PROSTOR 26 [2018] 2 [56] ZNANSTVENI ÈASOPIS ZA ARHITEKTURU I URBANIZAM A SCHOLARLY JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN PLANNING SVEUÈILIŠTE U ZAGREBU, POSEBNI OTISAK / SEPARAT OFFPRINT ARHITEKTONSKI FAKULTET Znanstveni prilozi Scientific Papers UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB, FACULTY OF 268-281 Erna Husukić Re-conceptualizing Common Ground Preispitivanje zajedničkog jezika ARCHITECTURE Emina Zejnilović of the Cultural Landscape kulturnih pejsaža ISSN 1330-0652 Testing the Reality of Sarajevoscape Analiziranje stanja sarajevskog pejsaža https://doi.org/ Preliminary Communication Prethodno priopćenje 10.31522/p https://doi.org/10.31522/p.26.2(56).5 https://doi.org/10.31522/p.26.2(56).5 UDK | UDC 71/72 UDC 711.4 (497.6 Sarajevo) ”20” UDK 711.4 (497.6 Sarajevo) ”20” CODEN PORREV 26 [2018] 2 [56] 217-404 7-12 [2018] 268 Fig. 1 Neighborhood Marijin Dvor Sl. 1. Četvrt Marijin Dvor Scientific Papers | Znanstveni prilozi 26[2018] 2[56] PROSTOR 269 Erna Husukić, Emina Zejnilović International Burch University Internacionalni Burč Univerzitet Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences Fakultet za inženjering i prirodne nauke Department of Architecture Odsjek za arhitekturu Bosnia and Herzegovina - 7100 Sarajevo, Francuske revolucije bb, Ilidža Bosna i Hercegovina - 7100 Sarajevo, Francuske revolucije bb, Ilidža [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Preliminary Communication Prethodno priopćenje https://doi.org/10.31522/p.26.2(56).5 https://doi.org/10.31522/p.26.2(56).5 UDC 711.4 (497.6 Sarajevo) ”20” UDK 711.4 (497.6 Sarajevo) ”20” Technical Sciences / Architecture and Urban Planning Tehničke znanosti / Arhitektura i urbanizam 2.01.02. - Urban and Physical Planning 2.01.02. - Urbanizam i prostorno planiranje Article Received / Accepted: 19. 10. 2018. / 11. 12. 2018. Članak primljen / prihvaćen: 19. 10. 2018. / 11. 12. 2018. Re-conceptualizing Common Ground of the Cultural Landscape Testing the Reality of Sarajevoscape Preispitivanje zajedničkog jezika kulturnih pejsaža Analiziranje stanja sarajevskog pejsaža cultural landscape kulturni pejsaž European identity europski identitet landscape change promjena pejsaža new technologies nove tehnologije Sarajevo, BiH Sarajevo, BiH sustainability održivost This paper discusses the complex processes and practices of global flows within Ovaj se rad bavi složenim procesima i aktivnostima globalnih tokova unutar the dynamic nature of European cultural landscapes in a contemporary context. dinamičke prirode europskih kulturnih pejsaža u suvremenom kontekstu. It examines the role of new technologies, recent demographic fluctuations and Istražuje se uloga novih tehnologija, recentne demografske fluktuacije i rastu- increasing interconnectedness in cultural landscape reconfiguration. This paper ća međupovezanost u novoj konfiguraciji kulturnih pejsaža. Rad ima za cilj represents an attempt to encourage a shift in thinking on existing environmental potaknuti promjene u načinu razmišljanja o postojećim mogućnostima u resources and sustainable landscape practices, and to question alternative ap- okolišu i održivim aktivnostima u krajoliku te preispitati drugačije pristupe proaches that are sensitive to the cultural interchange process. Substantively, osjetljive na procese kulturne razmjene. Analizira se složena i kontradiktorna complex and contradictory nature of contemporary cultural identities is ad- priroda suvremenih kulturnih identiteta u Sarajevu, glavnom gradu Bosne i dressed in the city of Sarajevo, the capital of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Hercegovine. 270 PROSTOR 2[56] 26[2018] 268-281 E. Husukić, E. ZEjnilović Re-conceptualizing Common Ground… Scientific Papers | Znanstveni prilozi INTRODUCTION ing and are being invaded by new landscapes, which is intimately connected with the shift- UVOD ing nature of cities. Thus, as characterized by researchers, planners and policy makers5 ur- banization, new modes of transportation, glo- balization and unpredictable factor - calamity are driving forces of landscape change. Fur- thermore, the realities of the accumulated ef- fects of infrastructural interventions constant- ly alter ecosystems and material process in foreseen and unforeseen ways.6 Consequently, dysfunctional environmental relations have been a major force of land- scape transformation, challenging the land- scape to cope within maelstrom of continu- ous disintegration. Broadly speaking, an abundance of conceptual landscape views is to be expected. In this context substantive landscape meaning varies. As Rowntree7 re- veals according to various disciplines and its preferences landscape could be understood differently ”as an ecological artefact, materi- al culture, visual resource, a metaphor, and artistic