapter 5
Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s research and resulting propositions. While their formula based approach could easily be dismissed as a sceptical exercise in advocating the rational values and scientific approach embraced by the ruling Communist Party, their integration of emotional values appears as a genuine effort to appeal to a broader sense of well being in terms that were acceptable to the socialist ideology.
Neidhardt’s integration of emotional values in the otherwise formulaic approach to design favoured by the socialist government shifted the relevance of the Ottoman built heritage in the creation of a socialist architecture. It provided a model for a modern architecture that allowed the Islamic heritage to be present and contribute to a ‘synthetic’ Yugoslavia.
The visual and theoretical propositions developed in the dictionary, provided the foundation for a number of Neidhardt’s design propositions. These included urban proposals for the town of Zenica (1950–54), the development of the suburbs of
Grbavica (1953) and a proposal for a monument to Marx and Engels. In applying the
Bosnian Oriental formulas to the development of the ‘design idea’ for these projects, the meaning and significance attached to traditional buildings was fully transformed. Bosnian Ottoman history was no longer placed in the distant and controversial past, but was seen as a powerful tool to create anew.
218
Chapter 6 Transforming the City: the New aršija as the Theme Park of Socialism and the Design of the Parliament House Precinct
Neidhardt’s active academic and public profile grew with his continuing involvement in architectural and urban competitions and design proposals. From the publication of Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity until the late 1970s he participated in more than 30 large urban planning competitions, almost 100 designs for individual buildings, and more than 20 small scale design idea competitions. Neidhardt maintained that the ‘dictionary’ of Bosnian Oriental design principles underwrote all his architectural propositions, regardless of differences in the scale, context and typology of the projects.
This chapter analyses two proposals developed over 1950–55: his proposal for the transformation of the business sector of Baš aršija into the ‘New aršija cultural centre of socialist society’ and his winning design entry for the Bosnia and
Hercegovina Parliament building and its surrounds.1 In the proposal for New aršija, the principles of Bosnian Oriental allowed for the reorganisation of existing fabric into a socialist theme park. In the case of the Parliament precinct at Marindvor, the
Bosnian Oriental was vested with the capacity to extend beyond the specifics of the
1 Both projects are included in Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity. The project’s title New aršija refers to the business section ( aršija) of the Baš aršija precinct.
Chapter 6
old fabric and was presented as an abstract force capable of informing the new architecture. This chapter demonstrates that by grounding such diverse projects on the principles of Bosnian Oriental, Neidhardt could present this architectural and cultural expression as capable of negotiating competing national discourses while contributing to the construction of socialist ideology.
Baš aršija and socialist urban polices
Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s engagement with the precinct of Baš aršija extended over 20 years. First discussed by Grabrijan in 1930s and then negotiated by
Neidhardt in his numerous design proposals, the precinct dominated their urban explorations. Indeed, as already discussed, the old town structured the city’s urban debates both as an urban entity and a place of symbolic significance [Figure 58].
Figure 58: Baš aršija precinct during the socialist period. Plan indicating the chronological development of the precinct: A) Gazi Husref Beg’s mosque; B) Orthodox church; C) Jewish synagogue; D) Brusa bezistan; E) Rustem pasha Bezistan; F) Czar’s mosque; G) Town Hall. Originally presented in JSAH, vol. 51, no. 1, March 1991, drawing adjusted from the map used in A. Bejti , Stara Sarajevska aršija – ju er, danas I sutra.
220 Chapter 6
However, despite the public debates and the controversies that surrounded
Baš aršija, government policies rarely admitted the impact of nationalist tensions on such city debates. Only a few indirect references indicated the difficulties
Neidhardt faced in integrating ‘Islamic’ cultural references into his experimentation with modernism. His academic assistant Jelica Kapetanovi , for example, briefly alludes to the problematic position of Islamic cultural heritage in Neidhardt’s work.
Describing his ongoing involvement with Baš aršija, she wrote:
[The] old parts of the city built during the Ottoman period disturbed certain intellectual circles close to the regime, which basically denied any cultural specificity or integrity of Bosnia. Their views on buildings such as the mosque, medresa and Turkish graveyards were tainted by the century old bitterness against the old colonisers.2
It was for those reasons that, initially, the new post–World War Two communist government perceived the precinct as nothing but a burden of the past, and proposed plans to demolish significant parts of Baš aršija. In 1945, the City People
Committee formed a ‘demolition board’ to take charge of the clearance. It was responsible for the destruction of 246 small shops over a period of five years. With declarations such as ‘our history is not in old timber shutters’, ‘the shops have no
2 Original quote: ‘Stari dijelovi grada, izgradjeni u osmanskom periodu smetali su u ono vrijeme pojedinim intelektualcima bliskim režimu koji su u osnovi negirao svaku posebnost I kulturni integritet Bosne. Kroz gledanje na objekte džamija, medresa I turskih groblja provejavala je I vjekovna gor ina porobljenog naroda. Naprotiv, ti objekti zadivljavali su došljake, intelektualce iz drugih sredina koji su se tu nastanili I djelovali. Takvi su bili Vancaš, Pospišil, Grabrijan, Najdhardt … Oni su svaki na svoj na in u ovim bosanskim gradjevinama vidjeli jedan suptilni orijentalni duh I estetiku, izazov za prou avanje, o uvanje I poticaj za novo stvaralaštvo’. Kapetanovi , ‘The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt’, p. 248.
221 Chapter 6
historic or cultural value’, and they are only a ‘fire hazard’ and a ‘source of infection’, the government justified these planning decisions.3
Despite efforts by the Institute for the Protection of Natural and Built Heritage
(Zemaljski Zavod za Zaštitu Spomenika Kulture I Prirodnih Rijetkosti), established in
1945 to halt the clearances, significant parts of the precinct were demolished.4 The individual buildings affected included Gazi Isa begova tekija (a lodge of a dervish order) and a musafirhana (inn), possibly the oldest structure of its kind in Bosnia and Hercegovina, built in 1462.5 The building of the tekija in the area of Bendbaša, which was surrounded by a graveyard that was in use until 1924, was under a heritage protection order when it was demolished in 1957.6 That is, it was a
3 A. Bejti , Stara Sarajevska aršija – ju er, danas i sutra (Old Sarajevo aršija – Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow), Gradski Zavod za Zaštitu I uredjenje Spomenika Kulture, Sarajevo, 1969, p. 61. 4 The demolition process was finally slowed down due to significant protests by prominent city figures. While Neidhardt was ultimately among those who objected to the precinct’s destruction, initially he was a ‘committee’ member in charge of the demolition. On the 29 April 1949, a committee (Komisija pri Gradskoj upravi) was formed to oversee the demolition process. Its members included: engineer Emanuel Šamanek Director of Urban Development, engineer Muhamed Kadi , professor Hamdija Kreševljakovi , Dr Vlado Jokanovi , Director of Zemaljski Zavod za zaštitu spomenika kulture, engineer Juraj Neidhardt and Vera Krsti Galeb. V. Krsti Galeb ‘Culture and arts in the early years of post war development’ (Kultura I umjetnost u prvim poslijeratnim godinama), in M. ankovi , Sarajevo u Socijalisti koj Jugoslaviji od Oslobodjenja do Samoupravljanja, 1945–1950, vol. I, p. 478. 5 Demolished parts of the precinct included the south side from the area of Sara i to Kazaz Street on the east, numerous small shops of Upper and Lower Trgovke, almost all shops that surrounded Brusa bezistan, the eastern end of Kolobara han, all the shops and stores between the Milos Obili a Street and Sagrdjija. Kostovi , Sarajevo izmedju dobrotvorstva i zla, p. 135. 6 The official website of the Komisija/Povjerenstvo za O uvanje Nacionalnih Spomenika (Commission to Preserve National Monuments) presents an overview of the historical development of Isa begova tekija (zawija). In 1878, the Austro–Hungarian authorities temporarily banned the musafirhana, and thus also the tekija, from operating. The tekija, however, remained in use until 1924, and was maintained from the revenue of vakif (patron) Fadil paša Šerifovi . In 1941, claiming that it needed to regulate traffic, the government of the Independent State of Croatia issued plans for the area, proposing the demolition of Isa beg's tekija. The commencement of World War Two prevented the plans being carried out. In 1950, the executive committee of the Sarajevo City People's Committee resolved to carry out a new regulatory plan, which again proposed the demolition of the tekija. This began on 23 June 1950 and, despite protests, the tekija was demolished in 1957; its foundations were filled with layers of soil to regulate and level the terrain. The commission found that graves of some leading figures from the tekija were covered by demolition debris, with no record of whether
222 Chapter 6
registered monument, documented and described in literature and in receipt of some funding for restoration early on. Its destruction demonstrated the low regard in which heritage was held by socialist authorities.7
Government efforts to document the heritage precinct and identify structures worthy of preservation paralleled the demolition. In 1949, the government called for the submission of a full report on the precinct’s state, which would represent ‘a scientific elaboration of Sarajevo aršija’.8 Within this context of the government’s search for the objective significance of individual buildings, Neidhardt’s proposal began to make an impact on urban polices.
In 1950, a new executive body, the City Committee (Gradski Odbor), was established. It had the task of putting together the outcomes of the report into a comprehensive study and historical record of the precinct.9 Neidhardt’s previous plans for the precinct provided a starting point for the broader discussion. By 1953,
Neidhardt was in charge of team studying Baš aršija’s urban future. Among the outcomes of this study was a site model that was considered a ‘masterpiece’, and it became one of the central exhibits in the Sarajevo City Museum, which opened in or not the graves had been exhumed beforehand. For more information see the Commission to Preserve National Monuments website at: http://www.aneks8komisija.com.ba/main.php?id_struct=6&lang=1&action=view&id=2539; http://www.aneks8komisija.com.ba/main.php?id_struct=50&lang=4&action=view&id=2539 7 Serdarevi , Pravna zaštita kulturno historijskog naslijedja BiH, p. 36. 8 In February 1949, an administrative and executive body of the city committee (Gradski Odbor) called for a competition. In 1951, the committee pronounced Hamdija Kreševljakovi ’s study ‘History of Sarajevo’ as the winning entry. Krsti Galeb ‘Culture and arts in the early years of post war development’, in ankovi , Sarajevo u Socijalisti koj Jugoslaviji od Oslobodjenja do Samoupravljanja, 1945–1950, vol. I, pp. 477–78. 9 The chapter on the old aršija presented various aspects of the study and included historical images, numerous sketches and annotated diagrams of the precinct. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 60–109.
223 Chapter 6
1954 [Figure 59].10 Neidhardt’s ongoing interest in using his studies of the old precinct in his modernist endeavours finally appeared realistic.
Figure 59: Model of Baš aršija. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 98.
Past and present reunited in the New aršija project: a theme park of socialist Bosnia
Designed in 1953, the New aršija project proposed that the old Ottoman precinct be redeveloped into a regional cultural centre.11 Neidhardt articulated this proposal in Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, and relied on a series of urban strategies that included massive demolition, selective restoration, the
10 The model was done to the scale of 1:100; it covered an area in the old precinct of 500 metres by 500 metres square (model 50mx50m). The model maker was Mr Husein Karišik, with Neidhardt the architect in charge. Krsti Galeb ‘Culture and arts in the early years of post war development’, in ankovi , Sarajevo u Socijalisti koj Jugoslaviji od Oslobodjenja do Samoupravljanja, 1945–1950, vol. I, p. 478. 11 A version of this discussion was presented in D. Ali & M. Gusheh, ‘Reconciling competing national narratives in socialist Bosnia and Herzegovina: Baš aršija project (1948–53)’, Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, vol. 58, no. 1, March 1999, pp. 6–25.
224 Chapter 6
introduction of new structures and the importation of existing structures from the suburbs. The most prominent structures of Baš aršija would be preserved, a gesture accompanied by the clearing of small surrounding structures. Religious buildings such as Gazi Husref Beg’s mosque, with the šadrvan (water fountain), turbe (tomb) and medresa (religious school), as well as other significant structures were among those selected for preservation. Cleared of the surrounding fabric, the monuments appeared isolated – objects severed from the everyday life of the city. Positioned in large open areas and parks, these ‘jewels of the past’, as Neidhardt called them, became powerful reminders of the successive periods of Bosnian history. Devoid of their immediate context, the buildings became part of a cultural ‘theme park’ removed from the everyday life of the city [Figure 60].
The vast, open space provided by the clearances allowed Neidhardt to propose new connections, linking existing structures to each other as well as to the newly proposed monuments to socialism. New vistas, configured to emphasise the multicultural nature of Baš aršija, provided visual clues so that the visitor to New
aršija could easily see the varied religious traditions of Bosnia. Within this urban framework, the old precinct was presented as a most suitable place for collective representation:
There is no doubt that it would not only be desirable but also feasible to remould the aršija located at the crossroads of the Balkans into the cultural centre of Bosnia and Herzegovina. In cultural centres, records are kept of traditions which enlighten future generations and represent the superstructure of a civilization.12
12 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 111 & 136.
