TRADITIONAL DWELLINGS AND SETTLEMENTS REVIEW

si, , a.& *:,A

, ;. :-

a:: '

East Bloc, West View: Architecture and Lithuanian National Identity J O H N V. M A C l U l K A

The aming of the Werrte~n Cold War dis~ottrsc has made i t possillle d a y to render a more

nuanccd picture or cultural and their political undercurrents, that once took

place in dseren t regions of the Soviet bloc. Th is article eualuatm historical evidence h m the

past half-tentq to demonstrate that a Westward orientation played a significant role in Soviet

Lithuanian architecture, retaining a subterranean influence even through the region's most

trying periods as a republic in the former U.5.S.R. Applying innavations h m countries like

Finland and France, Lithuanian architects worked both within and on the outside of a Soviet

bureaucracy to introduce humanizing elements and a Wmtern, decidedly non-Soviet orienh-

tion into their designs. Ey grafting this Wecitward-looking orientation onto local traditions,

a r c h i m at the BaItic periphery of the Soviet Union kept alive an historical ambition to be

induded in a Western European national and ct~lttrral rommuniv.

For thc Baltic Stales of Lithuania, Labia and Estonia, thc twentieth cenhiry has often povidcd a dramatic affirmation of the old adage that "geography is destiny." The fates ofthme nations have been tivd to the expansion and co~llraction ~Fneighhoring ?itairs such as Polarid, Ruwa and Germany for longpr than rnanv Baltic citritcns mre to

rcmcmber. As a result, pcnds of independence likr: the intern-ar period o f 1920 TO 1333, or the recently regincdindependence that datcs to March rgc)i, havt: taken on Ilcightened significanw as tirncs when natlonal id~rjtity and cuIhlr~ must 1 1 ~ aflirnied.

One historical constant in Lithuania since 1945 has been he persisterice o l a "Westward gaze" among architccis as an expression of national and ~ultural identip.

John 1C: M u c i ~ h LS a n h i s l a n t ~rofe$sor Ancl thou* certainly- not rpducible to a single causc, the wish to parhrlpatc cullurally of u r u h ~ v m l &ry rat the U H ~ W C ? T ~ V qf and politically in a commurfity or Western F.umpc%n nations can bp m d c d as one ~rgwtm, ~ ~ m ~ w i f l c , VA, response to Lithumla's historiml suhrdinatiun to foreign neighbors. Prsent-day

Lithuanians livc in the shadow of he penod frtlrn 6112 scv-

enteenth to twentiet!~ cccnturies, when Lithuan~a ~ m p i e d a junior position in a Pnlish-Lithuanian state (until 17c)~). and then an men marc mbordinate position as a pminct. ruled bv Russian czars until afier 1918.' The period of national independence betwen 1320 and 1939 offered thr first s~ls~airied opportunity to establish the cul~ure and symbols of irldcpcndent nationhod, although tth-sc were surrendered to thc So~iel Union after 1945.

Non~.thcle5s, the cultl~ral nationalism exprt:hscd through architecture during the Sm+et er;l can Ix: under- stood as a kind of substitute for the political rl;ttionalirrm that was repressed unlil the glasnost penod o f ' t h ~ I 980s. And today thcvv a~chiteckural expressions of'politicnl and culh~ral identity may provide an important index of the thot~ghts, feelings and encrgics tlzat were pent up in Lithuania during those decades. I n a region where notions of identity - L~thtraniar~ or otherwise - have been contested for so long, examining the record of the built landscape is one wav to render a cleiarrr picturc of recent Lithuaman accomplishments,

LITHUANIAN ARCHITECTURE IN THE MODERN AGE A HYBRID TRADITION

One w a d d be hard pressed to identi* a singlc. c o h e i v ~ Lithuanian national building tradition. P w Soviet indigenous Ijthuanian domestic architecture, for mmple. belongs to a vari~gatcd Northern European and Scandinavian tradition of wooden hmsc-building h a t features sleep, sloping roof's to protert against an unfor- giting local climate. Reflecting regional differences across the villages of Lithuania. vernacular hi lders have tended to rrcct clusters of buildings that hug the land, orlent toward the sun, defend against the w ~ n d . and fea- ture hand-crafted woodm ornaments of plants, the sun, and other natural motifs: Towns and cities contain many more brick, stonc m d concrete colistr~trtions, along -4th a varit.t)! of edectlc and modernist buildings designed not only by Lithunrllan archirects but by b ~ ~ i l d e ~ s from Russia, Poland. Germany, and as far atvay as Italy. Rut, overall, it is the respect for nature exhibit- ed by nlral stru~turos that has inspired modernist archi- tects tu wurk with a particulnr Lithuanian gcnius loci.

Thc cra of Soviel rule, rvhich began for the Baltic statcs in 1945, brought massive changes to the country and its poptdatioii, 80 percent of which still lived outsidc of clties and towns as late as rgqo: Tncorporatton ~nkrl the Soviet Union brought a wholesale p r o p m of mod- crnization, urbanizatio~i and fndustrialltation. As onc

local observer noted in 1990, "more than thrw hmcs thc number of buildings were bu~lt d u t ~ n g the f;fty-?car Soviet perid a s mwe built du~ing the: previou:: several

c e n t u n ~ s . ~ ~ Iri the face of such changc, and a ry of on11 fragile natiorlal independence, Lithuanian builders and ar~hitects chirig 20 the sense of n lntildmg " iradition" that evlncr d a noticeably hybrid character. Features of this trad~tion indude respect for nature drrivcd froin vernacular builders, loml inflections of' selertc!d foreign styles and planning iduences, and a de te rmind effort to reflect the latest trcnds in Western modernism. In paticular. the effbrt to participate irl the evolution of Wcstcm thought Itas formed an integrd part of Lithuanian arcl~itects' self-defin ~b on. Both during the first ~ o d of natiar~al i r idepend tn t~ In the 19x0s and 1930s as wdl as during [he Soviet penod, leading archi- tects have equated the expression of Western arch-- al sensibiIities on Lithuanian +oil with two important, linkrd ideas dlstance from Russian dominance; and par- ticipatim Irl a Western communiv of dernmaric naticjna. Hence, modem architecture has served in part to symbolize a tneasure of ps)zhological and cultural freedom - and. of course. political indepmdencc.

In spite of'eqericncing two complete and upposing paradigm shifts in the lad half century (first of incorpora- tion into thc Soviet Union, and then thc sudden arrival oh post-Cold War independence), Lithwnla's hybrid build- ing traditron has proven remarlably resiIient. And since die end of the Culd War the charactensbrs: of this badi- tion - which cannot l,c take11 too literally, but which is more Iike a set of com1non tendencies -haw been finding expression in a new and still-~ransitional democ- r a t ~ ~ , capitalist polihcal culture. Rut what ma): be most surpnslng to readers unfamiliar with the intmd cultur- al politics of thc former Soviet Union is that snmc of the most We? t~m-oriented, independent-minded impulses of !he hybrid 1-ithuanian tradition were able to surface in works of Lithuanian a~chitcas even during the most try- ing years of Soviet domination. AAer looking at current changm in Lithuania's architechrral culture, this article attempts to establish the sense of a continuity between p-mcmt-day production and sweral archibtural works of thc Soviet era, The intent 1.; to show how elements of Lithmnia's hybrid tradition haw persisted in spite of the ~ n t ~ n s e redirection of political, economic and ideological impulses rrom the Soviet era to the present day.