depiction, ideology, and agent of power relations”.8 Accordingly, selective landscape experience and representation, the ones that favor beau- tiful and stylized scenarios, is based on indi- vidual aspirations of the observer. Looking D istinctive characteristics of twenty-first for visually appealing environmental images, century landscapes, old or new, are products picaresque and surreal landscape beauty, of fundamental changes of its natural state very often intentionally, wilderness of envi- by human activity. Moreover, pointed out by ronment, ”the squalid villages of the real 1 the recent studies today’s Earth’s surface is countryside and including certain agreeable occupied predominantly by human-dominat- natural features: brooks and groves of trees ed ecosystems. Cleary, untouched nature is and smooth expanses of grass”9 are omitted just a fiction since every epoch and culture from landscape images. But such landscape leaves its own imprint on landscape. Thus, interpretation signifies the exact opposite of there can be no doubt that pseudo-natural 10 landscapes do exist. Still, the degrees of hu- what a cultural landscape is. Thus, the ma- man impact on environment vary, as well as jor concern of this paper is to question how degrees of landscape naturalness. one could understand, analyze and interpret diverse value system inherent in cultural Given the scale changes happening in the landscapes. age of the Anthropocene, humans have be- come a major geological force.2 The plethora This paper draws on Wall11 and the concep- of processes between various actors in the tion of landscape as responsive urban sur- environment indicate that there is little hope face ”that invokes functioning matrix of con- for understanding these interactions at a nective tissue that organizes not only objects global scale unless particularity of complex and spaces but also the dynamic process and environmental realities is going to be re- vealed. The identification of these interac- 1 Sanderson et al., 2002; Foley, 2005 tions and specific environment features in- 2 Steffen et al., 2011 clude understanding of co-dependent and 3 Terkenli, 2001: 198 co-evolutionary processes articulated and 4 According to Antrop: ”Traditional landscapes have materialized socially and culturally. Specified been defined as the landscapes which evolved during cen- by Terkenli3 the relevance of accepting land- turies until the fast and large scale modem changes in scapes as a synthesis of various discourses ‘tabula rasa’ style started.” [Antrop, 1997: 105] comes from need of ”cultural understanding 5 Antrop, 2004; Li et al., 2013; Lokman, 2017 and interpretation of changing geographical 6 Lokman, 2017 schemata of changing economic, physical as 7 Rowntree, 1996 well as social relations”. 8 Stephenson, 2008: 128 9 Jackson, 1984: 3 A common theme across landscape discipline 10 Rapaport, 1992: 34 is that traditional landscapes4 are disappear- 11 Wall, 1999: 233 Scientific Papers | Znanstveni prilozi Re-conceptualizing Common Ground… E. Husukić, E. ZEjnilović 268-281 26[2018] 2[56] PROSTOR 271 events that move through them”. Wall12 re- their shared cultural and natural heritage, fers to a landscape as an urban surface char- and a foundation of their identity”.19 acterized ”as extensive and inclusive ground- The article aims to fill gaps within recent plane of a city, the ‘field’ that accommodate landscape research by addressing intercon- buildings, roads, utilities, open spaces, neigh- nectedness between culture and nature. In 13 borhoods, and natural habitats”. Moreover, doing so, Section 2 presents research on this view on the importance of complex pro- landscape as an instrument of cultural power cesses in landscape formation is additionally and questions alternative landscape ap- supported by the European Landscape Con- proaches that are sensitive to the process of vention that implies understanding of land- cultural interchange. Seeking to contribute to scape as ”means an area, as perceived by the theoretical framework and practical mo- people, whose character is the result of the dalities of comprehensive landscape devel- action and interaction of natural and/or hu- opment approach, section 3 explores mean- man factors”.14 ingful concepts of sustainability in reference Accordingly, multiple and complex changing to cultural landscape and challenges land- scape design beyond ecological perfor- realities bring to the forefront new challenges mance. Substantively, Section 4 explores the for landscape research that questions land- complex nature of contemporary cultural scape policy as well as landscape evaluation identities that are addressed in the city of Sa- and assessment methods. The European rajevo, the capital of Bosnia and Herzegovi- Landscape Convention15 emphasized the