225 Chapter 6
Figure 60: View of the Baš aršija proposal. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 139. Consistent with socialist policy, Neidhardt’s proposal ignored the principles of the vakuf.13 In 1946, the socialist government, through the Land Nationalisation law
13 Gazi Husref beg’s bezistan (marketplace) was built to the east of Tašlihan. The two buildings were connected, enabling traders in the bezistan to make direct contact with the merchants from Venice and Dubrovnik based in the Tašlihan. The bezistan was used for its original purpose until 1879. The commencement of World War One prevented the building being entirely demolished, although by
226 Chapter 6
(Zakon o nacionalisaciji), reduced the authority of the vakuf and in 1958 the law of
Nationalisation of Rental Properties and the development sites (Zakon o nacionalizaciji najamnih zgrada I gra evinskog zemljišta) made the authority of this institution almost non existent.14 The break between Ottoman public and religious institutions and the commercial units that formerly provided financial support allowed these buildings to become financed and managed by the state. Most were left unattended or were supposedly handed over to the state willingly.15 The 1965
Heritage preservation legislation recognised the relevance of ‘scientific and technical aspects’ of old fabric, but referred only briefly to ‘other values’, its stated main purpose being to protect all ‘important periods of history’, excluding the
Ottoman period as irrelevant.16
Referring to the fabric emptied of its content and its civic purpose, Neidhardt stated that ‘To these buildings of such historical importance, a socio political significance should be added’.17 His utilitarian approach and focus on function echoed the government initiative of finding new uses for old structures. Numerous historic structures such as the Gazi Husref Beg’s hamam (public bath), mentioned in vakuf
1913 much of it had been pulled down to allow for the vakuf’s initiative of developing the Tašlihan site. www.aneks8komisija.com.ba/main.php?id_struct=50&lang=4&action=view&id=2857 14 Serdarevi , Pravna zaštita kulturno historijskog naslijedja BiH, p. 40. Paradoxically, a lack of funds also prevented the modernisation and upgrading of the vakuf’s sites. Suffering this fate was the 1939 design competition for the New Tašlihan (Novi Tašlihan) business building, which remained undeveloped. 15 Serdarevi , Pravna zaštita kulturno historijskog naslijedja BiH, p. 76. 16 Serdarevi , Pravna zaštita kulturno historijskog naslijedja BiH, p. 35. 17 Original quote: ‘Da bi te muzejske vrijednosti bile što životnije, želimo im dodati još društveno politi ke. Istodobno emo opti ki pove ati utisak oko Begove džamije i Brusa bezistana sa spomenikom NOB. Ne znamo naime zašto ne bi smjestili u aršiju u mauzolej NOB…’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 111 & 137.
227 Chapter 6
documents from 1535, were affected by this approach.18 Despite the hamam historically providing a sacred space for abdest (ablution), Neidhardt proposed converting the building into a wine cellar and restaurant. Oblivious to the impact of his proposal on the wider urban context, he rationalised his approach by stating that ‘since the building is slightly sunk into the ground, the rooms on the ground floor are cool and would lend themselves to being utilized as a cellar or a wine shop, and a restaurant’.19
Furthermore, in the New aršija proposal Gazi Husref Beg’s bezistan became a national restaurant, the hanikah an ethnographic museum and the medresa a library [Figure 61 &Figure 62].20 Neidhardt also suggested converting Brusa bezistan to a museum of the socialist revolution.21 Presenting the picturesque qualities of the heritage fabric as a rationale for his approach, he stated: ‘In this way, Bey’s
Mosque [as background] and the Brusa bezistan would make a fine background for the National Liberation Memorial…’[Figure 63].22
18 Serdarevi , Pravna zaštita kulturno historijskog naslijedja BiH, p. 76. 19 Original quote: ‘Zgrada je dakle kao stvorena za pivnicu u stilu naših vinskih podruma. U tu bi svrhu mogli iskoristiti i ‘koje’ na zapadnoj strani, koje se otvaraju prema Begovoj džamiji. Kod takvog preuredjenja unutrašnjih prostorija u savremene svrhe, morali bi budno paziti, da vanjština ne izgubi svoju historijsku vrijednost’. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 93. 20 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 137. 21 The selected artwork dealt with the themes of the revolution was done by recognised revolutionary artists. It included a sculpture of ‘Mother and child’, a scene from the National Revolution War; ‘Ploughing’, a scene from World War Two by Kostovi ; ‘Mother’ by Meštrovi ; ‘Hostage’, a scene from the National Liberation Struggle by Baki ; and a relief from the National Liberation War by Mujezinovi . Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 120–37. 22 Original quote: ‘Da bi te muzejske vrijednosti bile što životnije, želimo im dodati još društveno politi ke. Istodobno emo opti ki pove ati utisak oko Begove džamije i Brusa bezistana sa spomenikom NOB. Ne znamo naime zašto ne bi smjestili u aršiju u mauzolej NOB…’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 111 & 137.
228 Chapter 6
Figure 61: The New aršija proposal: view of new artists studios above the Old Orthodox church (top and bottom left); proposed change of Gazi Husref Beg’s bezistan into a bar (top right); an interior of the new Town Museum to be housed in the former Sheriat (Muslim Law ) School. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 114.
Figure 62: Interior view of the proposed adaptation of Brusa bezistan. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 56–57.
229 Chapter 6
Figure 63: Proposal for the New Museum of Revolution within the old Gazi Husref Beg’s bezistan that would include art celebrating ‘Liberation war’. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 126. In regards to the more incontrovertibly religious buildings such as mosques,
Neidhardt’s proposal for New aršija honoured their original functions, although their independent status would have been already jeopardised by socialist policies, which insisted on supervision of religious activities. The government’s strict control limited them to the most essential daily services performed exclusively inside religious buildings.23 The urban isolation proposed in the plan furthered social segregation of religious communities and enhanced the spatial terms of their marginalisation.
As well as reducing religious buildings to symbolic monuments and to properties of the state, Neidhardt’s project introduced an organisational principle more suited to 23 Serdarevi , Pravna zaštita kulturno historijskog naslijedja BiH, p. 76.
230 Chapter 6
socialist rule and a Marxist view of history. Based on the belief ‘that historical continuity was to be maintained at all costs,’ Bosnian history was portrayed as linear and progressive, and displayed within Baš aršija’s redefined boundaries.24
Low scale rows of shops, arcades and walkways wrapped around New aršija, defining its new perimeter. A monumental portal marked the entrance to the precinct. Utilising the same design presented in ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’, the gateway was a threshold separating the Baš aršija district from the Austro–
Hungarian quarter and opening vistas to a number of monuments on display [Figure
64].
Figure 64: The proposed gate to the Baš aršija precinct. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 109.
24 W. Lesnikowski (ed.), East European Modernism, Architecture in Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Poland Between Wars, 1919–1939, Thames & Hudson, London, 1996, p. 10.
231 Chapter 6
Passage through this gateway would mark the beginning of a journey that demonstrated Bosnia’s history from prehistoric times through to the Illyrian, the
Bogumil and the Bosnian Oriental, culminating in the socialist era.25 The representation of the prehistoric, the Illyrian and the Roman eras relied primarily on ancient archaeological finds categorised and displayed in the proposed museums.
These objects included ceramic artefacts, mosaics, costumes and decorative elements.
The inclusion of Bogumil ste ci (gravestones) in the New aršija was aimed at highlighting a period representing Bosnia as an independent state [Figure 65]. The
Bosnian Bogumil’s resistance to both the Catholic and the Orthodox Church was, as discussed, commonly associated with the rebellious nature of Bosnians.26
Figure 65: Proposed Bogumil gravestones in the precinct. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 113.
25 Although the drawing of Bašcaršija’s gateway appears as an opener to Neidhardt’s chapter on the New aršija project, he borrowed the image from the partial analysis he made of Bašcaršija in the 1940s. 26 Referring to the 1950 Paris Universal Exposition, where ste ci represented the Bosnian contribution, Neidhardt stated: ‘the world was impressed [by Bogumil heritage] … they are the pride of our people … [the] story of our distant and close past’. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 112.
232 Chapter 6
Contrary to the government position in Neidhardt’s proposal the Ottoman period was represented through Baš aršija’s mosques, the existing graveyards and other urban remnants. It was to be extended by introducing restored residential houses from the suburbs and by the conservation of isolated streets that represented the craft groups that once occupied Baš aršija. Deconstructing Bosnian historic legacy into its supposed constituent elements endorsed the presentation of different periods in their varying relevance to the contemporary context.
Extending the theoretical and historical discussion presented in other chapters of
Architecture of Bosnia and the way Towards Modernity, Neidhardt stated:
We see in this development a consistent historical continuity: some architectural creations, having become unnecessary and anti social, will gradually die out, others will change as the new ones are being born, because they are demanded by conditions and the way of life.27
The period of Bosnia’s history that Neidhardt believed to be the most relevant to its current state was clearly located in the old precinct. With his focus on architectural form and not the historic context, he wrote:
Feudal social structure [of the Ottomans] and the way of life in those times have given us three fundamental architectural forms, the expression of three various functions: the ‘ ošak [corner]’, the dome and the minaret, i.e. cube, sphere and cylinder.28
27 Original quote:’ Mi vidimo u tom razvoju logi an historijski kontinuitet: neka arhitektonska ostvarenja, kao ekonomske nepotrebna i asocijalna, postepeno izumiru, druga se transformiraju, a tre a, sasvim nova, se ra aju, jer su uslovljena novin uslovima i na inom života’. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 322. 28 Original quote :’Feudalna društvena struktura I tadašnji na in života dali su nam na polju arhitekture uglavnom tri elementarna oblika, koji su proizašli iz triju razli itih funkcija: ošak, kube i munaru. Dakle kocku, polukuglu i valjak.’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, 323.
233 Chapter 6
Skilfully using aspects of previous arguments developed in collaboration with
Grabrijan, Neidhardt reminded the reader that it was this very similarity between modern cubic form and Ottoman architecture that should be appreciated:
Here we may find origins of cubism, a predecessor to modern architecture, since these very geometrical bodies are the first letters of its alphabet. Looking at these geometrical figures in nature we automatically recognize that oriental, as well as modern architecture, is based on the contrast between the severity of geometrical bodies and the gaiety of nature.29
Presented as pure geometric shapes of cubes, spheres and cylinders, the monuments of Baš aršija were no longer connected to the past but demonstrated
‘how the positive values of our inheritance – divanhana (veranda), doksat (porch), meander etc. – pass imperceptibly into modern architecture’.30
Having redefined the role and function of existing buildings by stripping them of historical context, Neidhardt’s plan emphasised new links between isolated monuments in Baš aršija. The presence of Christian and Islamic religious institutions as ‘sparkling jewels of the past’ enabled a reading of Baš aršija as a place where all cultures and religions were united. Numerous sketches showed views of churches and mosques in close proximity. The sketch of the entry gate showed the architecture of Austro Hungarian period located just outside the precinct of religious and historic monuments [Figure 64]. The sketches of interiors of proposed
29 Original quote: ‘Upravo na ovom možemo temeljiti porijeklo kubizma – likovnog pokreta prete u modernog arhitekture, jer su upravo ova primarna geometrijska tjela po etna slova njegove abecede.’ Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, 323. 30 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 330. Neidhardt linked his interest in a geometric and elemental approach to his time in Le Corbusier’s office. For further discussion of Le Corbusier’s use of primary forms see, A. M. Vogt, Le Corbusier, the Noble Savage, Toward an Archaeology of Modernism, MIT Press, Cambridge, Ma., 1998, pp. 153–82.
234 Chapter 6
restaurant conveniently included the Orthodox Church and the minarets of Beg’s mosque in the background [Figure 66].
Figure 66: Interiors of proposed restaurant ‘Aeroplane’. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 294. The plans shown and the cross section through the precinct shown in Figure 67 extend the notion of diversity further. The latter included domestic dwellings, religious buildings, the new scientific institutions and the former Town Hall, now a library, together highlighting the architectural and cultural diversity of Bašcaršija within the context of the city.
235 Chapter 6
Figure 67: Longitudinal section through the new Baš aršija. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 120–21.
236 Chapter 6
Neidhardt’s purpose for including all the main religious institutions was clear. By extending the area of Baš aršija to the south, he incorporated the existing St
Anthony (Sveti Ante) Catholic Church of the Franciscan Order, located on the left bank of the river,31 resulting in the New aršija featuring buildings of all the main religious groups: the Jewish synagogue, the Catholic and Orthodox churches and the
Muslim mosque. Tourists and visitors would be presented with an exceptional opportunity to see the places of worship of the main religious faiths – their proximity to one another giving the impression that the socialist ‘brotherhood and unity’ was based on solid cultural foundations [Figure 68].
31 The old Catholic church in Bašcaršija was burnt down in the fire of 1697. The Austro–Hungarians built a new Roman Catholic cathedral. St Anthony Catholic Church was designed by Josip Vancaš and built in the period 1911–13 outside the old precinct. For further discussion of the new cathedral and Vancaš’s designs see Kurto, ‘Arhitektura Secesije u Sarajevu’.
237 Chapter 6
Figure 68: Plan of the New aršija proposal: A) Gazi Husref Beg’s mosque; B) Orthodox church; C) Jewish synagogue; D) Catholic church of St Anthony; E) new graveyard; F) Czar’s mosque; G) new public/cultural buildings; H) new residential area for cultural workers. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 117. New aršija objects and monuments were intended only to be viewed in relation to each other, or as backdrops to the new structures that would be introduced. The narrative established concluded with the socialist revolution, represented through modern structures and monuments throughout the precinct. The significance of the modern structures lay in their authority to mark the beginning of the socialist era as
238 Chapter 6
well as their capacity to represent the continuous development of humanity. The new structures included an amphitheatre – with a stage for folkloric performances, cultural political manifestations and festivals – a cinema and a number of new museums. The most prominent modern monument was the Academy of Science and Arts [Figure 69]:
At the far [western] end of the aršija might be erected, as a symbol of socialist progress, a tall building which would house either the Balkan Institute or the Academy of Sciences and Art … [This zone] could represent one of the finest architectural achievements in Yugoslavia’.32
Figure 69: Proposal for the Academy of Arts and Sciences of the People’s Republic of BiH. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 113.
According to Neidhardt, the buildings’ designs were all based on the modern qualities of the traditional house, the scale, materials, geometric composition and
32 Original quote: ‘Zašto da ne zaklju imo arsiju sa takvim objektom u obliku savremene kule znanosti i smjestimo unutra orijentalni i balkanski institut ili Akademiju znanosti i umjetnosti. Koji bi se grad [u Jugoslaviji] mogao ponositit takvim profilom koji bi obuhva ao cijelu arhitektonsku klavijaturu BiH’. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp.112 & 137.
239 Chapter 6
rhythm of which were all included in the architectural dictionary of Bosnian Oriental expression [Figure 70].