TRENDS IN POST-INDEPENDENCE LITHUANIAN ARCHIITECTURE

Immense material and cultural challenges faw architects. plannms, and architectt~ral educa to~ in Lithuania toda>- T h i s is immediately clear to anyone who tours the two malor schools of architecture in the Lithuanian capital of.Vilnms, a city with a population of yo,ooo.' n t : major iterns on the a~chikcturdl agenda

. _- - + - - - _ , ,- --.:-.c2 po!icies beins pur- Rcspndlng to Lithuanian ovelbrcs in the West, - - .- -- . .

. . : : --r:.~: -:mi--l!. ro intcprate the meanvhil~, ari array of Genwn architrctura.1 firrns has -- - - 7

. . ,= .+ 5-c. E-;r.~~fan idtural and eco- begun testing t h ~ waters lo see if they can apply the same - - _ _ - ----

-. - . -=.=... :-.~-nwm countricli- niethods in t11c Baltic slates that they have b ~ e n practicing - - . .

- >--- -=--- _ - -- _ - --.. =... ,.e.1)315. in particular - with in neishborhoods of firmer East Berlin and in the tmrito-

. . -- - - ." --- - - , - - -.I;. c.~=lizl i t +-stems. and vari. - ---.. .. - ries of the former Gennan Democratic Republic that today -TL-

- -. ---. ~ ~ ~ o c ~ t l c 501-enlance, rep. . , . - . 5 I:~<-:~ZE ro which Lithuanians have

. - ----- --= -+= - < .-- - - .-. .-- . .' -- -. . . &na 1930s. - . . . . .'I;'- : ----- -- .-

. .--. .. ... ;,-.m.ue. Ilowever, as in many - - - - - - - . < - - - - - . - .

- - - - . - -, - - G:S. 3 dic-bted by extreniely lim- - -- - - - - - -. . + . . -- - + .-' -c., --: ?A!o\rir* their disastrous experi-

- . -- -- - ----.-- . . . . . . - - 1- 1 r r r c\;tent in other Eastern I -z :::z:r; yx'+:en~ inxt:3?ors havt: rcccrltly k e n

. . . -.---.- --- .. " .- - -- - - * . . .- .,c.~sIP c31ition. Tt i is has mearlt that -- --__-. - - - - - i --.. 2 2 2 planners have been forced to ----: - - - 1 - - . -- - -.;.t of severe coiistraint as they atlempt - -----= > --A .- -- - --at, a i d kr~prove the ubiquitous Sori~t- --- - - - -. -t7---- -; - - - K:; io deviate h e countr):'~ oi19:oing

. . - - . -*F --<-- - - . . - ..-. . .Jli;ng. TIleir rcsulis have so Car been - - .

3-z ;: 15 z j ie of thc! first dccadc of post-Cold War

z 5 e c 5 : : +.f- irr noxv causes for optimism. ki-haps kc-::! :lex.x-!y fonned public-prime orgnim-

. . -- -- .. - - -- -. -- - :I.uaaiarl , --.- Ho~i~ling Credit Rind are t d a y

1 -x?.:?r! dle process of privatizing l - ~ o ~ i s i n ~ - - P -- 1 I--;: =:;= Tom the s l a l c of individual aparlments

- - - . . - --= - - x-. 7 : ~ 5uildjny and c-ntirc ndghberhodls. - - - . -. ..

-;=:I 7: ?en& are now making it ps$il~lc to - - >-..- .--.-- =I _ . . . . . .. . ..-2 of s d e that mill ill turn promote the

. . ---- -. .- , . . . x . - - . . - ,_<e +\-ate housinp-manngemel~t cornpa- - - .. . - = .. . ; r ::::.re absence of such companies to this

F- -.r: :-r-;e- %c main obstade LO successful comple- -. - -- - . . - ,. . * ,:--,;:-r - . . -. how~ing privatizatiorl and moderniza- - -- --. --.. . .

. . . -+ .. :F IOTA! jit\-estorfi, I~~ullilding contractors, - ----.--

. , . . . .. ., r,?rlzirlting firms, and developers.: A f i d i c r 7-c . . - - -.r . :i: ei,?pslent today is that the Housing Crrdit -- - - + -. -.- - - - ,,. -.:pati~ig ill the drafting of new legislati011 to 7 I r i ::::Lied laws governing housing, propeq- ommw

I: L-.: =rope+ rnanagelnent to better reflect the con- . - , : :' : grou ing market economy.' . - .,. . - - - part, architects have rhus far concentrated nn

:5-i;2r. ra~o\~aiioiis of housing blocks that invvhe new , .+ =- . . 21d L~s~datio~, stnlchlral snSilization. and md- =- -,J!T af \r ater and heating systems. The straw of .--...-. < - = - =I t y k a stop of apartments beneath nmIy buiilt . ..., L : i ~ ! r r . has dso been popular. in the rip rrfkilnius z ; :2i:~n~re finn !moan as Jun&n& Archikhy - - - - - - - -. . , . & (United Architects' Workshops) has takrn this - - - - - - . . . . . . :-A<? TO renor-ations o f both Wv.h4o~ Smitrt-pvriud - - - - on and larger. f i w s h ~ aparhncnt I~locka . . . . - - .

T I G S . I . L ) . The resulting proj&v make the! rnt~st of cxist- - - .. .. -, -:-.:XI% sstruchlres. u-hile attmpting to r:nlivcrl far-

. .. . -. .- .. .: . ~LI?Z:I. gray: squaw-pndd facades tkiruugh a variety

+; -. =-:--.~?icaY. struckma7 and oniamcrktal clcrr~erltr,

rIcum I. (TOP) RPIIWU~~IIIII ()rprqbblr'~~~d mcrft~ pnnd-Iddc trprtmtnts

11 om the ~gGo? awl > 97or 1Teut-t .wk& c j pnvntp rondmwmm upnrfmk

In tile sadlltr r~:rlmhu: tcnwzr n n g q ik Lithuanin~ capttal of ~ ~ F ~ ~ I I u I . (Photo cfmoddr c o r t l t ~ of Gnikd Arci~irPcts' C&bmrivr, tflniur

rxum Z. ( m u ) ~ h u f r o n , plan nnd sertlon nf'ncwty rc~trwuted

upamxnm it1 bilnlu~. (Sourd: Unikd 4rchttrdr' CnIEu borrituvt: tilnrus )

con~price Germany's "new federal states." For emnple. a pri~ale firm known as HoIJro, Inc.. dlid~ rpfonnd from tlie a s h ol h e planning wing of the kast G ~ ~ T K ' L I ~ sorid-

ist Wohnuilgsbaukombinat (Aparhnerlt Hudding Combine], has ioincd with the Lithuanian Hrmsi~~g Crt:dit

Fund to launch ;I pilot prnirct in Vilniu~. Its g ~ l is to sys-

tcmatic3lly rcnmate 1 ithwmm pr~f~bri~;ited apartment blocks withm present German cost paranietm of DVgoo per square meter (apprnximately US$5oo per square meter), tlie minimuin cost at w11id1 the conlpan!- has loltnd it can profittbly carry out this work ' _ h d as thc Litl~uanhi Parliamen~ and shLe platmiq q e m i c s gradu- a h d c r the cuuntry's lcgd fiamrrvork and ma~ket enrl-

mnmrnt more transparent and congenial to Westem FIGURE 3. iT~alii(7r ~+i ;~hFr l~ . l i /ni:v 4,rtdLtny (lf Fule Irfr 4 1 ~ h ~ t c ~ t t i r c

Imestors, the number of coinpames workmg with and Dssgi: bl+i!'drg [ I ~ $ I ) . ~Pkoto by arrthor.)