Figure 70: Collection of architectural ‘elements’ includes ste ak; traditional house and mosques’ domes. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 416. Ultimately, Neidhardt’s Baš aršija project became an architectural synthesis of nationalist ideologies, where the heterogeneous, progressive and secular Bosnia confidently represented a socialist Yugoslavia. His modernist reading and the secularisation of Ottoman architecture responded to the Bosnian national claim of a unique culture, while representing Bosnia as an essentially multicultural state secured its position within the broader socialist and Yugoslav project [Figure 71].
240 Chapter 6
Figure 71: Images of New aršija, photomontage. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 120 & 121.
Marindvor precinct and the design of socialist modernism
In 1955, a national design competition called for master plan proposals for the
Marindvor precinct, which included the new National Assembly;33 a team lead by
Neidhardt won the competition.34 It is in this project that his interpretation of the
Ottoman legacy as a tool for architecture of the new state is most clearly attempted. His proposal for a political and administrative centre of Sarajevo and the
Republic of Bosnia and Hercegovina established the relevance of the Bosnian
Oriental not only to the historical fabric of the city but also to new architecture.
33 An earlier discussion of this project was presented in D. Ali , ‘Sarajevo and the making of monuments (1945–1992)’, in M. Ghandour, M. Labban, M. Lozanovska (eds), Sites of Recovery, The Fourth 'Other Connections’ Conference, Beirut, Lebanon, October 1999, pp. 11–18. 34 Neidhardt’s assistants were architects D. eli , E. Jahi and B. Mileusni , architecture student Z. Ugljen, art consultant R. Miševi , model maker I. Komsi . The project was published in Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 408–26.
241 Chapter 6
Neidhardt’s proposal included a vast range of cultural and political buildings in what appeared to be free urban organisation. ‘The structures are’, he said, ‘by no means placed on the basis of some rigid principles but are laid out in a flexible and free manner, now on one side, now on the other, with the aim of making them … the visual markers of the new areas of Sarajevo.’35 In this seemingly casual spatial arrangement, the geometric volumes of cubes, spheres and cylinders housed the new activities of socialism. Uninhibited by the relationship between form and function, the buildings of the new opera, exhibition centre, radio and television centre, commercial hotel, department store and supermarkets invoked Neidhardt’s liking of pure geometrical forms; he stated in a discussion of his design approach that these forms were intended to represent socialist architectural aspirations: ‘The basic idea of the project is reflected in the attempt to interconnect the ideological and urban concepts into an organic whole’ [Figure 72].36
Neidhardt claimed the design as an opening episode representing the new era in
Bosnian urbanism:
Today we are in a fortunate position that it is easy for us to make our contribution to the altar of community … We are not allowed to take a rest, but must contribute what experiences we have, to the making of a new architecture.37
He believed the ‘new architecture’ would soon transform the capital, making his ideas stand out as templates for urban success [Figure 73].
35 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 416. 36 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 427. 37 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 14–15.
242 Chapter 6
Figure 72: Master plan view of the new Marindvor proposal. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 414.
Figure 73: The map of Marindvor precinct and Sarajevo, drawn by Neidhardt. ‘Dwelling complex in Yugoslav Army Street (1966 47). First [example] in the history of Sarajevo [where] the principle of a spacious meander street is applied’. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 408.
243 Chapter 6
Historical continuity and progressive development of culture
The site covered a large triangular area, loosely framed on one side by the main east–west traffic route through the city; on another by the diagonal route that connects the large residential block called Marindvor at one end and the site of the new railway station at the other; and on the third side by a street aligning three existing buildings: the National Museum, the Technical School and the new railway station.38 The brief described the site as a flat area interrupted by a number of significant public buildings dating from different historical periods. These were the
Natural Museum buildings, described as representing the neo renaissance style and considered by the jury to be ‘the best example of the architecture of late Austro–
Hungarian period’; the High Technical School, representing ‘old urban building’ from the period between the world wars, and the new railway station, built during the socialist government era by Czech architects.39
The judging panel complimented the winning scheme on its successful resolution of the relationship between the heterogeneous existing buildings and the proposed new structures. Neidhardt’s sketches, however, hardly showed the buildings mentioned by the jury, but rather indicated his interest in relating the site to the greater city area. Presenting the city in its natural setting along the river valley,
Neidhardt’s drawings identified different stages of its development. Its eastern end
– marked by the Ottoman established Baš aršija – is followed by the central part, developed by the Austro–Hungarians, and then the growing new socialist suburbs
38 Karli Kapetanovi , Juraj Najdhart, život i djelo, p. 171. 39 Karli Kapetanovi , Juraj Najdhart, život i djelo, pp. 171–72.
244 Chapter 6
that stretch towards its western end. Neidhardt remarked, ‘If the development of
Sarajevo is approached from the point of view of historical continuity then, in the line of continuity with the ancient town of guilds [Baš aršija] and the later of capitalists [central part], the construction of Marindvor is an expression of the socialist society’ [Figure 74 & Figure 75].40
Figure 74: Source: ‘Graphic analysis of the elements of the urban solution’ described through use of keywords (from top) ‘zone’; ‘zig zag space’; ‘visual markers of heights’; ‘space’; ‘views’, ‘traffic’; ‘historic precinct’; ‘continuity’; ‘pedestrian zones’ and patterns’; ‘squares’ and ‘city as a carpet’. Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 415. 40 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 422.
245 Chapter 6
Neidhardt’s sketches presented Marindvor and Baš aršija in relation to each other, despite being physically distant from each other and separated by the largest part of the city. ‘Marindvor’, he said, ‘is representing the demarcation line between old and modern Sarajevo’.41 Neidhardt disregarded the central part of the town, dating from the Austro–Hungarian time, as irrelevant and described it as ‘an aberration in the development of the historic continuity of Bosnia’.42 He restated his conviction that the historical mooring of his work was in the Ottoman architectural legacy
Figure 75: From top: urban solution for Marindvor precinct. Bird’s eye view of ‘Manifestation square’ and the parliament House building. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, pp. 410 & 413.
41 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 422. 42 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 415.
246 Chapter 6
The building of the National Assembly
The belief that the architecture of the new National Assembly building ought to represent all the people of Bosnia was at the core of Neidhardt’s design approach.
‘[The assembly] house [is a house] of the whole nation and as such its symbolism needs to be recognisable to all’, Neidhardt wrote in his proposal.43 His design was conceived as a cluster of three buildings: the office tower, the ‘free shaped’ conference building and the horizontal administrative block [Figure 76 & Figure 77].
Figure 76: ’Elements’ of the new National Assembly buildings: tower, atrium, shells, balcony and veranda. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 417.
Figure 77: Design for the National Assembly of Bosnia and Hercegovina. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 417. 43 Karli Kapetanovi , Juraj Najdhart, život i djelo; p. 175.
247 Chapter 6
The spatial arrangements of individual buildings – their volumes and shapes as well as the treatment of their elevations – were all based on the relevant historical precedents.44 Neidhardt wrote, ‘The collection of the old Bosnian architectural elements: tower, atrium, balcony, pillar hall (triem), cupolas and rustic walls served as basic elements for the composition of the design (in a modern sense)’.45
Accordingly, Neidhardt suggested the precedent for the administrative building was in the elongated bay window (doksat) commonly associated with the Ottoman domestic architecture [Figure 76].46
Similarly, the free shaped structure that wrapped around the two central courtyards extended the associations with domestic architecture, confirming
Neidhardt’s belief in the unique ability of Sarajevo domestic architecture to harness an amicable relationship between modern structures and nature. With an aim of balancing the relationship between private and public, traditional and modern,
Neidhardt proposed that the two meeting halls be covered with what he described as ‘mosque like cupolas’.47 In using of the dome on the grounds of its historic use in covering the mosque’s most important rooms – the market hall (bezistan) and baths
(hamam) – Neidhardt confirmed his belief that any religious associations were merely a matter of the Bosnian past.48
44 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 423. 45 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 416. 46 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 424. 47 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 424. 48 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 327.
248 Chapter 6
Neidhardt’s colleague Džemal eli recorded that the symbolic potency of the historic forms was not lost on its audience. Appraising the Marindvor proposal, eli wrote:
In addition to the functional spaces required by the brief, the Parliament house includes a range of symbolic spaces that have emerged from our tradition: the platform for public speaking in the shape of doksat, modern atrium, domes as symbols of gathering, and finally the high tower of the new building shaped as stecak the symbol of our consciousness and resistance, on which surface our whole history is written.’49
A tentative arrangement of winding paths linked the new structures at ground level.
This was meant to encourage viewers to establish free visual associations between the individual structures laid out in this open urban arrangement. Neidhardt’s monuments to socialism provided opportunities for people to make new associations and establish, he suggested, ‘spiritual links with the monuments’.50 He believed such links would further encourage people to engage with the site, and, ultimately, ‘lay wreaths at its [the monuments’] pedestal.’51 In return, ‘the light flooded Monument’, Neidhardt wrote, ‘will symbolise the suffering, struggle and victory of a small nation’ [Figure 78].52
Figure 78: People viewing the Parliament House building. Source: Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 410 49 Karli Kapetanovi , Juraj Najdhart, život i djelo, p. 364. 50 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 427. 51 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 427. 52 Grabrijan & Neidhardt, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, p. 427.
249 Chapter 6
Following the competition, the realisation of the winning design was indefinitely postponed. The authorities justified their decision on the basis that there was a lack of funds to execute the scheme, but their subsequent actions suggested it was more a matter of Neidhardt’s proposal. Despite the halt the authorities requested a further development of the master plan, indicating the need for more administrative buildings. This increased rather than reduced the project’s scope and was contrary to the original competition brief. Between 1955 until 1976, when yet another competition for the National Assembly building was announced, development and construction in the Marindvor area were focused on individual buildings only. The Marindvor master plan proposal was never executed in its entirety. The design of the National Assembly buildings was revisited many times and was eventually built in 1974–82 to Neidhardt’s design. Exaggerated to the size of a high rise building, this ‘new ste ak’ of the National Assembly building aimed to promote the independence and strength of socialist Bosnia.
Postscript: Baš aršija as a centre of collective identity
Despite the difficulties and a lack of support in implementing his design proposals,
Neidhardt nevertheless played a crucial role in shaping Baš aršija’s future.53 He assumed numerous professional and civic duties, which included an advisory role on the historical study of Baš aršija by Alija Bejti that defined the overall approach to the preservation of the precinct. Titled ‘Old Sarajevo aršija, yesterday, today and tomorrow’ (Stara Sarajevska aršija, ju e, danas, sutra), the document presented an 53 M. umruk i , ‘Izrada Generalnog Urbanistickog Plana’, in M. ankovi , Sarajevo u Socijalistickoj Jugoslaviji od Oslobodjenja do Samoupravljanja, 1950–1963, vol. 2, pp. 387–559.
250 Chapter 6
in depth historical overview of the precinct, identifying individual monuments and structures worthy of preservation. While from a preservationist point of view
Bejti ’s approach was inclusive and recognised the diverse historical periods of value, its focus was on preserving the historic core as distinct from enabling socialist development. This denied Neidhardt’s vision for the viable contribution of historical built fabric to the architecture of modern Bosnia.54
The establishment of a fund for upkeep and repairs of Baš aršija (Fond for uredjenje
Baš aršije) in 1963 further isolated the precinct from the rest of the city. By 1968 the old aršija was put under a protection order and considered an ‘urban whole’.55
In 1975, that so called ‘problem of old Sarajevo – aršija’ was considered resolved, the Regulation Plan for Old Sarajevo aršija declaring the precinct an urban entity of historic and cultural importance.56 The subsequent urban preservation ‘treatment’ and polices that supported it, highlighted the importance of Baš aršija’s heritage.57
54 A. Bejti , Stara Sarajevska aršija ju er, danas i sutra, Osnove I Smjernice za Regenaraciju. The list of contributors included Juraj Neidhardt, Husref Redži , Mustafa umruk i , Midhat Aganovi , Vojislav Joksimovi , Sretislav Marjanovi . The ideas presented in 1969 had been already presented in a 1962 analysis of the precinct in ‘Program for urban development of aršija’ (Program za urbanisti ko ure enje aršije), also by Alija Bejti . 55 Focused on maintaining the existing fabric, the fund established the 1878 map of Baš aršija as the reference point in defining the heritage fabric considered of collective value. The map also marked the boundaries of the fund’s jurisdiction. According to the archives of the Institute for Protection of Monuments of Culture for the City of Sarajevo (Zavod za Zaštitu Spomenika Kulture Grada Sarajeva) the fund for the protection of Baš aršija was established in 1983. For more detail see Serdarevi , Pravna zaštita kulturno historijskog naslijedja BiH, pp. 56–57. 56 Regulation Plan for the Preservation, Conservation, Restoration and Revitalisation of Sarajevo aršija (Regulacion plan sanacije, konzervacije, restauracije I revitalizacije Sarajevske aršija), Skupština Grada Sarajeva, Sarajevo, 1975. The list of project architects includes: Alija Bejti , Džemal eli , Radivoj Jadri , Juraj Neidhardt and Husref Redži . 57 M. umruk i , ‘Izrada Generalnog Urbanistickog Plana’, pp. 387–559.
251 Chapter 6
The conceptual premises of Neidhardt’s theoretical approach remained in the new government promoted plans. These included a focus on the historical significance of structures, the preservation of individual historical monuments and the re creation of an ‘historical’ or ‘period’ appearance in new structures – hence the reconstruction of small shops based on their 19th century appearance and the enhancement of precinct tourist facilities. With craft production virtually non existent, shop owners were forced to sell fake copies and craft lookalikes, the
‘bijouterie’ objects of Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s first proposal. By the 1970s
Baš aršija was a place of tourist consumption and folklore [Figure 79].
Figure 79: Sarajevo, a postcard, published by ‘Svjetlost’. According to Dževad Karahasan, a writer and academic of socialist times, those urban processes made the built fabric of Baš aršija representative of the socialist and secular state’s values. Just like in Neidhardt’s 1953 proposal, Baš aršija represented the merging of the ‘East and West’ or ‘Christian Islamic’ and was
252 Chapter 6
expressive of the broader socio cultural notions of tolerance and pluralism he assigned to Bosnia. In Sarajevo, Exodus of a City, published during and in response to the 1992–96 war, Karahasan argued that the ‘internal pluralism’ of Bosnia was reflected in the precinct’s built fabric. He argued that Baš aršija’s limited geographical size and peripheral position were the ‘enclosures that separate and protect it from the outside world’, allowing it to absorb and ‘contain all that exists around it’ within its boundaries:
At Charshiya, each culture that exists in the mahalas articulates and realizes its universal component. At Charshiya the universal human values – which of course exist in every culture – are being realized. Business goes on there, providing the economic foundation for existence in this world, and, simultaneously, human solidarity is being expressed at Charshiya, through communication and openness among people and toward one another. … For, at Charshiya, people from all the mahala spread around it, meet each other, communicate, cooperate, and live side by side. One beside the other are the shops of a new Jew from Byelave, a Muslim from Vratnik, a Croat or an Italian from Latinluk, a Serb or a Greek from Tashlihan … At Charshiya, all of them are just people and Sarajevans, merchants and artisans, notwithstanding all the differences amongst them. This is why Charshiya, the city center, is at once the most interior and the most open place.’58
In the context of the 1992–96 war’s destruction of Sarajevo, these very qualities of
Bosnian culture stood in startling contrast to the characteristics of the Serbian nationalist forces surrounding the city, with their intolerance towards the Other, their cultural exclusivity and their xenophobia. It is through the aesthetic values of the precinct and the architectural qualities of building designs that the memory of cultural interactions, influences and multiple narratives are not only brought
58 D. Karahasan, Sarajevo, Exodus of a City, Kodansha International, New York, 1994, pp. 8–9.
253 Chapter 6
together but transfigured and changed according to the specific sensibilities of the people and the times.
254
Chapter 7 Discussion and Conclusions
Overview and conclusions
This thesis has argued that Dušan Grabrijan and Juraj Neidhardt’s discussion of
Bosnian Oriental expression emerged from their attempts to find a place for
Ottoman and Islamic heritage in the complex and contradictory nationalist discourses in Bosnia and Yugoslavia. Their model of Bosnian Oriental, as a synthesis of Islamic heritage and modernism, identified architecture as capable of negotiating diverse political agendas.
At various points, this thesis has argued, Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s theoretical and practical contributions to architecture and urbanism were more closely connected to the political terrain of their times than has been recognised by them or by commentators on their work. The gradual but significant changes in their attitude towards Ottoman heritage demonstrated not only their intrinsic connections to the broader political scene but their astute awareness of the changing perceptions of
Bosnia’s Islamic past within the discourses on Yugoslav and specifically Bosnian national identities.
Chapter two argued that drawing on his years of study in Ple nik’s school, Grabrijan recognised the importance of cultural uniqueness to the discussion and
Chapter 7
construction of visions of the Yugoslav nation. Grabrijan’s numerous writings sought to articulate the distinctive qualities of Bosnian architectural and cultural context, which he connected to Ottoman/Islamic urban heritage. While his search for a greater recognition of this heritage was, in some ways, compromised in his and
Neidhardt’s first urban proposal for Sarajevo, presented in ‘Sarajevo and Its
Satellites’ (discussed in chapter three), their work continued to be underpinned by the established importance of this historic fabric to debates on Bosnian identity.
Chapter four presented their subsequent book, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way
Towards Modernity, as a recognition and acceptance of the past and as an articulation of socialist Bosnia as represented in the arts and architecture.
Grabrijan’s analysis of the traditional house, chapter five demonstrated, became central to the transformations of the pair’s theoretical agenda into an architectural discourse. Focusing on the Bosnian house, the authors argued that despite its
‘Oriental’ lineage traditional ‘Islamic’ built heritage was a shared heritage that transcended ethnic and national boundaries. As such, their architectural vocabulary of ‘Bosnian Oriental’, which relied upon their transformation of traditional house typology, provided the architectural ‘vocabulary’ for Neidhardt’s most important architectural proposals. The two concluding chapters presented a discussion of these proposals: the redevelopment of Baš aršija and the new socialist precinct of
Marijin Dvor. It was in these projects that Grabrijan and Neidhardt were able to negotiate and unify their urban and political views.
256 Chapter 7
This thesis argues that despite the differences between ‘Sarajevo and Its Satellites’ and Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity, Grabrijan and
Neidhardt’s two major collaborative publications had much in common. Most significantly, both attempted to overcome nationalist and Marxist resistance to the region’s Ottoman past. In architectural and urban terms, both explored the issues of creating a modern city and the contribution of heritage built fabric to a new
Sarajevo master plan. Both proposed new visions of urban planning and, like many of their contemporaries, promoted industrialisation, efficiency and rational planning. And both advocated rationalisation combined with the essential human needs for light, comfort and hygiene as a way towards achieving better living conditions for all.1
Nevertheless, the two publications also differed significantly. The inclusion of specific Bosnian and Muslim cultural references in Architecture of Bosnia and the
Way Towards Modernity marked the real difference between the two. It signalled the authors’ awareness of the political forces that rejected the Islamic past and it suggested their involvement in nationalist debates particular to 1950s’ Bosnia. Their discussion of local people and culture highlighted a move away from stereotypical views that connected Muslims to the greater world of Islam rather than to a specific place in time. It focused on a search for the unique qualities of the local people and culture, and highlighted their role in a developing an inclusive Bosnian culture. This vision challenged the nationalist views, which promoted an exclusive ethnic 1 McLeod’s work presents similar such ideals as underlying Le Corbusier’s production. M. McLeod, ‘Urbanism and Utopia: Le Corbusier from regional syndicalism to Vichy’, PhD thesis, Princeton University, 1985.
257 Chapter 7
grounding of the nation. In short, Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards
Modernity presented Bosnian Oriental architectural expression as capable of overcoming ethnic and national divisions.
At the same time that Grabrijan and Neidhardt were searching for historical continuity – for aspects of the past that could inform the modern world – they disregarded many significant elements of that heritage, or else reinterpreted them in such a way as to support dominant socialist discourse. For example, significantly secularised and stripped of their cultural complexities, the monuments and symbols that served the needs of communities were appropriated for the purposes of an ideological agenda. The realignment of built heritage and meaning illustrates that
Nora’s concept of ‘sites of memory’ (lieux de mémoire) are indeed constructed on shifting ground. Detached from the organic and emplaced reproduction of culture
(milleux de mémoire), Baš aršija’s places of significance have, through subsequent interpretation, been influenced and informed by diverse ideological positions.
Accordingly, Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s interpretation of Bosnia’s Ottoman architectural legacy became a powerful tool in promoting the socialist government’s aspirations for a secularised, multiethnic and multi religious society.
In this context, the reductive nature of Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s formal expression and its focus on an architectural ‘dictionary’ highlighted the difficulties involved in the search for architectural principles. Their work presented Muslim references but sought out traces of modernity in that heritage that transcended religious and
258 Chapter 7
historical differences. Absorbing those values within their modernist enterprise was aimed at making the modern architecture they were creating even more modern and universally human.2 By recasting their sources of inspiration in the images of the architecture they proposed to create, Grabrijan and Neidhardt underlined a
‘disquieting quality of modernism’ that James Clifford has referred to in terms of ‘its taste for appropriating or redeeming otherness, for constituting non Western arts in its own image, for discovering universal, ahistorical “human” capacities.’3
Nevertheless, their insistence on an association between a Bosnian vernacular and
Ottoman architectural legacy provided an opportunity, albeit temporarily under the socialist government, for that legacy to occupy a space within the broader architectural discourses of Yugoslavia.
Contribution: changing formations of identity
This thesis broadens the understanding of Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s work beyond mere appreciation of their formal expression and the modernist agenda. It demonstrates that, more significantly, the success and acceptance of their ideas lay in their capacity to integrate the political into their architectural agenda. By positioning Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s work as a model of culture within a political framework, this thesis emphasises the importance of ideological underpinnings to artistic creation in post–World War Two Yugoslav. As stated in the Introduction of this thesis, both Lampe and Wachtel consider the power of cultural models as
2 For further discussion of use of primitive art in the developing modernist agenda see J. Clifford, ‘Histories of the tribal and the modern’, in K. Pinder (ed.), Race ing Art History, Critical Readings in Race and Art History, Routledge, New York, 2002, pp. 217–31. 3 J. Clifford, ‘Histories of the tribal and the modern’, p. 219.
259 Chapter 7
central to the construction and deconstruction of dominant political models in
Yugoslavia.4 Indeed, Wachtel argues that the ultimate failure of the Yugoslav state was caused by ‘the failure of the idea of a Yugoslav nation to bind the South Slavs into a viable nation and state’.5 Further, ‘the collapse of multinational Yugoslavia’ and the nationalist attempts to establish separate ‘uninational states’, he reasons, cannot be found in political and economic collapse, but in ‘the gradual destruction of the concept of the Yugoslav nation’.6 This thesis sees Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity as an attempt, through architectural and urban vision, to present Bosnian cultural identity as an addition to Yugoslav aspirations, not an aberration of them.
The discussion extends upon post 1992–96 scholarly efforts, such as those presented by Buturovi . In addition to her study of Dizdar’s poetry, which identified
Bosnia’s pluralistic identity as an alternative to nationalist divisions, Buturovi ’s analysis of the well known novel Dervish and Death reveals the complex transformations of Islamic identity in the years of the socialist Yugoslav government.7 It demonstrates that despite the problems embedded in Bosnia’s lack of a unified national identity, historically ‘the sentiments of group belonging in
4 Lampe, Yugoslavia as History, Twice There Was a Country; and Wachtel, Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation. 5 Wachtel, Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation, p. 5. 6 Wachtel, Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation, p. 5. 7 Buturovi , ‘National quest and the anguish of salvation: Bosnian Muslim identity in Meša Selimovi ’s Dervish and Death’; Buturovi , Stone Speaker; and Buturovi , ‘Producing and annihilating the ethos of Bosnian Islam’.
260 Chapter 7
Bosnia Hercegovina have neither been rigid nor inflammatory as their war image suggested’.8
Operating in the same moment of Yugoslav socialism as the writers Buturovi investigated, Grabrijan and Neidhardt explored the embedded tensions between cultural practices and institutional demands in Bosnia. Their model of Bosnian
Oriental, I have argued, offered to provide a vision of culture based on a collective and secular Bosnia, not on individual ethnic groups. By their own admission and by the perception of others, they were modern architects whose interest was not in creating national but international modern architecture. But nevertheless their work presented a powerful vehicle for the search for selfhood in the Bosnian past, present and future. By contextualising their contribution to the growing discourse on modern architecture, I have in this thesis shown the significant role architecture plays in constructing national identity. Like other cultural producers, Grabrijan and
Neidhardt considered local historical conditions in terms of their potential to define a unique place for Bosnia within the larger whole of Yugoslavia.
Underpinning Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s contribution and significance to narrative making of Yugoslav identities were the political and social contexts of their times. I have in particular explored the relationship between their writings and the specific national debates that surrounded the development of the Bosnian community in
Yugoslavia. While Grabrijan and Neidhardt’s vision of Bosnian Oriental included
8 Buturovi , Stone Speaker, p. 6.
261 Chapter 7
aspects of identity that Hall has argued are ‘partially constructed in fantasy’, its content was constructed ‘within [the] discursive, material and political effectivity’ of the context in which the two architects operated.9 In a process bringing about a
‘disturbing recognition of the internalised nature’ of identity creation and its
‘relation to the Other’, Grabrijan and Neidhardt demonstrated the importance and limitations of identity, and the presence of what is not ‘natural but a constructed form(s) of enclosure’.10
Against that background, the changing notions of the Other and the ideologies upon which they were established confirm Hall’s views of identity as constructed ‘within the play of power and exclusion’.11 This study has demonstrated that understanding the built fabric’s ideological and symbolic role is contingent upon the specific context within which it is formulated and its meanings are negotiated. Furthermore, the Bosnian and Yugoslav identities that emerged during 1992–96 war confirm the importance of the temporal aspects of identity construction.
Contemporary and future relevance: war destruction and the meanings of architecture
The 1992–96 destruction of built fabric
Viable future research would relate the conclusions drawn in this thesis to discussions that have emerged following the 1992–96 war in former Yugoslavia. A large number of historians, independent writers and prominent thinkers in the
9 Hall, ‘Who needs “identity”?’, p. 4. 10 Hall, ‘Who needs “identity”?’, p. 4. 11 Hall, ‘Who needs “identity”?’, p. 5.
262 Chapter 7
international justice system have shown a conscious ‘link between the systematic persecution and expulsion of ethnic and religious communities and the destruction of the cultural and religious heritage associated with the targeted community’.12 In that context, architecture’s association with a particular expression of national identity is undeniable. Despite Neidhardt’s attempts to separate the built fabric from an Ottoman political and social agenda, the buildings of Baš aršija and the
National Assembly buildings were among the first to be attacked during the recent war in Bosnia by the Serbian nationalist forces that surrounded the city. The
Parliament was attacked in July 1992, during the early days of the Bosnian war
[Figure 80].