Lifl~~mnhli architec~s and der-.elopers in thic way swan poiced LO increacc, pssihly dramatically. in thc opming decade of the hvrkn@-first rrcnhq.

The firid o f Lithuanian architcr-tu~al erlwatim has UTI dvrgon~ a vim~lar level .elf rdriirdl reorientation during the I 990s. At imdtutions 11k the \-illnus Tedmical Un~vers i~- , lm ted a sllort distance 011 tside Vilnius. adniimstraiors irllroduced a Masier's of .k&tccturc degree program in 1992. Modeled along tVcstcm Tincs,

his Lwo-year professional d e p progranl is nlcant to fol- low iolir years of undergraduate study toward a 1mchrlo~'s degree in architecture and lo ~eplace the Soviet sy~tcm in wliich architects were prepared solcly to stm7c in state

~ l a n n i r ~ g and ct)r~stn~~%on oficcs. Annthw sigificant dcv~loptnent. dating to rgy4, is the cnnvewion of one of the: th~-r:c, fifteen -sh~dent set% on s of- th? Master's program to English-langrage instnlction." Thbhere is a stroizg push as well, tl~rough ih acornbiriation of fellomsl~ips and foreign aid, to place 1 ithuanian students in accredited foreign architechwe schools and exchange programs To dale Denmark, Noi~vay, Sweden, and Gerninliy have hosted architecture sluderlts horn Lithunrun '

il similar reonentdhon an bP ~txm In thr. arch~tt.tturtb pmgmm of the V h u s Acadenw of'fiilc Arts, an dder ~ c h c d R hose lien es t build*. the archltetntt~ and apphd ark fad- iL)- by facull) ~ n e t n k r b'yiai~tas Brkidis, f nicked h~to a fmskd. m r n - d c sitc in Vihlius' htorjc dl? core (t~sr3q). The rontmt ufstuho assignments at thc Arts Acadpm) a1.o rt.flPrh a \VfiMn nrmcnlatirm facing thc rmplica~ms of p\-ai~tatioii h(+ad<rn. Inurnsingly during thc 1990s. <dc.nts in df4gn s-turlior h ~ m haw Ixxm prcwntcd with assipmen@ for cmnrnwtial ad;lpvr+nwxb pmitr tq

ttithin Vlnim* m s i h i ~ historic 11hn falmc At 300

hecmes, his area rese~nbls he lusronc centers of Poland's kczkotr. Slovenia's Ldiiblian, and (at a snlaler scale) the Czech Republic's Pnque. But in contrast to these cities' e x p riences, 'rrllnius appears to ~JIF begun its boon1 in mton- t i o i ~ re11ovatiot-i. and nmt- consm~ction only du&q Ihe w o l ~ d h a o f h e 1390s~ LI px t reflec- the increased mn- sitiotaal lag lime for a cotulky was not iust in h e fonner k t Rltx. I n ~ t whicli for 45 yQr< w a ofiicially incoprated in t h ~ Snnpt U n ~ t ~ n us onr ofits 6fhu:n consitutmt n.pul~lirs,

Onc such adap~x-e-1~1~s?ir: p r o j ~ t - thls onr gven by professors R ~ i d i h ? and qfdutas ~ckanauskas - prrwnted students with h c d-i of a npw, priva~ell- owned bfindtii camera and photmopy store. From a pedagctgical stand- point. such a pmjt,d rlzallenged studrv~k Lo hitemlate nrw

+\.ate conmeroal prcrnises rwth a &nw~to~v~~ core that whined h e sale and character of IE many Golhic, Renaissarlce. and Bargut Inddings. But the instiuciors. both also ~c te ran architech, 5vcl.e also stri~ing tn t n k the issue of'contmbdkm an g l i r i t on-slte concern. nim, while stl~dmtx wcre left free to rxplore cutrrently fashior1al)Ie hqh-tech and prtrndernist approaches, as pubEdled i t 1

such popldar io~itnals as \ZJerk, B a r n tutd \blohnzn. L4mhif~'turr d k j o u ~ h ~ , and Bau~wlt. they wrrr also

required tu accommodate a hypothrtical client's main

request: to rebin and inlegrate an wi~tinp large Itenaissancr staircnse mto h e d w i p -noithe iiex- storr. '

At the Fine Arts Academy project. fur advanced stu- ck:r~ts have also includcd preparation of .;ul)missions to a

compl.titio~i COI a new barik it1 Ka~iias, Lithuartia's sec- ond city (and its provisional capital from 1920 to 1339). Arid other rclatrd courses have triod to lntrod~rce sh- dents lo the practical aspects of mnning arl arditectural office iiz the new private-sector envit.anment.

In the meamtirnc, beyond the \12114 (sf academia, con. si&ra~ions of real properly commercial mnt9, and other common characteris~cs of a mnarketdriwn (milomy are nrw i~af ip factored into thc production of'desigrls h r s~tch real qtnl~turcs 3s hods, drpat%neirt stores, and parking garagepes, Private investment end publlc f~undr; are also begnning to reshape Wnius (a city whose population is j4 permnt Lithuanirm, 19 pernmt Ru~sian, 19 p e m t Polish, and 8 prcent a n i x - r e of Byclorussians, J ~ T , and other rninonht.~) into a diwrse, incrcashqly IiveIy cap~tal . '~ .4so mdrcabw ofcfforls to reioin a 1Vcstern-style Euxop~atl ilrban cornni~mity has been the appearance of the inevltabl~ stsugglr lxlween sucl~ b~~qincsscs as Benetton and McDonaldb (in ~ g g G ) and those who adwate the relention of I d mban character. Polihdy, the eleaion of

President VJ&s Adadcus In j;mnuaq 1998, sipaled another tr~m to the West. As a rchgee rrom World War I1 Lithuania and a former Ammican c i d servant, Adamha has brought a decidedly non-Srl\iic:t, strongly i9:estem (nit- loolc to the oficc of Lithuania's diicf execrztive.

At tht: same thne that surrll dcvelop~neiits sigma1 thc potential fix improved dvign ou~tpul. the stan o f profcsslon- a1 practice irl Lithuania also probides mipFe wid~9n.c~ of h e nrtd to train new ge~ict*ations of architects In the: challenges

and responsibilities of'q~dity design. For wmplc, while

rrsidtiitial cornnissims in Lithumian cities are rc:rriarkably plt*ritihl, a \%me of ggancsrn in residen.tial mnsbction. markrd by pudy excess, has followed the repeal r ~ f lirni~s on home sizes, wIuc11 I~m~ttul tile size of p r h a ~ ws~dcnces to 130 quare meters ( I b400 sqifare f ~ ) dur7ng the Soviet

years. In rebponse, ,Ugunzlntas Nam-tis. 3 vmc~daied smior crllleagl~t of Rri.d~kis and &kanauskas 2nd nm-c3nt head of thr Lithuanian Architects' Un~on, has m m p a i p d throuph- o11t the 1990s fo* pfesslonal prt:r revicrt-s and ohm mel- suns to &till responuble values arnone, ~oday's privatc archittu+xq Anlong h ~ s gods is a desirt: to curb sihiabons in wllich "archlects yetiorrn = ronsummatc semnts to thtjr clients to thy dcb%ne~lt ofthe quali~, scale, and crlergyeffi- cimry uf house dcsipis.":~ Nas-qtis hopes that tht: parhapa- tion of President k h m k u s and former Lthwnian Reputbhic Prrsiden~ Algirdas Br.uaushs (who, lie Boris Yeltsin, is a f m r r ro~lstmchon rriariager) in 1.ithmnhi Archrtetts' Union 1n~h~:tings will result in k~creased attention to the qudk and characier of Lithuania's budt ~nvirorirnenl.