12 A. J. Riedlmayer (principal investigator), Destruction of Cultural Heritage in Bosnia and Herzegovina, 1992–1996, A Post war Survey of Selected Municipalities, Cambridge, Mass., 2002, Expert report commissioned by the International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). Riedlmayer’s study of 392 cultural and religious sites in 19 municipalities in Bosnia presented evidence of widespread ethnic and communal violence resulting in a destruction of cultural and religious buildings of religious groups of former Yugoslavia. However, within Bosnia the Islamic heritage suffered the most. The findings show that out of the 227 Islamic mosques considered 92% were heavily damaged or destroyed. The same was true for other Islamic religious monuments such as turbes and tekkes. In its conclusion, the report states that, ‘the Bosnian Serb destruction of Islamic and Catholic cultural heritage sites was intentional and systematic’. In an attempt to formalise the procedures and position the destruction of cultural and religious heritage within the context of war crimes, the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The Hague included architectural historian Andras Riedlmayer’s report on the cultural destruction in Bosnia and Kosovo in the case against the former president Slobodan Miloševi , accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
263 Chapter 7
Figure 80: The Parliament of Bosnia and Hercegovina burns after being hit by tank fire during the siege in 1992. Source: Mikhail Evstafiev (photographer), Wikipedia.
Other buildings and structures also came under attack. The Association of Bosnian
Architects’ catalogue of urban destruction, published during the siege of Sarajevo in
1993, showed damage to all religious buildings within Baš aršija.13 While most, like
Gazi Husref Beg’s mosque and Baš aršija mosque, came under attack for their obvious connection with and value to specific ethnic groups, not all buildings attacked were marked by religious symbolism.
13 ‘Warchitecture’ ARCH, Magazine for Architecture, Town Planning and Design, special issue, no. 24, Sarajevo, June 1993, p. 9. The project was undertaken in association with other institutions and bodies, such as the Special Unit for Cultural Rescue of City Civil Defence, the architectural unit of the republican headquarters for Protection of Cultural Heritage, the Commission for Cultural Heritage Rescue and City Assembly. The subsequent exhibitions that travelled to numerous European and US cities – presented under slogans such as ‘In circumstances of general destruction’, ‘Genocide and urbicide’, ‘Where life is reduced to elementary needs’, ‘Architects maintain their creative energy’ and ‘The spirit of the city’ – passionately promoted the role of architects in the construction and protection of the city.
264 Chapter 7
Among the most significant structure of collective value to be attacked was the building that housed Bosnian National and University Library (former Town Hall).14
In August 1992 it was shelled with incendiary grenades until its collection was destroyed and the building almost completely burnt down. The library contained a collection of three million items, including 155,000 rare books and manuscripts, maps, the national archives, and copies of newspapers, periodicals and books published in Bosnia. It included one million volumes in the languages of the various cultures that have influenced Bosnia.15 Some 90% of the library collection went up in flames in what Riedlmayer described as the ‘largest single act of book burning in modern history’.16 As well as attracting significant international attention, the destruction of the city library had a devastating impact on the people of the besieged city.
Among trajectories to be further explored are the political forces that frame the rebuilding process of war damaged structures such as the National and University
Library. Soon after the attack, the rebuilding of the Town Hall appeared to be a question of national pride of post 1996 Bosnia; its speedy and full reinstatement was symbolic of the nation’s recovery. Internal enthusiasm for the reconstruction of the building, as well as the library collection, was enhanced by the support of international organisations such as UNESCO and the World Bank. UNESCO Director 14 For further discussion of the Town Hall’s destruction and rebuilding see D. Ali , ‘Ascribing significance to sites of memory, Sarajevo’s Town Hall’, in P. Somma (ed.), At War With the City, Urban International Press, Gateshead, 2004, pp. 65–86. 15 B. Bollag, ‘Rebuilding Bosnian architecture’, The Chronicle of Higher Education, 13 January 1995, pp. A35–A37; Riedlmayer, ‘Erasing the past: the destruction of libraries and archives in Bosnia and Herzegovina’, Middle East Studies Association Bulletin, vol. 29, no. 1, July 1995, pp. 7–11. 16 A. Riedlmayer, ‘Killing memory: the targeting of libraries and archives in Bosnia Herzegovina’, Newsletter of the Middle East Libraries Association, no. 61 (Mela Notes), Fall 1994, p. 1.
265 Chapter 7
General Mr Federico Mayor, in his appeal for the reconstruction of the library, called ‘on all States, international governmental and non governmental organizations, public and private institutions … to participate through voluntary contributions – in the form of funds equipment or services – in the reconstruction of the National and University Library in Sarajevo and in the reconstruction of its collections’.17
The significance of the library in the intellectual and physical context of Sarajevo seemed to have secured the Town Hall’s place in the city reconstruction over subsequent years (1996–2000). However, many other public buildings were restored while the Town Hall was only made structurally stable and protected from the weather. The expense of rebuilding, a lack of clarity about legal ownership and uncertainties about the future use of the Town Hall were all factors that contributed to the delay.18
17 Appeal by Federico Mayor, Director General of UNESCO for reconstruction of the National and University Library of Bosnia and Herzegovina in Sarajevo, Paris, 13 April 1994. 18 The proposals for the new use of the Town Hall varied significantly – retaining the building’s previous use as the National and University Library; the Town Hall; a museum and library for rare book collections; a ‘Monument of Inter ethnic Peace in the World’ etc. UNESCO report, Libraries, UNESCO’s assistance to the National and University Library of Bosnia and Herzegovina, May 1998, www.unesco.org.
266 Chapter 7
Figure 81: Rubble in Vije nica, former Town Hall and National and University Library building. Source: D. Ali . In assessing the cultural significance of buildings demolished, officials from the
World Bank and UNESCO searched for identifiable links between the local community and the symbolic values of the monuments.19 It is in this regard that
Marian Wenzel, Director of the Bosnia Herzegovina Heritage Rescue stated,
‘Vije nica lost because it couldn’t be aligned with either the Muslim nationalist SDA party or with Islam itself’.20 Unlike the colonial government of Austro Hungarians and the socialist government of Yugoslavia, the new powers did not perceive the relationship between the ‘pseudo Moorish’ style and the communities involved in the political negotiation for Bosnia’s future. Without clear links to local ethnic or religious groups, international organisations lost interest in the Town Hall and shifted their support to projects less controversial in their meanings and more 19 E. Barry, ‘All the sympathy in the world hasn’t rebuilt the Sarajevo Library’, Metropolis, June 1999. 20 Barry, ‘All the sympathy in the world hasn’t rebuilt the Sarajevo Library’.
267 Chapter 7
predictable in their financial return. In the absence of a stable political context within which the buildings’ aesthetics could gain significance, the symbolic value of the Town Hall and other structures of Baš aršija were questioned. Further investigations into the historical, political and broader cultural formations that frame the identity formation will reveal the shifting terrains upon which they are formulated. An exploration of emerging identities and their transformation in writing and architecture provide the potential for future research. While this thesis has added to ongoing debate, the complexities of the issues involved open opportunities for future research.
268
Bibliography
Books and articles
‘Expert Testifies to Systematic Destruction of Cultural Monuments’, Coalition For International Justice, International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia (ICTY), Miloševi Trial, The Hague, Court Room One, Day 213, 08 July 2003.
‘The Academy of Science and Arts of Bosnia and Hercegovina marking the centenary of the birth of the academic Juraj Neidhardt’, catalogue, The Academy of Science and Arts of Bosnia and Hercegovina and the Architectural Faculty of Sarajevo University, Sarajevo, 2001.
‘Warchitecture’ ARCH, Special issue, Magazine for Architecture, Town Planning and Design, no. 24, Sarajevo, June 1993.
‘Warchitecture’, Sarajevo Urbicide, Association of Architects DAS SABIH, exhibition catalogue, Sarajevo, June 1993
Abu Lughod, J., ‘The Islamic city historic myth, Islamic essence, and contemporary relevance’, International Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 19 Cambridge University Press, USA, 1987, pp. 155 176.
Ademovi , F., Baš aršija I Njena Zaštita, Hronika aktivnosti Fonda na revitalizaciji starog gradskog jezgra of 1893 do 1990 godine (The Heritage Protections of Baš aršija, Documentation of the Institute for Protection and Revitalisation of Old Urban Precinct from 1893 to 1990), Fond za Zaštitu Baš aršije – Izvršni Odbor, Sarajevo 1991.
Ali , D., ‘The role of rational and scientific arguments in the promotion of ideology through architecture’, in F. G. Leman, A. J. Ostwald, A. Williams (eds.) Innovation, Inspiration and Instruction: New Knowledge in Architectural Sciences, Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Conference on the Australian and New Zealand Architectural Science Association (ANZASca), Newcastle, Australia, 26 28 November 2008, pp. 161 168.
Ali , D. & Bertram, C., ‘Sarajevo: a moving target’, Centropa, Journal of Central European Architecture and Related Arts, vol. 2, no. 3, September 2002, pp. 164 176.
Ali D. & Gusheh M., ‘Reconciling competing national narratives in Socialist Bosnia and Herzegovina: The Baš aršija Project (1948 53)’, JSAH, Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, vol. 58, no. 1, March, 1999, pp. 164 176.
Bibliography
Ali , D., ‘Grabrijan, Riegl and the problem of Style’, Progress, The Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Conference of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand, Sydney, 2 5 October, 2003, pp. 1 5. Ali , D., ‘Ascribing significance to sites of memory, the Sarajevo’s town hall’, in P. Somma (ed.), At War with the City, Urban International Press, Gateshead, 2004, pp. 65–86.
Ali , D., ‘Marindvor precinct and the design of the socialist Modernism’, in Contested Terrains, edited by Terrance Mc Minn, Dr John Stephens, Steve Basson, The Proceedings of the Twenty third Annual Conference of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand, Notre Dame University, Fremantle, Western Australia, 29 September 2 October 2006, pp. 9 14.
Ali , D., 'From Ottoman house to Bosnian style: Neidhardt’s design for workers’ housing in Bosnia and Herzegovina (1939 to 1942)”, InSite, An electronic journal published by Graduate Students at the Faculty of the Built Environment, no. 1, March 1999.
Ali , D., ‘Changing perspectives of architectural vernacular: Grabrijan and Sarajevo’, in R. Blythe, R. Spence (eds.) Thresholds. Papers of the Sixteenth Annual Conference of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand, Launceston, September 1999, pp. 1 7.
Ali , D., ‘Sarajevo and the making of monuments (1945 1992)’, in M. Ghandour, M. Labban, M. Lozanovska (eds.), Sites of Recovery, The Fourth 'Other Connections' Conference, Beirut, Lebanon, October, 1999, pp. 11 18.
AlSayyad, N., (ed.) Forms of Dominance, on the Architecture and Urbanism of the Colonial Enterprise, Avebury, Aldershot, England, 1992.
An eli , P., ‘Zaštita spomenika kulture I Narodno Odbori’, Naše Starine, no. 3, Sarajevo, 1956.
Anderson, B., Imagined Communities, Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, Verso, London, New York, 1992.
Andri , I. (trans. Lenore Grenoble), A Letter from 1920, Forest Books, London & Boston, Dereta, Belgrade, 1992.
Ballantyne, A., ‘Space, grace and stylistic conformity: Spatromische, Kunstindustrie, and Architecture’, in R. Woodfield (ed.), Framing Formalism: Riegl’s work, essays, G+B Arts International, 2001.
Banac, I. & Verdery, K. (eds.), National Character and National Ideology in Interwar Eastern Europe, Yale Center for International and Area Studies, New Haven, 1995.
270 Bibliography
Banac, I., The National Question in Yugoslavia, Origins, History, Politics, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1984.
Barry, E., ‘All the sympathy in the world hasn’t rebuilt the Sarajevo Library’, Metropolis, June 1999. Bejti , A., Stara Sarajevska aršija ju er, danas i sutra, Osnove I Smjernice za Regenaraciju, (Old Town of Sarajevo, Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow, a Development Proposal), Gradski Zavod za Zaštitu i Uredjenje Spomenika Kulture, Sarajevo, 1969.
Bejti , A., Ulice i Trgovi Sarajeva, (Streets and Squares of Sarajevo), Muzej Grada Sarajeva, Sarajevo, 1973.
Bertram, C., ‘Ottoman Sarajevo, the urban history of Sarajevo in the Ottoman period and into the period of the dual monarchy’, unpublished article.
Bertram, C., ‘The Turkish house, an effort of memory’, PhD thesis, University of California, Los Angeles, 1998.
Besarovi , R., (ed.), Kultura i Umjetnost u Bosni i Hercegovini Pod Austrougarskom Upravom, (Culture and Art in Bosnia and Hercegovina Under Austro Hungarian Government), Arhiv Grada, Sarajevo, 1968.
Besarovi , R., Iz Kulturne Prošlosti Bosne i Hercegovine (1878 1919), (Cultural History of Bosnia and Hercegovina, 1878 1919), Veselin Masleša, Sarajevo, 1987.
Besarovi , R., Iz Kulturnog Života u Sarajevu Pod Austrougarskom Upravom, (Inserts from Cultural Life of Sarajevo Under the Austro–Hungarian Administration), Veselin Masleša, Sarajevo, 1974.
Bevan, R., The Destruction of Memory, Architecture at War, Reaktion Books, London, 2006.
Blau, E & Platzer, M. (eds.), Shaping the Great City, Modern Architecture in Central Europe, 1890 1937, Prestel, Munich, 1999.
Bollag, B., ‘Rebuilding Bosnian architecture’, The Chronicle of Higher Education, 13 January, 1995, pp. A35 A37. Bozdogan S. & Kasaba R. (eds.), Modernism and Nation Building: Turkish Architectural Culture in the Early Republic, Studies in Modernity and National Identity, University of Washington Press, Washington, 2001.
Bozdogan, S., ‘Architecture Modernism and nation building in Kemalist Turkey’, New Perspectives on Turkey 10, spring, 1994.
271 Bibliography
Bozdogan, S., ‘Journey to the East: ways of looking at the Orient and the question of representation’, Journal of Architectural Education, vol. 41, no. 4, summer 1988, pp. 38–45.
Bozdogan, S., ‘More on Le Corbusier’s Orientalism’, Journal of Architectural Education, vol. 43, no. 1, fall 1989, p. 63.
Bozdogan, S., ‘Sedad Hakki Eldem of Turkey’, Mimar, 24, June 1987.