THE CROSSROADS OF THE 1900s: BRIDGING T H E FUTVRE AND THE PAST

As etsemh~rc irl the fo1rnt.r Soviet Union, thp glasnost prriod saw 3 aremarkably rapid flowwring of new ideas wih- in T,it?tuaman architectid circks. Cunqtrucbon and design s tandads w r e criticized m+lr;tE1 mcreaslng frequcng dunng the 1980s. and " postmoderrl" dccoratic.e acccnb emerged ~ L S a fashionallle means of achievi~yl more oprn architectur- a1 expressiort . Howm er, a rt-vdng change ~n Lithuanian architectrndl dismss~ons h t h m international wtt~ngs and it1 the nahondl press en~ergd amurrd the time of ~lidepen- cl~nce Intemhonal audiences befke mdeper~dencc were oftrn told. for examplc, how Llthuamans had studied '&~ic:btcrtl m r n p l ~ s and taken them lnto accoulit in t h ~ i r attrmpis to p p p ? ~ \dl local I ssuw and traditions. But p s s accor In t~ soor1 after independence placed far gr(:.Lter rmphasis on evaluabng Lithuanian archi~ecture In l ~ ~ h t of a prnl~lerr~allc Sowet l r ~ c y .

On bath sides of this national artd i~iierllational &vide

can be d~mrned the figlrc. of Gedeminas Baravykas, a trell-tra+r-lcd, prolific T I tlluanian arch~tect who was respon.

slble for h e dcsig of n u i n ~ r o n s bulldings and tnonu- ments nftcr pdzlating from the nrcliltechm* program at the Vilrliuls Arts 4cadem) in 1964 (rrc.5). Brfbre h ~ s ur~lirncly dr.atli In ~ 9 9 j at the a$e of j4. Baram k d s percep- tively and ~r ihcauy analyzed h e histmila1 influence of W- arch~tecture m Lithuania in presentations m the U.S. in 1989 and lr l E5rorlia i l l I 990. Siy&canll>, thrsr presentations fomsrd an the problematic nalurc of

Lithuanian effoh In tlre 19705 to ' q~~ole" farnou.: coiltein- poraneous Wmtem bllildillgs whde allemphrlg to remain t i l e to nobuns of'a tith~iatuan and Baltrr gcntwq J D G ~ . TO illurbatr, t l ~ ivays in which &tc& trmk on these chd- 1~nge5, Earatykas cited pominent bulldlngs sucll as thr. Supreme Soviet (nnw Pdrlidmmt) building i11 V~lnms desip~ed bv Aigimarltas Naswtis and his hother V!-tautn~ and ctmlpletd in 1982 - a ljuilding that owed an o h i m r dpbt to the Boston City Hall. R a r a y l ~ a s also praised anoth- r r hirrsc-rtis brolhers' prqrb. tlic 1 ith~rarilan Drama Theater m Z 3 i l n i ~ ~ ~ (19811, d~ an r x e n ~ p l a ~ deslgl lip+ sentlilg a certain fold-art-ii~fl~tenced, modcmnt 1.1thuania11 onpal i t j that had we~z nmlwgd to attract the praise of Western arcliitecrs ( ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ 6 . 7 ) . Thc dmig~ of this building qcts a d~arnatlc, higldy sculptural bnck. granite ar~d bronzc facade among the older buddmgs of Cedeninas Yrosprct (formerly Lenjn Prospect), a strongly axial avenue connr~t- mg Wn~us Cathedral to thr Parl~ament building. [n a h -

de5 and interviews, Ban) ykas m d u ~ t a i ~ ~ e d that hi.: o m

uorlcs were deeply indehtrul to the preceding gencra%on that had praducd w ~ l ~ k s like these. These oldrr ~ r~h i tec t s . he eqixlned. had w e d the door for joungrr I+~tliuanian architects by ccclinng d wglificant deyw of-c~eahre ~ n d e - pe~ldence from Russidn officials in Mosco\t. *

M~er indcp~nd~nre in rggr. as Lithuanran archilec- tun1 profesr;ional.: and critics reevaluated their country's architeaurr. a pronounced shift appcarrd In the en~phasis of such architecbral discussions, howmer. The very title

of a igy 2 article in tlie national press, "Architeciurc of thp S ~ w t Period Weighed on thc of Hisloly," con- hbu'rcd to a new sense o f f i d ? ~ 7 t h which Liltiuarlians viewed tl~rir participation in the So\.ir* sphere of influencr:. T h e ar~ ide , rvrirten by Jonas Minkevifius, opencd ~ 4 t h a dramatic quake by Bardykas to the Lithuanian Architects Union. "Wc an, not at all ashamed of aur ~ w k s h m the Soviet periad," Barar-yhs declared. "1 do not wject a single orle o i rn) o ratrons "'" S yrnpathdic to this sentiment, Minkcv ih~~s nnnetheless charactenzed ~t as ~ I P I J - ' relewnt to tkic task nf establish- ing w h h pr[>jrcts had coiitributed to thr nation's sense of itself, and wliich had helped desmy raf~rable parts of the country. ~ t s landscape, and heritap. t v w y period and generation c:stahlisI~es ~ t s own criteria with which to judqe architectt~rc, the author noted. 2nd in the pt-Soviet era the task of cstaldiqhing criteria - beyo~ld rimplv a s s i g - ing blame or gudt - had y ~ t to be properly addrrsvd.

Lenino pr.

FIGUHF 6. (TOT) .Aigiwni~ta~ an6 Vyla~lras !\;llryt:s !.ifhunr;iarr S t a f f ,

Thrttter, Iiilnilrr IlyGI;-rg6'<1). Scrt l~r t r~red brontc.Jh~&by S~teni~lovus

Kz<zintr. ( S ~ ~ J G C : K. &rbrrlzt~as el al,, gel! , rdk . , kilnians Archiwl;nfra,

V~lnrzat, Lfck5lar. ~y8-i. p . 2 2 ~ . j eIcuaE 7 . ( Y L O ~ . ~ ~ I ] I.itjitm~tian S:@tl! Drama n~mlrr: plun (bunr:

L'erbr~lcnas ti 111 f i r . \5lni:11ls Architcktirra p.xg )

~ , T A C I L ' I K : \ L P S T 3 f l C , W F S T V I : k \ 2 9

WEIGHING THE HISTORICAL LEGACV: A 3ALTIC WINDOW ON THE WEST

An ltnpnrtant hnplicalion of h i s article 11-x that. while ~uch prnj~rt.i a.: grand Stahlisl apartment blocks and ubiquitous s3atwr of Lcnin wcrc dcarJ!. par( or an ideologically driven urbanist pTognrn in Srn i r t - r ra

Li~huania. other projects had managed to pursu? a d i f ' f % ~ c:nt agctida. ' S h y it is possible to ask ro w l i n t ex-tent. and with what force, such a legacy of "W+stern infliient-(3'' ran lx* rlr~ctcci in Lithuanian architecture of the Soxiet \-ears -that i s , hctween 194 j and 1991 And if such influence existed, when and how d ~ d it bcgn , 2nd how war: it negotiated in a Cold War atmosphere 111 which SovEct tulc, at I r a ~ t Lo R'esteni eye?. was perceived as uneqriivucally opposed tu Wr:strn~ .~,apitalist-- and 'bo~rrgeois" design? Ard~ival and journal e ~ d e n c c i~ldi- cntes that independent gestures nf rcsittance m7rte madc by Lithuariiall architects as far bark a s tllc Khmschev thaw of the mid-19 50s. These declarations twre follom=ed ~vith guardcd appkicatiorls of iVeslecn ideas. realized in projects in the 1960s and 19709.