Bozdogan, S., Modernism and Nation Building: Turkish Architectural Culture in the Early Republic, University of Washington Press, Washington, 2001.
Brown, C. L. (ed.), Imperial Legacy, The Ottoman Imprint on the Balkans and the Middle East, Columbia University Press, New York, 1996.
Burkhardt F., Eveno C., Podreca B., Jože Ple nik Architect: 1872 – 1957, The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1989.
Burks, R. V. ‘Nationalism and Communism in Yugoslavia: an attempt at synthesis’, in H. Birnbaum & S. J. Vryonis (eds.), Aspects of the Balkans, Continuity and Change, The Hague, 1972.
Buturovi , A. (trans. by F. R. Jones), Stone Speaker, Medieval Tombs, Landscape, and Bosnian Identity in the Poetry of Mak Dizdar, Palgrave, New York, 2002.
Buturovi , A., ‘National quest and the anguish of salvation: Bosnian Muslim identity in Meša Selimovi ’s Dervish and Death’, Edebiyat 7, vol.1, York University Spring, Toronto, 1996.
Buturovi , A., ‘National quest and the anguish of salvation: Bosnian Muslim identity in ‘Meša Selimovi ’s Dervish and Death”’, Edebiyat, 7, York University, Toronto, spring 1996. Buturovi , A., ‘Producing and annihilating the ethos of Bosnian Islam’, Cultural Survival Quarterly, summer 1995, pp. 29 33. ankovi , M., (ed.), Sarajevo u Socijalisti koj Jugoslaviji od Oslobodjenja do Samoupravljanja, 1945 1950, (Sarajevo in Socialist Yugoslavia, from Liberation War to the Self governance, 1945 1950), Istorijski Arhiv Sarajevo, Volume I, Sarajevo, 1988.
ankovi , M., (ed.), Sarajevo u Socijalisti koj Jugoslaviji od Oslobodjenja do Samoupravljanja, 1950 1963. (Sarajevo in Socialist Yugoslavia, from Liberation War to Self governance, 1950 1963), Istorijski Arhiv Sarajevo, Volume II, Sarajevo, 1988.
272 Bibliography
Castillo, G. A., ‘Constructing the Cold War, architecture, urbanism and the cultural division of Germany, 1945 1957’, PhD thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 2000.
Castillo, G., ‘Socialist realism and built nationalism in the Cold War “Battle of the Styles”’, Centropa, A Journal of Central European Architecture and Related Arts, vol. 1, no. 2, 2001.
eli , Dž., Grabrijan i Sarajevo, Izabrani lanci 1963 42. (Grabrijan and Sarajevo, Selected Articles 1963 42), Prilozi za istraživanje istorije Sarajeva, Godina III, Knjiga III, Muzej Grada Sarajeva, Svjetlost, Sarajevo, 1970.
Çelik, Z., ‘Le Corbusier, Orientalism, Colonialism’, Assemblage 17, December 1992, pp. 59 77.
Çelik, Z., Displaying the Orient, Architecture of Islam at Nineteenth Century World’s Fairs, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1992.
Çelik, Z., The Remaking of Istanbul, Portrait of an Ottoman City in the Nineteenth Century, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1986.
Çelik, Z., Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations, Algiers under French Rule, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1997.
ernjavski, Z. (curator), Vodi kroz Svrzinu ku u (Guide through Svrzo’s House), Muzej Grada Sarajeva, Sarajevo , 1976.
Ciucci, G., ‘The Invention of the Modern Movement’, Oppositions, Vol. 24, Rizzoli, New York, 1981.
Cohen , J. L., (trans. by S. Sartarelli), ‘Le Corbusier and the mystique of the U.S.S.R.’, Oppositions, no. 23, winter 1981, pp. 84 121.
Cohen, J. L., Le Corbusier and the Mystique of the USSR, Theories and projects for Moscow 1928 1936, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1992.
Colomina, B. (ed.), Architectureproduction, Princeton Architectural Press, New York, 1988.
Dal Co, F., Figures of Architecture and Thought, German Architecture Culture 1880 1920, Rizzoli, New York, 1990.
Dimitrijevi , B., ‘Prilozi o zaštiti graditeljskog nasljedja u Bosni I Hercegovini I valorizaciji Baš aršija u Sarajevu u Austro Ugarskom periodu (1878 1918)’, (A contribution to the protection of historic fabric of Bosnia and Hercegovina and Baš aršija under the Austro Hungarian government), Sarajevo, September, 1988, unpublished paper presented at a conference on the development of Baš aršija), Sarajevo 1988.
273 Bibliography
Djilas, A., The Contested Country, Yugoslav Unity and Communist Revolution 1919–1953, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Ma., 1996.
Djuri D. & Šuvakovi M. (eds.), Impossible Histories, Historical Avant gardes, Neo avant gardes, and Post avant gardes in Yugoslavia, 1918 1991, The MIT Press, Cambridge, 2003.
Donia, R. & Fine, J., Bosnia and Hercegovina a Tradition Betrayed, Hurst and Company, London, 1994.
Dreyfus, L., H & Rabinow, P., Michael Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics, (second edition, with an Afterword by and an Interview with Michael Foucault), The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1983.
umruk i , M., ‘Izrada Generalnog Urbanistickog Plana’, in M. ankovi , Sarajevo u Socijalistickoj Jugoslaviji od Oslobodjenja do Samoupravljanja, 1950–1963, vol. 2, pp. 387–559. Ernesto L., ‘Universalism, Particularism and the Question of Identity’, in Rajchman J. (ed.), The Identity in Question, Routledge, New York, 1995.
Etlin, R. A., ‘Le Corbusier, Choisy, and French Hellenism: the search for a new architecture’, Art Bulletin, 69, no. 2, 1987, pp. 264 278.
Forty, A., Words and Buildings, A Vocabulary of Modern Architecture, Thames & Hudson, London, 2004.
Foucault, M. (trans. by Alan Sheridan), Discipline and Punish: the Birth of the Prison, Penguin, Harmondsworth, England, 1979.
Foucault, M., (trans. by A.M. Sheridan Smith), The Archaeology of Knowledge, Routledge, London, 1989, c1972.
Galison, P. & Thompson, E. (eds), The Architecture of Science, MIT Press, Cambridge, Ma., 1999. Gazihusrevbeg’s vakuf (comp.), Spomenica Gazi Husrevbegove etiristo Godišnjice, (Four Hundred Years of Gazihusrevbeg’s Vakuf), Sarajevo, 1932. Golomstock, I., Totalitarian Art in the Soviet Union, the Third Reich, Fascist Italy and the People’s Republic of China, Icon Edition, Great Britain, 1990.
Gombrich, E.H., The Sense of Order, A Study in the Psychology of Decorative Art, Cornell University Press, 1980.
Grabrijan, D. & Neidhardt, J., ‘Sarajevo i njegovi trabanti’, Arhitektonsko urbanisti ka razmatranja uo i nacrta za regulacije grada Sarajeva’ (Sarajevo and Its Satellites, architectural and urban debates presented as a contribution
274 Bibliography
towards the development of the regulation plan of Sarajevo), Tehni ki Vjesnik, br. 7 9, Zagreb, 1942.
Grabrijan, D. & Neidhardt, J., Arhitektura Bosne i Put u Suvremeno (Architecture of Bosnia and the Way Towards Modernity), Ljudska Pravica, Ljubljana, 1957.
Grabrijan, D., Ple nik in Njegova Šola (Ple nik and His School), Založba Obzorja, Maribor, 1968.
Grabrijan, D., The Bosnian Oriental Architecture in Sarajevo, with Special Reference to the Contemporary One, Dopisna Delavska Univerza, Univerzum, Ljubljana, Slovenia, 1983.
Hadjijahi , M., Od Tradicije do Identiteta, Geneza nacionalnog pitanja bosanskih Muslimana, (From Tradition to Identity, The Genesis of the National question of Bosnian Muslims), Svjetlost, Sarajevo, 1974.
Hall, B., Life and Letters, ‘Rebecca West’s War’, The New Yorker, 15 April, 1996.
Hall, S. ‘Who needs 'identity'? in Hall, S & Du Gay, P. (eds.), Questions of Cultural Identity, London, Sage, 1996.
Handži , A., Population of Bosnia in the Ottoman Period, A Historical Overview, Research Centre for Islamic History, Art and Culture (IRCICA), Istanbul, 1994.
Handži , A., Studije o Bosni, historijski prilozi iz osmansko turskog period, (A Study of Bosnia During the Ottoman Turkish Period), Research Centre for Islamic History, Art and Culture (IRCICA), Istanbul, 1994.
Hays, K. M., ‘Diagramming the New World, or Hannes Meyer’s “Scientization” of Architecture’, in Galison, P. & Thompson E. (eds.), The Architecture of Science, The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1999, pp. 233 252.
Hirst, P. Space and Power, Politics, War and Architecture, Polity, Cambridge, 2005.
Hobsbawm, E. & Ranger, T. (eds.). The Invention of Tradition (1983), Cambridge University Press, Canto edition 1992.
Holzhausen, A. (ed.), La Bosnie Hercegovine, a L’Exposition Internationale Universelle de 1900 a Paris, Exhibition Catalogue, Vienne, 1900.
Howarth, D. & Torfing, J. (eds.), Discourse Theory in European Politics, Identity, Policy and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, 2005.
Hozi A., Begi , A., Krzovi I., Radi M. (eds.) Umjetnost Bosne I Hercegovine 1894 1923 (Art of Bosnia and Herzegovina 1894 1923), exhibition catalogue, Umjetni ka Galerija Bosne I Hercegovine, Sarajevo, 1978.
275 Bibliography
Imamovi E., ‘Mercator is badly positioned’, in Bosanskohercegova ki DANI, Independent news magazine, special edition on urbanism URBICID, June 2003.
Ingersoll, R., ‘Letter to the editor’, Journal of Architectural Education, vol. 42, no. 4, 1989, p. 61
Ingerson, C., ‘Architecture and the scene of evidence’, in Building, Dwelling, Drifting, Migrancy and the limits of architecture, 3rd Other Connections Conference, University of Melbourne, June, 1997, pp. 143 149. Isakovi , A., O ‘Nacionaliziranju’ Muslimana, 101 Godina Afirmiranja i Negiranja Nacionalnog Identiteta Muslimana (‘Nationalisation’ of Muslims, 101 Years of Affirmation and Negation of Muslim National Identity), Globus, Zagreb, 1990.
Iversen, M., Alois Riegl: Art History and Theory, The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1993.
Kapetanovi , J., ‘Stvaralaštvo Arhitekte Juraja Najdhardta’ (The architectural work of Juraj Neidhardt), PhD thesis, University of Sarajevo, 1988.
Karahasan, D., Sarajevo, Exodus of a City, Kodansha International, New York, 1994. Kar i , F., ‘Medjunarodnopravno regulisanje Vakufskih pitanja u Jugoslovenskim zemljama’, Anali, Gazi Husref Begove Biblioteke, Knjiga IX X, pp. 141 153.
Karli Kapetanovi , J., Juraj Najdhart, Život i Djelo (Juraj Neidhardt, Life and Work), Veselin Masleša, Sarajevo 1990.
Koštovi , N., Sarajevo, Izmedju Dobrotvorstva i Zla (Sarajevo Between the Charitable and Evil), El Kalem and Merhamet, Sarajevo, 1995.
Kralja i , T., Kalajev Režim u Bosni i Hercegovini 1882 1903 (Kallay’s Governance of Bosnia and Hercegovina’, Veselin Masleša, Sarajevo, 1987.
Kre i , P., Ple nik, The Complete Works, Academy Editions, Ernst & Sons, London, 1993.
Kreševljakovi , H., Esnafi i Obrti u Starom Sarajevu (Esnaf and Crafts of the Old Sarajevo), Narodna Prosvjeta, Sarajevo, 1958.
Kreševljakovi , H., Sarajevo za Vrijeme Austrougarske Uprave (1878 1918) (Sarajevo During the Austro Hungarian Government), Izdanje Arhiva Grada Sarajeva, Sarajevo 1969.
Kruševac, T., Sarajevo pod Austro Ugarskom upravom 1878 1918 (Sarajevo Under the Austro Hungarian Administration 1878 1918), Izdanje Muzeja Grada Sarajeva, Sarajevo, 1960.
276 Bibliography
Krzovi , I., Arhitektura Bosne i Hercegovine 1878 1918 (Architecture of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 1878 1918), Umjetni ka Galerija Sarajevo, February/ March, 1987.
Kurto, N., Arhitektura Bosne I Hercegovine, Razvoj Bosanskog Stila, (Architecture of Bosnia and Hercegovina and the Development of Bosnian Style), Medjunarodni Centar za Mir, Sarajevo, 1998.
Kurto, N., Arhitektura Secesije u Sarajevu (Secession Architecture of Sarajevo), PhD thesis, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, 1988.
Laclau, E. & Mouffe C., Hegemony & Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics, Verso, London, 1985.
Lampe, J., Yugoslavia as History, Twice There was a Country, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996.
Le Corbusier, (trans. by Edith Schreiber Aujame), Precisions On the Present State of Architecture and City Planning, The MIT Press Cambridge 1991. First published in 1930.
Le Corbusier, The City of To Morrow and Its Planning, Dover Publications Inc., New York, 1987.
Le Corbusier, The Decorative Art of Today, translated and introduced by Dunnett J. I., The Architectural Press, London, 1987.
Le Corbusier, The Radiant City, The Orion Press, New York, 1967. First published 1933.
Le Corbusier, Towards a New Architecture, Dover Publications, Inc. New York, 1986. First published in 1931.
Lefebvre, H., The Production of Space, Blackwell, London, 1991.
Lesnikowski, W. (ed.), East European Modernism, Architecture in Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Poland Between Wars, 1919 1939, Thames & Hudson, London, 1996, p. 10.
Lovrenovi , I., Bosnia: A Cultural History, New York University Press, New York, 2001.