As a recent gradmate of thr: I-itf~uar~izui Acddr~ny uf Arts at the time of' josef' Stdin's dcxtli iri 1953, Algimantas Kasvytis R-as among the first to protr%? 50vict d r s i y poli- cies. In a still-celebrattld &rfi:nsc: of Vilriiris' old toiw~ to

thc Russialz-appointed head.; of the Lithuanian S.S.R. 8rchltccty' Uruorl at their Second Congrcss irl VUnius i11

I ' 3 5 5 , n'z~,? tn conipared the bu~ld~ngs of t4ic Gothic, Rrnaissance and Baroque penods to postwar intenren- tions in 61c urbarl iabric. "If construdon in the ccnter of Vjln us cuntinur.5 to follow ib present path, then without exception it can be maintained: In a fm- decades son?&

wdl j 11 dge us - the a ~ c h i k t . of today - to ha\-e been 11:~rbanans. ihe despoders of OUT capital." To prolect this hrntagc, Nas\yL!.nis 2nd deagn colleapcs of his genemtio~~, notably RrCdiLis and & h m u s h s , pushed f o ~ politick that wr.udd nll(lw ncw constri~ctioii to be lmted fir out- qide the old center of'Vilniuc, preferablr beyond an lnsu- lat~ng greenbelt of forests. Their cot~cvms nere parh~ularly dirrrtrd loward the large-scale, lr~dustnallv manufactul.ed housn-ig I ~ l o d s that then formed the cor- nerstone of a 501let houJng policy, as defined by Khr~~slid~er- in d ~ e nnid-rg ~ O S . '

Available evidence supg~~t t r that such Llthuanlali a~chitcctc cucceeded in resisting the lorkstrp ndbance of housing pnl~clch from Moscow as early 39 the latt, 1350s

and eat17 19605. Thr kry coniributio~i of'arcl~ite~?? such as Bredlkis, d e k d n d ~ ~ r k a n , Balflfmas and Valiuskw from this pe~lod rvah kilnl~rc' sccand mikrora ion, or resi- dentlal satelllte c ~ t y of pr rfLl>ricdted cor~crele panel-block bulldlngs, bullt a t 1 d7d)-na1 { I F G S . ~ , ~ ) . A lvpical proiecl

WEIGHING THE HISTORICAL LEGACY: A BALTIC

WINDOW ON THE WEST

An important implicalion of his article was hat . whilt* wch prajrcts a5 grartd Stalir~ist apartnlcnt Iilocks and ubiquitous stables o f 1.etiiti were rlearly past af an

ideologically driven urbanist yrograrn in Snriet-era

Uthuania, other projects had nianaged to pursue a differ- etll aperrda. Today iL is possible LO ask lo what extent, itnd with what fr~rcc, such a legacy of "lVfesterti influr:nct:" can 11c dr:tr:ctt:d in Lithuanian architrlcturr: of tlxr So\iet yca1.s -tliut is, llr!twcsr~ r34j artd ~ g g r . And if such influence existed, ~ 1 1 e n and how did it begin. n r ~ d 11011: was it nego~iated it1 a Cold War attnospliere ilz which Sovist n~lt:, at Isast to Wr:stsru cyes, \+)as p~rccivcd ss uneqrlivocally opposed to Westrni "ca1)italist" a n d "bourgeois" design? A1:chiv;~l and journal evidence indi- cates that independent gestures of resistsnce were made by Lithuanian architects as far back as the Khrusche~ thaw oSthe mid-r950s, Tl~esc declara~iolzs were followed with puarclcd applicatiolzs of WesLertl i d c ; ~ ~ , rcalhurl jrl projvc?s in the I 960s ar~cl I 970s.

As :q recent graduate nf'the 1 btl?u.mjan Academy of Atts a t the time o f Josrf Stalin's death in 953. Alpirnantas NasqTis ~ ~ 3 s anlong the first to pratest Soviet design poli- cies. In a ~till~celebrated drfense cfVilniuri' old t o v ~ i to

the Russ~an-appointed ht ads of the Lithuaxnax~ 5.S.R Architects Unlon a t the~r Se~ond Cor~grrsc: In Vilnius in 1955, Nasq-tls con~pared the b~llldl~lgs flf'd~c ~ o t h i c , Renaissance and Baroque p ~ n o d s to poqtwar interven- tions Irl h e urban fabr~c "If C O I I S ~ ~ I L ~ O ~ in the ct9nt(*r of L ~ h i u s cunhliues to Collow ~ t s present path, then withnut pxcephon ~t car1 Ilc ma~ntalrled. In a few decades society

~~111 judge 11. - tlip dl ~ h l t r ~ t s of toda) - to have been barbarians, the despoilel 5 of oui r apltdl." Tn protect IS herltnqe, Nasr-r-tls and design rolledp-uc. of h ~ c grricrahnn, notably B ~ e d ~ h s and ~ e k a n a u s b s , pushed for pollne.; that wordd allow nex construction to be located f ~ r out-

stde the old centrr r)f Vilnm< prefelably beyond an insu- latlriq greenbelt of f u l ests Thw C n n w r n S WMC

parhcularlr direcled tonard the hp-scale, mdustrially manuf~ctus~d liou~mg blocks that h e n Conned the cor- nerktone of d Soxlrt housing poky. as deCmed k Kllmsl~che\ In tlie rnib1g5os.

Availabl~ evdpnrr xiqgest~ that such Lithuanian archlzects succeeded In res~shng the lo~kstep advancc of lzousi~ig policies froin Moscox- as early as the late I g 50s and cadi 1960~. 'Che ke) contribution of archit- S I I C ~ Rri'diki5, G,kanau4as, 13all.iiltlas and Valiuskir: hum this p n r ~ d \car; Vilnius' secoiid rnikroraion. or resi- denha1 .atr-lhtc rity of prefabricated concrete panel-block hlnldings. ]milt at hzdynai ( F I G S . ~ , ~ ) . A typical project

Fltiua 8. &a:~mar+id+

p&de Hnim. dei+ by

kn~lhri &r:nu~kur ond

k n a m s H d i k i z (c i r~r t rudd 1964-

ry7s. mmry401~ fmwn rid& m

~982)- ( S m r ~ r : nishor's cnllailrr; J

for 40,000 residents, b~z i l~ wi~lzin thc framcrvork of a t~ ghtly organized Soviet command economy, 1 a7dya I rnust also be understood as one of a f i x w t~ail-blazing attempts to break wit11 the burea~iclcratic ngicllty of large- scale central planning '- Tht~ architects themselves, however, arc 'dlc first to admit that their tactics could do little more than providp a bu f f~ r against the tightly con- trolled. t~ierarcliical progratn of Moscow-based central plarirling. nwir it~put could not, for example, prompt a complete rodvsign uf housing schemes, o~zly lead t u changes In s ~ t p planning and housing-block desigli that challrngrd the existing order of thilzgs."

One stlmulus for Lithuanian dcparhires from sonet norms, lingering from the pt:riod uf indepcn- qcnce o f ' t h ~ 1930s in wliicli Nasvytis, Brtdik~s and Cckanauskas had spent their youths, was thc dif5,rcncv betwcrn the TO]? oftfie architect in the Lithuaniari and S o t i ~ t contexts. Opposing the Soviet tendcncy to subor- dinatc! thr architect's role to that of economists, pc111c)- makm. and planners in charge or all-encampass~ng f i t ~ y ~ a r plans. Lithuanian arclijaecls {to hcar N a s y h s dcscrille it) clung to notions of a duty to thcir profrssinn that was *higher than simply drawing,* and extended to

the organizdtion nf rpa tial experience, rhe promotion of harmony IX=~UFPTI buildings and the landscape. and thc consideratic~n of inhabitants' and users' needs.* By con- trast, the c.uhr!me topdown nature of the Soviet hausing system has hetv v~vidly described by Italian housing scholar Roma~io dcl Nor&

Like n stlrirs qrburmc4cralic pyramids wnwsging loward a linglz vvrkx, t-clztrul kuifding wmmitteec w m u p h - ?ling u f i c ~ s , rcgivnul institut85. and rcpbliclln bruwhs tkdx

pa~ t in a vertical,flow oforders a d guideline%. T h i 3 ~ k w

ture: pemitr ullno~t nu uomniuniwtro~r horizontuny, a d no

wnstructiv.t,fisdback bttwecn administrative branchrs:'

If tlie subordination 01 the architects' creative role is not obvi- ous frorr~ the rigid appearance of ubiquitous urban housing blocks that camcd protc:st rvcn iri thr heartland of Russia, thr:rl d(:l Nord's description help4 capture the ~nstitutional obstacl~s to credtivity bmlt into the Saviet planning systeln.

In Lithuania, dthouph designs for Lazdyrlnl were ready as early as 1962, consbi~ction was delayed to allow for thc coordination uf diffrrrnt build~ng phases. Ultimately, these delays allo~i-ed local architects arid plan- n m to coilcentrate on developing dterrlntive housing models, men i i h e s e had to be worked out w i h n the stric- tures oh 11e preiabdc3td 3x3-meter pane[ construcdon sys-

tem developed lly Gos\eoi. thc Sovic? planning ministry (which, in turn, had betln a miva? of metFrods introduced by German architect Emst May in fl~e early- ~gjos]."

Lazdynai todny d8ers noticeably from tpd Sot?el

ho~~sing sites primarily in that it consists oia series d stepped, forested terraces running p d e l to the river Neriq. R11et-m~ s t a n d l Sok.iet and East BIK pmedm W;~S to level a site to make it easier for crancraoff to set up on eirher side of a

b~r~ldkg, Bridikis and argucd that l d d q h e I d L d c s \ d d soften thc c&cts of svch a massiw

dwlopmcmt, dis~lmting it a m x s the l a ~ l d S p e ' The Litl~& ad* wwe drivm not amply by a desire to

hlild at \wi-dnc~ W&I the h i e t q-. Rather, the)- m a e

attrnlptifig to fr)llvw It..jwns d&d hm Finland %-hose rolling 11111 .;. for~sk, and g m m l landscape character resem- b l ~ that of the Baltic xrates. Brild&s and &kmaushs, in p a r h d a r , had both been part of official delegations of Soviet architects on visits to Fdand in 1959 and 1960."

Bredllus' obsen~aiiorls of F~lzmsh a r d ~ i t c h r e prompt. ed sweral of the departures from Sovlet design dochitie that the hzd>nai project ~vould come to embody. And both he and dehnausbs aclmowledg~d the strong impressions lef? by such exxnples of Alvar Aalto's projects as Sunila, fiuttua, and Tapiola from the late 1930s to tlie 1950s. Aalto's qliest to humanize modernism was perhaps most evident in hls designs for housing, in which he acted on the bel~ef-that large concrete structures did not lieces- sarily haw to project an ethos of'domination over the sites on which they stood. Thu.;, hit: plans iwre laid out so as to fit large hm~srng blocks in the best way possible to the existing contr)urs of the hilly, wooded Finnish landscape. For cxamp1e, many of'his Eargt. Suild~ngs at Sunila and Kauttua w r ~ e fitted into the folds of hillsides and along ridgelines, whilc othcrs d i m b d up through fores?;tpd areas in a stepped or terraced f~shion {FIG.EO).'"

F IT.URE 10. '111~ sol, rvumplr vfsrrppci: f ~ ~ m i z d pond -h i d housing 111

tl~c Solid Ghrott, r @ c r t i r z g d ~ injurttcr ojT7nnlrh arrllrtect Alvur Anllo.

(Sourl-re Ur Rzttdod, Ncuc tT'uhnqebletc sozialistlscher Liindcr. Rcdrn.

1Mag)tir Huuwwtr. 1975. p .246 )

The hurnanizmg potenljal of Aalto's designs for large-scale housing w s not last on the t.ithuariian visl- tors Back homc. when o r d ~ w d Lo desigm mikrordaiohs for ail average of 30,000 residents, thcy proposed tu Russia11 r)fficmls that they l ~ c allowed to dcbclop their own hlock- and-panel system, one that woulcl add variety to ~xlsting Suviel models. Initially, this reclucst did not grt very far. Pr:rmisslon was dm.nied when G~ssboi planning officials frrlm the local Lithuanian branch irlfotrrled the architects that, in the view of central autl~ontirs in Moscom:. sucl~ \-anant panel systems wcse unnecessary and irnpracti~~l. Liling at the Soviet periphery had i ts advanrages, howc:v-

et: Onc was that of 130 housing combirles in [he So~ i r t Un~or l during the 1960s. thee wwt. at work producing prefabricated panels in Lithuatiia. WOI king witla Lieprojrkt, the Lithi~anian Ministry o f Construction, a portion af'a h o u g i q combirlr outside the ~ i t y of Kaunas r\as quletlv retrofif;tfed to produce a different iariciy 01 lio~ising block. This building wmld use the wme con- crete paa~ehng sysiem. but would be brokPn in plan to allow ~t to follow exishng rel~ef lilies on a terraced site."

In r 969, in the Moscow jomd !Voy Mrr ( N m

IT orld). Russian journalist Alexander Nexh ny rccou~lted h e official rcsponse to I i thuania's cons tnution of an inde- pendent housing n d e l . When t h e secret urne out while the bmlding w a under con~truciion, the ~qmblic Slate Constnutirm Conlniitte~ supported the ~nstitute, though it resentrtl the hdc of confidence in i t shotvn ly he archi- itrt~."' Other researchers of housing In the Baltic states haw showr~ h a t the SOWL? Umon did tulrrate a certain lmormt of what it caned "cler~zocr~tic cmtralisnl" -a pnn- c~p le by whidl local and ccr~lsal poline5 wcre aloi..ed to dl fYts ' But Lhese diff ercnces were usually Limited to thp r~tat iw the amount r l f expenditures on items like eduica- xurl and other seniccs. In this mstarlcc he archit~cts Imd

d~ady tiken matlcrs into their awn hands, reappropriating important asp=-ts of planning and collsrnrc-or1 control from their propcz piace in thc Swiet hif,rarchy.

Nezhny's arhde also made the signitican~ point that it w s the rcpuMic 1ewl orthe State Cons~c l i o r l Cornnlittee that rescnted, but evmttmldy supported, the architecls 05 Lazd ynai. .4nd lie eqlaixled how, aftcr support brcame off icial on thr local level, thc architects g r a d u e - revealed six more dem PIS fur diR'erent q-pes of'housing block: that

t h q had been d~~cloping for the Lazdtnai p j e c t . Beanng in mind that here werr only eight paricl-housing designs in existeticc in the entire Rcpubllc of litl~uania. it was sigdicant that stepped, termed housmg blocks and f i ~ ~ olher aItemative designs- weere now unnder considera- tion fur a single mtkro~aion. As the architm explained, h e y gained lml suppoit for each oftheir dtcmattv~ rlcslgns over a long penoct i n d u c i n g them one at a h e :uld convir~ir~g offirlals tkat the desigr~s were sound and, more impo~taritly+ buildabl~ withill the limits of eisting Souirt constn~ction capabillbcs. Gaining this support on the lrlcal level pro\-rd easier as time went on, for after it became clmr that res~dr~nill organizaiian, traffic pallerns, and quality of life tr-ould lw impraved I>? the projed, local oficials 11ad less traublr p ~ t ~ t i n p thvir approval.'!