Lowenthal, D., The Past is a Foreign Country, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985.
Malcolm, N., Bosnia A Short History, Macmillan, London, 1994.
Mamuzovi , I., ‘Croatian metallurgy, past, present and future’, Metalurgija, vol. 43, no. 1, 2004, pp. 3–12.
277 Bibliography
[http://public.carnet.hr/metalurg/Metalurgija/2004_vol_43/No_1/MET_43_1_0 03_012_Mamuzic.pdf]
Markovi , M. & Petrovi , G. (eds.), Praxis, Yugoslav Essays in the Philosophy and Methodology of the Social Sciences, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, D. Reidel Publishing Co., Holland, 1979. McKay, S., ‘Le Corbusier, negotiating modernity: representing Algiers, 1930 1942’, PhD thesis, University of British Columbia, 1994.
McLeod, M., ‘Le Corbusier and Algiers’, Oppositions, vol. 19, no. 20, winter/ spring 1980, pp. 53 85.
McLeod, M., ‘Urbanism and Utopia: Le Corbusier from regional syndicalism to Vichy’, PhD thesis, Princeton University, 1985.
Moravanszky, A., Competing Visions: Aesthetic Invention and Social Imagination in Central European Architecture, 1867 1918, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Ma.,1997.
Musabegovi , S., ‘War – the constitution of the totalitarian body’, PhD thesis, European University Institute, 2004.
Musabegovi , S., Rat Konstitucija Totalitarnog Tijela, Svjetlost, Sarajevo, 2008.
Morshed, A., ‘The Cultural Politics of Aerial Vision: Le Corbusier in Brazil (1929)’, Journal of Architectural Education, vol. 55, no. 4, May 2002, pp. 201 210.
Nalbantoglu ,B. G., ‘Between Civilization and Culture: appropriation of traditional dwelling forms in Early Republican Turkey’, JAE, vol. 47, no. 2, November 1993, pp. 66 74.
Neidhardt, J. & eli , D., ‘Rješenje Marindvora I Narodne Skupštine’, (A solution for Marindvor and the National Parliament), Naše Starine, no. 1, 1956. Neidhardt, J. & eli , D., ‘The old Mostar bridge’ (Stari most u Mostaru), Naše Starine, no. 1, 1953, pp. 133–40. Neidhardt, J. ‘Putevi nacionalne arhitekture’ (Paths to national architecture), Naši Dani, November 1954, p. 5. Neidhardt, J. ‘Rekreacija duha I tijela’, (Recreation of mind and body), Slovo Gor ina, 1974, pp. 25–34.
Neidhardt, J. ‘Smjena kultura’, (Transition of cultures), Slovo Gor ina, 1973, pp. 13–20.
278 Bibliography
Neidhardt, J., ‘Geography of architecture’, 1977, exhibition, brochure, Juraj Neidhardt (1901 1979) in Jelica Kapetanovi (curator), Umjetni ka Galerija Bosne i Hercegovine, Sarajevo, 31 October – 28 November 1989. Nora, P., (ed.), Realms of Memory: Rethinking the French Past, Columbia University Press, New York, 1996,1998.
Nora, P., ‘Between memory and history: Les Lieux de Memoire’ Representations, spring, no. 26, 1989, pp. 6 26.
Ockman, J. (ed.) Architecture, Criticism, Ideology, Princeton Architectural Press, Princeton, 1985.
Pacht, O., ‘Art historians and art critics – vi: Alois Riegl’, Burlington Magazine, 105, 1963, pp. 188 193.
Panofsky, E., (trans. Northcott, K. & Snyder, J.) ‘The concept of artistic volition’, Critical Inquiry 8, Autumn, 1981, pp. 17 33.
Passanti, F., ‘The vernacular, modernism, and Le Corbusier’, JSAH, Volume 56, Number 4, December 1997, pp. 452 477.
Pavlov, T., Teorija Odraza, Osnovna pitanja dijalekti ko materijalisti ke teorije saznanja (Theory of Reflection, The Dialectic and Materialist Grounding of Knowing), Kultura, 1947.
Pekovi , R., Ni Rat Ni Mir, Panorama književnih polemika 1945 1965 (Neither War nor Peace, [Yugoslav] Literary Debates of 1945 1965), Zavod za izdava ku delatnost ‘Filip Višnji ’, Beograd, 1986.
Pinder, K. (ed.), Race ing Art History, Critical readings in Race and Art History, Routledge, New York, 2002.
Pinson, M. (ed.) (with a foreword by Roy P. Mottahedeh), The Muslims of Bosnia Herzegovina, Their Historic Development from the Middle Ages to the Dissolution of Yugoslavia, Distributed For The Center For Middle Eastern Studies of Harvard University by Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Ma., 1994.
Prelovšek, D., Jože Ple nik 1872 1957, Architectura Perennis, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1997.
Prelovšek, D., Kopa , V., Žale by Architect Jože Ple nik, DELO, Ljubljana, 1992.
Premerl, T., Hrvatska Moderna Arhitektura Izmedju Dva Rata (Croatian Modern Architecture Between The Two World Wars), Nakladni Zavod Matice Hrvatske, Zagreb, 1989.
Rajchman, J. (ed.), The Identity in Question, Routledge, New York, 1995.
279 Bibliography
Raymond, A., The Great Arab Cities in the 16th 18th Centuries, An Introduction, New York University Press, New York, 1984.
Redži , H., Islamska Umjetnost, (Islamic Art of Yugoslavia), Jugoslavija/ Beograd, Spektar/ Zagreb, Prva Književna Komuna, Mostar, 1982.
Redži , H., Studije o Islamskoj Arhitektonskoj Baštini, (Studies of [Bosnian] Islamic cultural Heritage), Veselin Masleša, Sarajevo, 1983
Regulacion plan sanacije, konzervacije, restauracije I revitalizacije Sarajevske aršije, (Urban Regulation plan for the preservation, conservation, restoration and revitalisation of Sarajevo aršija), Skupština Grada Sarajeva, Sarajevo, 1975.
Riedlmayer, A. J., ‘Erasing the past: the destruction of libraries and archives in Bosnia and Herzegovina’; Middle East Studies Association Bulletin, vol. 29, No. 1, July, 1995, pp. 7 11. Riedlmayer, A., (principal investigator), Destruction of Cultural heritage in Bosnia Herzegovina, 1992 1996: A Post war Survey of Selected Municipalities, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, (government report), 2002.
Riedlmayer, A., ‘From the ashes: the past and future of Bosnia’s cultural heritage’, in Shatzmiller, M. (ed.), Islam and Bosnia, Conflict Resolution and Foreign Policy in Multi Ethnic States, McGill Queens University Press, Montreal, 2002.
Riedlmayer, A., ‘Killing memory: the targeting of libraries and archives in Bosnia Herzegovina’, Testimony presented at a hearing of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, US Government Printing Office, April, 1995, Washington, pp. 51 52. Riedlmayer, A., ‘Killing memory: the targeting of Libraries and Archives in Bosnia Herzegovina, Newsletter of the Middle East Libraries Association, no. 61 (Mela Notes), fall 1994, pp. 1 4.
Riedlmayer, A., ‘Libraries are not for burning’, International Librarianship and the Recovery of the Destroyed heritage of Bosnia and Hercegovina, 61st IFLA General Conference, Conference Proceeding, August 20 25, 1995.
Roš, S., Rusan, A., ‘Interview’ with Zlatko Ugljen, Oris, vol. 3, no. 12, 2001, pp. 4 31.
Rowe, P., Civic Realism, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Ma., 1997.
Said, E. W., Orientalism, Western Conceptions of the Orient, Penguin Books, London, 1978.
280 Bibliography
Schwarting, M. J., ‘Postscript’, in B. Colomina (ed.), Architectureproduction, Princeton Architectural Press, New York, 1988. Starr, S. F. (trans.), ‘Le Corbusier and the U.S.S.R.: New Documentation’, Oppositions, 23, winter 1981, pp. 122 137. Schwarzer, M., German Architectural Theory and the Search for Modern Identity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995.
Šegvi , N., ‘Stvarala ke komponente arhitekture FNRJ’ (The creative component of Yugoslav architecture), Urbanizam/ Arhitektura, nos. 5–6, 1950, pp. 5–40
Serdarevi , M., Pravna Zaštita Kulturno Historijskog Naslijedja BiH, Nastajanje, O uvanje, Destrukcija (Legislative Regulations for Cultural and Historic Heritage in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Origins, Protection, Destruction), Medjunarodni Centar za Mir, Sarajevo, 1997.
Šipovac, N., Kultura u Socijalisti koj Republici Bosni i Hercegovini (Culture of the Socialist Republic Bosnia and Hercegovina), NISP Oslobodjenje, Sarajevo, 1976.
Štraus, I., 15 Godina Bosanskohercegova ke Arhitekture (Fifteen Years of Bosnian & Herzegovinean Architecture), Svjetlost, Sarajevo, 1987.
Štraus, I., Arhitektura Jugoslavije, 1945 1990 (Yugoslav Architecture, 1945 1990), Svjetlost, Sarajevo, 1991.
Štraus, I., Nova Bosanskohercegova ka Arhitektura 1945 1975 (New Architecture of Bosnia and Hercegovina), Svjetlost, Sarajevo, 1977.
Tafro, D., ‘Iz istorije zaštite spomenika kulture u Bosni I Hercegovini do oslobodjenja 1945’, Naše Starine, III, Sarajevo 1956, pp. 5 12.
Teige, K., (Erich Dluhosch trans. and intro.), The Minimum Dwelling, The MIT Press, Cambridge, 2002.
Todorov, N., The Balkan City, 1400 1900, University of Washington Press, Seattle, 1983.
Todorova, M., ‘The Ottoman legacy in the Balkans’, in C. Brown (ed.), Imperial Legacy, The Ottoman Imprint on the Balkans and the Middle East, Columbia University Press, New York, 1996.
Todorova, M., Imagining the Balkans, Oxford University Press, New York, 1997.
Tralji , M., ‘Osvrt na Dosadašnju literarturu o Vakufima’ (Review of current literature on vakuf), Anali, Gazi Husref Begove Biblioteke, Knjiga IX X, 171 204.
UNESCO report, Libraries, UNESCO’s assistance to the National and University Library of Bosnia and Herzegovina, May 1998, [www.unesco.org]
281 Bibliography
Udovi ki Selb, D., ‘Le Corbusier and the Paris Exhibition of 1937, The Temps Nouveaux Pavilion’, Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, vol. 56, no. 1, March 1997, pp. 42 62 Vancaš, J., ‘Bosansko Narodno Graditeljstvo’ (Bosnian built heritage), Tehni ki List (Technical Journal), vol. 31, no. 24, December 1928, pp. 353–56. Vodi kroz Muzej grada Sarajevo (Guide Through the Museum of the City of Sarajevo), Muzej grada Sarajevo, Sarajevo, 1976. Vogt, A. M., Le Corbusier, The Noble Savage, Toward an Archaeology of Modernism, The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1998.
Wachtel B. A., Making a Nation, Breaking a Nation, Literature and Cultural Politics in Yugoslavia, Stanford University Press, Stanford, Ca., 1998.
West, R., Black Lamb and Grey Falcon, a Journey Through Yugoslavia, Penguin Books, New York, 1994. [First published in 1941, and re published in 1943, 1964, 1982 and 1994].
Wiebenson, D. & Sisa, J. (eds.) The Architecture of Historic Hungary, Cambridge, Mass., 1998.
Williams, R., Marxism and Literature, Oxford University Press, New York, 1977.
Williams, R., Problems in Materialism and Culture, Verso, London, 1980.
Žanki , I., (ed.), Le Corbusier (Charles Edouard Jeanneret), Journey To The East, The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1987.
Zerner, H., ‘Alois Riegl: Art, Value, and Historicism’, Daedalus, Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 105, winter, 1976, pp. 177 188.
Žižek, S. (an interview), ‘Everything provokes Fascism’, and Herscher, A., ‘Ple nik avec Laibach’, Assemblage 33, MIT, 1997, pp. 58 75.
Zlatar, B., Zlatno Doba Sarajevo, (Golden Age of Sarajevo), Svjetlost, Sarajevo, 1996.
Selected bibliography of Grabrijan’s publications:
For a list of Dušan Grabrijan’s articles see also: eli D. (ed.), Grabrijan i Sarajevo, Izabrani lanci 1936 42, Prilozi za Prou avanje Istorije Sarajeva, Muzej Grada Sarajeva, Godina III knjiga III, Sarajevo, 1970.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Jože Ple nik’, Jugoslavija, 29. 11. 1922.
282 Bibliography
Grabrijan, D., ‘Najamna zgrada u Sarajevu’ ([Rental] Dwellings in Sarajevo), Tehni ar, no. 6, Beograd, 1935.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Le Corbusier I Sarajevo uo i izložbe njegovog bivšeg asistenta arh. Juraja Neidhardta’ (Le Corbusier and Sarajevo discussion in relating to the forthcoming exhibition of Le Corbusier’s assistant Juraj Neidhardta), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 31. 10. 1936.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Muslimanska groblja’, (Muslim graveyards), Jugoslovenski list, Sarajevo, 14. 6. 1936; and Novi Behar, no. 5 6, Sarajevo, 1937.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Porodi na mala ku a’ (Small family home), Tehni ar, no. 7, Beograd, April 1936.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Povodom predstoje e izložbe arh. Juraja Neidhardta, koju priredjuje ‘Cvijeta Zuzori ’’ (Contemplation on the forthcoming exhibition of Juraj Neidhardta, at ‘Cvijeta Zuzori ’ gallery), Jugoslovenska Pošta, Sarajevo, October, 1936.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Sarajevo se izgradjuje Nekoliko polemi kih misli o urbanizaciji Sarajeva’ (Thoughts and comments on the development of Sarajevo), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 11. 4. 1936.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Željezni ki problem, O astronomskim sumama’, (A problem of the [Sarajevo] railway station, about exuberant prices), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 24. 6. 1936.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Sarajevski željezni ki problem, konkretni predlog’ (The problem of Sarajevo railway station, a proposal), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 1. 7, 1936.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Arhitekt Juraj Neidhardt, prilikom predstoje e izložbe njegovih radova pod pokroviteljstvom ‘Cvijete Zuzori ’’ (Architect Juraj Neidhardt, Discussion in relating to forthcoming exhibition of Juraj Neidhardta, at ‘Cvijeta Zuzori ’ gallery), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 18. 10. 1936
Grabrijan, D., ‘Izložba arh. Juraja Neidhardta, tuma izložbenih radova’ (The guide to Juraj Neidhardt’s exhibition), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 7. 11. 1936
Grabrijan, D., ‘Kosta Strajni (uo i njegovog predavanja o Meštrovi u)’ (Kosta Strajni in relation to his discussion of Meštrovi ), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 25. 11. 1936.