Evenhill!, die abflib to draw on I r d Lithuanian sup port from the Building M~r j i s !q and from h e heads of the hh~~ariian Cmnmunist Party also provcd uucial in tht: ardu- ~ m s w t i a tions to gain approval for corilrtruction changs frrm oficials in Mosu)~: By the end ofthis process, when ac~r~ur l t ab i l i~ camc to rest back on the shoulders of ofhfinals in Lit).iLwnia mhf) had heady ha co~lmnc ~d of he mrrik of tlic project, SWCII diliecenf house-bloclr dt4gm for h111d- ingq between five a d ~ l h e stcries were a p p d to accum- ~noclate the cornplw relief liner: of Local topography at L a z d p a ~ Besides the broken-plan M d u i g s that f o U d hillside contours, antltkier type clirnlled slopes uf up to r5 percent gmdc it1 a step@ fasko11. Thr a r c h i ~ s a h r ~ dis- persed h m l s i q bl& among h hills while leavng SLY-

tions of fnresl intact, and rim planting were a d d 4 orice constnu.%on had been complered The architech took these merlsurcf, in die hopr t l ~ "nah~w wodd be a pmer to the architfftrrre, n ther than a victim" (a observation that agam sliowetl Adto's influmcc). Both bid L ~ X S also aff'nrded views into h e surrv~mdings for thp greatest numlwr of apartmttrrts. And, further refleaing the influenw of h e Finn15h achiw~rnents in aceo~nmodating nature, architects BT&%s and &kana&s w o k at the time:

n~he vim throqh n ul~ndow ha5 a prohund impar~ on an i n d i v i d ~ k psychology . . . l%is view i r tht spatial con- tintiasion of the inlerior. an imqarablspurt ofthe s c a ~ rol~ndings In which a person lmes. A real tisual connrction with ores's s~crru~cndings i.5 ufundamental pal?

ofdcsipingfor n t ~ apartment3 owmtl comjori. '

Thr c onstrilchon dela1-s \\tardl had lasted through yearr nf negotiations also allo\vcd thy architects and plan- ners of Ldzdv1al to depalt rrom 50nt.t housiti~: practices

in their ~ntegratlon of m f r a s t m c - . ate pla~inmq, and ~l~clilanon ne~~vorks For cl11e5 on recent \hlestem think. Ing in these areas, B r e d h r and Cekanauskas used infi)r- nidtiola available from m ~ l p I g Gos Frer~cli architrrt.,~ lournals about t h ~ crfforts of Team X arch+& to rework the sircct in modem arcl~itec~urd contvxts Infl~ielzced b) the wa> G~orges Candllis. Atexic JOVL, and Shadrach Wotxl.; had recolzceimd Toulouw-Le V m d along the lirirq of " n w urban units," BrCdik~s, in particularh pushcd fir an analogous separation uf pedeshian and a~~tomobile Ttreet ~zetworks in the plan of the mrkrr,ruzr,n (P~G.II).:)

Sudl ~ntegrated planning, attenhon to uqerq' sub- jr ~ t i v e experience, and the sppai-atroll of vetllr~~lar f ? r m pd~st r lu i ~ r a f i c arr , of-course. far from rcvolut~onary in a IVestern arcll~trrhrrdl context. Their ~ign~ficance at Tazdyai lies ~nstcad In their co~~lribudon of ~ T P V ~ O U S I ~ u nackno\\ lrrlgecl and unwelcome approaches to So~~le i mtkrornion rieng. Where recent iT+stern schahrl! ~ C C D L ~ I ~ ~ < doc~~ment i n it~crca.;ing detail a hislory of Sotjet housilig llwt rcvulved around redurhvc cdlrula- tions of square meters of l imng space per pcrson. ~t 1s nntable that the d e s ~ g r ~ s fur Iazd>n.nai bv Srtdlkis dnd

kekananskas dlrectl) opposed thlc policv:" n r ~ r prolerT for the terraced si te at La7dtnal was a direct contraten- hon of the Soviet crntralr~ed bureaucratic structure, car- I led OLI t on khalf of a mole s~rccess f~~l a r c h ~ t ~ m r e .

Frorn a hl<toncaI polnt ofvieu, the completlnn of the poject let1 to a j ~ p r n ~ t i o i ~ oiironics. After wars of bureaucrahc oppns~bon, Lazdynai - 2 s az\;arcY~d d ~ e Lenin Prize for Umnn Architectural Design In 1972. And, fol1ou,% this mard , the proiecr became qoinethillg of a standard l x a r ~ r for "socialist" deslgn excellence, and war;

featwcd on the cover of he East Bluc's most cornprehen-

EI(.IIRF TI. VLZLL, oj L~zdyntu d m I o p ~ ~ ~ . t > qiuralc ~ ~ e l i l i ~ ~ a l i ~ ~ ~ and

peil<sti+an qtrixts (Souuce: o ulhar'~ coiieuio~..]

EIGUBE 12.

I~tlernatioaal

sacial~sl h o u ~ ~ n g

s~rveyfrutir17np

stepped. sdrrarrd

hows5tg 4 Ifizdynat.

(R~etdorf: Neue

\9'ohngellirtv ~ n z i a l i x t i ~ r h r r

Ilndrr. front

ucm7:)

sivt, international srwey ol modem pnel-bloclc housing dcvrlopments. Werner Rie~dorfs Nav Rc~dcntial Deudymrnts ofrhc SociaEisi .kfotiwrs {FIC.IZ).'- To the casu-

al ol>smer, Latdynai represented a socialist housi~ig s c h m e a set of new and badly nrcdtd apartments r hurned nut accordhg to an ind~~striali xed panel-block bullding system. But for those fam111ar with the ntmbing repetitiveness and drab features typical of Easl Bloc mikro. rolons, the project slgnificrl direct Western mfluence tl~rough its appearance ~ n d underlying organizatiorl.

TRENDS IN POST-INDEPENDENCE LITHUANIAN ARCHITECTURE

In th ply iwrI<, the hzdynai archittlrfs had sought to make a linkigr t t t h Western architechud currents that was et~Cely canhistmt with the efforts Bmtykas Iatcr higMighlcd in hi.: chsn~saon of the Lithuanian Parliament b ~ i l d i t ~ g arid the Drama Theater. The recurrence ofthi.: "Westward p a z ~ " among leading architects rcffccts, in fad,

he fiision ofLa Soviet-era Lithualkn hstorical longing w j h a prachcdl strategy 011 the part of hthuanidri c~illltural and political lcaduss to s~~ppor t expressions of indcpcndcnt ilationhood through a~lture In so doing. these leaders underscored the gcogwphlcal and historical d t i e s hat have, more often than not. conslgied residents of this Baltlc "mini-mtian" to hfi. aa. part o f a Russian- or Palish. dormnated conglomerate ~bte." Projects like Lazdynai p~eserved and espressd the vamp will to mdependent action that resurfaced tvhcn Lithuania became the first republic to secede f ~ o m the Soviet Lniun in 1990.

U A C I U I K k - E A S - B L O C . W E S T VREW 39

Today, af3er almost a decade of independence, Lithuanians are still stnlgglmg to fashion a stable young scpul~lic with a society and economy that more closely rcscrnblc! those of'their Scandinrn4an and Europem neigh Ix~rs. Rut in a part of the world where trxdihons of dcmocra. tic public debate have had comparatively few opportunities to come $0 fid Rower, the Lithuanian lxdt enwronment pro- tides vahablc duvv a to thy wd) s that archtecb sought to conb-ilrute to international discussions of architecture - As- cuwions which, wen during the Cold Wx, transcended s~m- plistic and totalizing East-West dirisions.

Facing increasingly powerful forces of global com- mercial investment. architem in Lithuania. as d s n h e r e , arc today seeking to balance what is international and contemporary against what is local, unique, and worthy oh preservation It is unclear what the future holds,

'tl~ough Western investment, local economic dwelop. men\, and living standards are gradually increasing - and w i h hern the disparities ofwealth common to capi- tallst societ~es. The Lithuanian hybrid architectural tradi- tion ndl urldou1,tcdly bc challenged by thc fotccs of ~cnnorn ic glol~alization in ways now scen in most 0th parts of'the developing world. Whether local architects can withstand this new onslaught of outside influences is, of course, unclear. Yet one thing appears certain: at

the core of Lithuanian identity has been the experience of 1ntcrac.ting with, accommodating, and adapting tn the cultures livlng around Tdthuania. If historical eqerience is any guide, then Lithuanians and their architects will again find ways to inflect their hybrid tradition and define their built environment in dialape with the inAtaences arriving from near and distant shores.

REFERENCE NOTES

An exller verslcln nfthis article was prment- ed as "Lithuanian Architech~rc, rggj-rg8j: Testing Authority a t the So~iet Pcr iphcq at

tlir S ~ c i r t y of Architechirai I listorians Forty-

Eighth Annual Meeting. Seattlc, WA. April

7. [ 9 9 j I would like to thank m a u t a s Matiuika, Grcg Castillo. Blair Rublc, Dora

Wiebcnson, and thc anorqmous reviewer ol this journal for their critical readings and comments on this work.

I. The best cornparatwe anal>rls io date of Ualtic politics a r~d culture In historical per- spective is A. Lieveri, T h Baltrr: R#otution: Eshraia. Latvta, Lrthuanlu, and the Pufh to

Indqmmdme [ N w Haven. Yale University Pre-1. ~ g g j . Thr classic histoy of Lithuania is k Glloka, li-VM Frtonja IHi~tory of Lilhuaniaj (Fellbachfliarttr~n?n~rg: Patrin

Publishers. rgio). Unless othwwictp rmted,

a l l hrhuanlan sources and qut>tatit,n< rxr

tranhted by the author.

a. See K. ~ e r h l ~ n a c , TalstieFiq Kirmn hfedmiq Trohesiq Dekoro Cmizi.' VThr Origins af Peaqan~ Farmyard Bililding Dccorationsq, Lieturn Arckikkbfiros

Hausimai ILilhlranian Archikfurrrl Qtmrionsj 4 (1974, pp.323-6:; K. teffelgis. ' LieTuvil~ L~audies hrch~leklilros Tyrimas: Darbai, Rezultatai, Pecspektyvas' ["Lit l~ua~uan Folk Architectural Re~earch Works, Resuhs, Perspeclives"], Lbudies CTki /AopEcs' Economy), July 1991, pp.13-15.

3 . 1 . Zinkus, Lithuania: An Enq~lopedic Sumy [Vilnius.: Vhia Encyclopedia Publkherr. 1984). p.36. 4.1. M~nkenfiut. "Sovietme60 architckhira mt i5torilo.; swr*kli~~'' rArchittaurc of the Sodrt Pwiod Weighed on the Scalcs o f Histom*l, titeruttiru Ar Menas /Liter@twrz and

Art!. july 25. 1991, pp.8-y. 5 . Muniripalitv of Vilnius, Vilnius Ewnornic

Profib 2 (Vilnius: Canada-Baltic Municipal Cooperation Program, rggll). p.g. G b t c d forcql mwsmnt . condi&rad by culttird dlfbrences and barriers posed by admns&abve mefficiencies and I ~ I transac-

bon costs, conthlues to be a major theme m

receill h o ~ s q Lteratue a ~ d conference r e p *

ernergq horr~ Eakrn a id Cerlbd Eurrjw.

S r r , for rumple, H.-U. Schwrdltl: 4.. A Futurr

fir ha Ho~t ing F~tuter: Furoptun Strutq'~t.rfor

PrrfiLhntutrd Housing Esa~f r ,$ in Ctntrul unrl

Easlrni E u w p (Berlul: European Academy of

the U r h ~ Er~vixonmet~t, rqgxj, pp 162 65

As0 see Evlvironmnhl Im~pmvtlmnls In

Prebbrimted Howang E s h k , proceechg of the

Co~~erence on Cooperahor1 hetween B e r h and

Towns and Cibm m CenW and Eastern

Europe. Decembr 12-14, ~rggh (Berh

Empan Academy of the U r h r En~mnn~ent.

1996). ppg-11. ;. A. Lritkaus!xas and V. Jonaih,

-Daugiabutiq Gyvenarnq y N a m y Prlezira:

Pmblemos ir Sprendimai' rApartment

131d Management: Problems and

Solutions"]. Stat)rbn irAdd&frim (Building

and Architectlr+. May rggg, pp.16-r7.

8. A. Vitkauskas, 'Bausparfonds be1 der

Samerung von Mattenbauten," presentahon at

the conference "We~t~rrnlwcklmg von

P l a t t e n h t e n Urnpentton m i ~ c h r n den

Stadtrn Rerlin und V7Irniirs." Srna-~nvaltung

fijr Stadtentwicklung. U m r l t s c h u ~ , und

Tahnologie. Rerlin, Iunc 17-18.1999 g. N m housing. by comparison. can only k built at a cost of Dhfz.500 per square meter,

h i n g many 6rms to ibe prcfabricatcd

housing rem-ahon market. Intemew nnth Bemd Fohgrub. Bu- hlanager. HoPro

Bauplanung GmbH Berlul, June 18, rggg. to. Currently. about half of the wsh-

spalung wction is comprised of foreign

studen&, many from the M e East

Beginning m Ed1 1994, a translhon -2s

~umpltlted tu a f o u r - y e ~ ~ Bachelaf s of

A3 ~ h i t r c t u ~ r dnd a ttw war Mastrr', d 4rchitrc+ure at the Vilniu5 Technirral

Unlversltv Intemlew alth Ardilkctur~

Program Deal Vylaulas DlClus at Vilnius Techrucal Urlivers~ly, May 24, 1994.

11. Vytautas Ditlus ~ntenlew, LMa q t h , 1994 11. Polis, "Kel~al lr Talta~ Vytauto Dl t~aus Pokalbls" ["Roads and Pathways: An Iriterview alth Vytautas Ditius"], Statyba 11.

Archrtektura, Ma.: 1992, p.z 12. htemcxu with architecture professors Vjrautas Drcd~kls and Vytautas ~ e k a ~ l a u s k a s a t thc Vilnius Acadcrny of Einc Arts Mav 25. 1994, and Junc ro, Iggj 13. Whflc Vilnius rcmains ethnically cxtrcmcly drverse. thc rcst of Wthuanla is made tip of approxfrnittcly 85 percent