Grabrijan, D., ‘SLOVA (misli i uputi)’ (Letters, thought and ideas) Tehni ar, Beograd, November/December 1936.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Weekend ku e (drvene konstrukcije)’ (Weekend houses, timer construction), Tehni ar, Beograd, 1937.
283 Bibliography
Grabrijan, D., ‘Osvrt na arhitektonsku izložbu Juraja Neidhardta na Tehni kom fakultetu u Zagrebu (A review of architectural exhibition of Juraj Neidhardt at Technical Faculty in Zagreb), Gradjevinski Vjesnik, no. 1, Zagreb, January 1937.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Gradjevna ideja GI’ (The design idea, DI), Gradjevinski Vjesnik, no. 1, Zagreb, January 1937.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Arhitektonski problemi modernog teatra, Orijentacija prilikom Sarajevske adaptacije’ (Architectural problems of modern theatre, a case study of Sarajevo theatre), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 6. 1. 1937.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Proljetna Izložba ‘Cvijeta Zuzori ’ Orijentacija jednog arhitekta’ (Spring exhibition at ‘Cvijeta Zuzori ’, discussion of one architect), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 9. 5. 1937.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Turska ku a Osnove i porijeklo’ (Turkish houses, the origins), Novi Behar, Sarajevo, 15. 7. 1937.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Prijedlog za regulaciju Jela i evog trga”’ (A proposal for the regulation of Jela i square), Gra evinski Vijesnik, no. 9, Zagreb, 1937.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Natjecaj za regulaciju Novog Sada’, (The competition of urban regulation of city of New Sada) Gra evinski Vijesnik, no. 10, Zagreb, October, 1937.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Muslimanska groblja’ (Muslim graveyards), Novi Behar, nos. 5 6, Sarajevo, 1937 38.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Otvorenje izlozbe ‘Kruga’ Ing. Arh. Grabrijan o razvoju slikarstva u Sarajevu’ (The opening of the exhibition ‘Circle’, arch engineers Grabrijan’s review of the development of art painting in Sarajevo), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 26.10. 1937.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Le Corbusier propovijeda kako je ako 18 godisnji mladic gradio prvu kucu svojim roditeljima na Ženevskom jezeru’ (Le Corbusier story about his first building, his parents home on Geneva lake), Tehni ar, no. 2, Beograd, November 1937.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Radni ka ku a akutan problem Sarajeva primjena principa stare islamske arhitekture na modernu’ (Workers housing, an acute problem of Sarajevo – application of the principles of Islamic architecture in modern architecture), Novi Behar, nos. 13 16, Sarajevo, February 1938.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Trg I spomenik kralja Petra I Pompeji Salzburg Sv. Petar Rim Corbusier’ (Square and monument to King Peter, Pompei Salzburg, St Peter Rome Le Corbusier), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 20. 2. 1938.
284 Bibliography
Grabrijan, D., ‘Trg kralja Petra i novo pozoriste u Sarajevu’ (St Peter’s square and new theatre in Sarajevo), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 19 April 1938.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Osvrt na izložbu radova (iz natjecaja za spomenik kralja Petra u Sarajevu’ (Review of exhibition of the entries for the competition for the monument to King Peter in Sarajevo), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 28/ 29. 6. 1938.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Spomenik kralju Aleksandru u Ljubljani’ (Monument to the King Alexander in Ljubljana), Slovenec, Ljubljana, 9 August 1938.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Podaci o projektovanju sokolskih domova”, (Review of the design of sports halls), Tehni ar , Beograd, March/ April/ May, 1938.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Regulacija Banje Ilidze od arhitekta Neidhardta’ (Regulation of Ilidža baths by architect Neidhardt), Gra evinski Vijesnik, no. 8.Zagreb, 1938.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Za skeletnu, aprotiv masivne konstrukcije (slobodno po Le Corbusieru: Les precisions)’ (For skeletal and against masonry construction, an interpretation of Le Corbusier’s les Precisions), Tehni ar, no.1, Beograd, Oktobar 1938.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Kultura teferi a (osvrt na bosansko islamsku arhitekturu)’ ( The kultura of teferi , a view of Bosnian Islamic architecture), Jugoslovenki List, Sarajevo, 8. 7. 1939.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Skloništa protiv napada iz vazduha’ (Anti air raid shelters), Jugoslovenska Pošta, Sarajevo, 27. 9. 1939.
Grabrijan, D., Gra evinski materijali (po Loosu)’ (Building materials as by Loos), Tehni ar, no.5, Beograd, 1939.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Princip obloge (po Loosu)’ (The cladding principles as by Loos), Tehni ar, no. 8, Beograd, May 1939.
Grabrijan, D., ‘O simetriji (polemicni dio po Sitte u, konkretni po Choisyj u)’ (Re symmetry, Sitte’s polemics and Choisy’s proposals), Tehni ar, no.1, Beograd, October 1939.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Problem akustike u modernoj arhitekturi (po Loosu i Le Corbusieru)’ (The acoustic problems in modern architecture, according to Loos and Le Corbusier), Tehni ki List, nos. 17 & 18, Zagreb, 31. 10. 1939.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Za horizontalni a protiv verikalnog prozora (po Le Corbusieru)’ (For horizontal and against vertical windows, according to Le Corbusier), Tehni ar, Beograd, January 1940.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Tražimo podesnu stambenu visinu (po Le Corbusieru)’ (In a search of good residential architecture), Tehni ar, Beograd, March, 1940.
285 Bibliography
Grabrijan, D., ‘Dvoetažni stanovi u višespratnim zgradama geneza jedne ideje (Po Loosu i Le Corbusieru)’ (Two story flats in multi story buildings, the genesis of one idea according to Loos and Le Corbusier), Tehni ar, Beograd, March 1940.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Novi Tašlihan’ (New Tašlihan), Novi Behar, Sarajevo, nos. 19 20, 15 May 1940.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Neboder Aleksandrova Baš aršija’ (Skyscraper – Alexander’s – Baš aršija), Jugoslovenki List, Sarajevo, 9. 6. 1940.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Baš aršija jedna nova alternativa’ (Baš aršija one new alternative), Jugoslovenki List, Sarajevo, 30. 6. 1940
Grabrijan, D., ‘Za holski sistem (M. Navisek) (The corridor system), Inženjer, Zagreb, vol. 1, no. 2, July 1940.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Arhitektura nadohvat ovje je ruke’ (Architecture in human scale), Novi Behar, nos. 2 3, Sarajevo, 1940.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Arhitektonski udio na izložbi ‘Bosansko selo’’ (Architectural part of the exhibition Bosnian village), Jugoslovenki List, Sarajevo, 27. 10. 1940.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Slu aj Šerijatske gimnazije’ (The case of Sheriat school) Jugoslovenki List, Sarajevo, 17. 11. 1940.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Avantura poku stva (po Loosu I Le Corbusieru)’ (Home ware according to Loos and Le Corbusier), Tehni ar, no. 1 2, Beograd, October/November, 1940.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Elasti na ku a’ (A flexible house), Tehni ar, nos. 3 4, Beograd, December/January 1940/ 41.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Urbanisti ka rješenja sarajevskih trgova’ (Urban proposals for Sarajevo’s squares), Pravda, Beograd, 24. 2. 1941.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Od Doma tehni ke radinosti do Paviljona ‘Cvijeta Zuzori ’’, (From ta technical community hall to the pavilion ‘Cvijeta Zuzori ’), Jugoslovenski List, Sarajevo, 16 March 1941.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Reforma strokovnega solstva’, (On school reforms), Potopnik, no. 2 3, Ljubljana, 1945/ 46.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Natje aj za ljudsko skupš ino LRS v Ljubljani’ (The competition for Slovenian parliament in Ljubljana), Arhitektura, no. 7, Zagreb, February, 1948.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Dediššina Ljubljane’ (The heritage of Ljubljana), Arhitektura, no. 13 17, Zagreb, February, 1948.
286 Bibliography
Grabrijan, D., ‘Ple nik lavreat Prešernove nagrade’ (Ple nik’s nomination for Prešern’s award), Ljudski tednik, Trieste, 8. 5. 1949.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Šola za arhitekturno na Ljubljanski univerzi’ (The School of Architecutre at University of Ljubljana), Slovenski Porocevalac, Ljubljana, 12. 11. 1949.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Orijentalna hiža v Sarajevu’ (Oriental House in Sarajevo), Arhitektura, nos. 23 24, Zagreb, 1949.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Naša orijentalna i savremena ku a’ (Our Oriental and contemporary house), Problemi arhitekture in urbanizma LRS, I posvetovanje FLRJ, Dubrovnik 1950, Architectural and Urban debates, RL Slovenia, symposium held in Dubrovnik in 1950.
D. Grabrijan, ‘Misli o Naši Dediš ini v Zvezi z Referati s Posveta, Arhitektov v Dubrovniku’, Separat, Slovenski Etnograf, V/1952, pp. 101 106.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Misli o naši dediš ini v zvazi z referati s posveta arhitektov v Dubrovniku’ (Thoughts on our heritage in relation to presentation in Dubrovnik), Ljubljana, 1950, brošura Dediš ina narodov FLRJ v arhitekturi Likovni svet, Ljubljana, 1951.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Spomeniki in nagrobniki narodnoovobodilnega boja’ (Monument to people’s revolution), Likovni Svet, Ljubljana, 1951.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Arhitektura v merilu loveka’ (Architecture in human scale), Arhitekt, no. 4, Ljubljana, , May/June 1952.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Arhitektonsko nasljede naroda Jugoslavije’ (Architectural heritage of the people of Yugoslavia), Arhitektura, no. 5, Zagreb, 1952.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Organski urbanizem’ (Organic urbanism), Arhitekt, no. 7, Ljubljana, November/December 1952.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Le Corbusier’, Naši Razgledi, Ljubljana, 4. October 1952.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Obeležje makedonske civilne arhitekture in njeni tvorci (The characteristics of Macedonian architecture and its creators), Naši Razgledi, Ljubljana , 18 October 1952.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Najnovejsije delo mojstra Ple nika’ (The most recent creations of the maestro Ple nik), Naši Razgledi, Ljubljana, 29 November 1952.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Arhitekt o slikarstvu rezoniranje arhitekta ob umetnosti Lojzeta Spacala’ (Views on art of Lojze Spacala, an architects perspective), Naši razgledi, Ljubljana, 7 November 1953.
287 Bibliography
Grabrijan, D., ‘Dubrovniski dvorci’ (Dubrovnik’s courts), Review, Arhitekt, no. 10, Ljubljana, 1952,
Grabrijan, D., ‘Lik Ple nikove Ljubljane’ (Ple nik’s Ljubljana), Naši Razgledi, Ljubljana, 23 February 1957.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Primerjava orientalske hise s sodobno’ (Use of Oriental tradition in contemporary residential design), Naši Razgledi, Ljubljana, 19. 9. 1964.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Veli ina in slabosti Jožeta Ple nika’ (The greatness in the weakness of Jože Ple nik), Sodobnost, no. 6.Ljubljana, 1964.
Grabrijan, D., ‘Ple nik i novija slovena ka arhitektura (Ple nik and the new Slovenian architecture), Arhitektura i urbanizam, no. 38, Beograd, 1966.
Grabrijan, D., (ed.), Urbanizam, arhitektura, konstrukcije (uredil besedilo), (Urbanism, architecture and construction) Ljubljana, Projektivni zavod LRS, 1945 1946.
Grabrijan, D., Makedonska ku a ili prelaz stare orijentalne u savremenu evropsku ku u, (Macedonian house and the transformations into contemporary European house), DZS, Ljubljana, 1955.
Grabrijan, D., Kako je nastala naša slobodna hiša, (Development of our domestic architecture), MK, Ljubljana, 1959.
Grabrijan, D., Zgodovina Arhitekture, svobodno po Choisyju (History of Architecture based on Choisy), Univerza, Ljubljana, 1949, [reprinted in 1952 and 1961].
Grabrijan, D. (N. Grabrijan editor), The Bosnian Oriental Architecture in Sarajevo, with Special Reference to the Contemporary one, Reprint, Dopisna delavska univerza, Univerzum, Ljubljana, Slovenia, 1983.
Web sites
Muzej Grada Sarajeva, Stambena Kultura Starog Sarajeva, DES, Sarajevo, 1975. http://www.muzejsarajeva.ba/content/view/37/52/lang,en/ For reference to Va e situla (vessel) from the end of the 6th century BC. See www.narmuz lj.si/ang/odd/arh/arhobj.html, viewed May 2009. For extracts from Ivo Andri ’s novel see, http://www.ivoandric.org.yu/html/body_andric_s_treasury_ii.html, viewed June 2009. Mamuzovi , I., ‘Croatian metallurgy, past, present and future’, Metalurgija, 43, 1, 2004, pp. 3–12. http://public.carnet.hr/metalurg/Metalurgija/2004_vol_43/No_1/MET_43_1_003_01 2_Mamuzic.pdf
288