| |
Although Yugoslavia existed as an official state through much of the 20th century, its architecture has been commonly presented through separate, regional surveys rather than general overviews. On the basis of the major political events of the century, three phases can be considered distinctive in terms of architectural analysis: the period before the creation of Yugoslavia in 1918, the interwar period of the kingdom of Yugoslavia, and the period after World War II, when the country was officially the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
Constituted on territory shared through the centuries by two quite different empires, the
Habsburg and the Ottoman, Yugoslavia had unequal potential for the development of modernity in its eastern and western regions. However, the modern age was brought to the whole country from the same source: the Central European metropolis. Being in Austro-Hungarian territory at the turn of the century, buildings in Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina were designed either by foreign builders or by domestic architects educated at leading schools of the empire. On the other hand, Serbia and Montenegro, emancipated from the Ottoman government in the mid-19th century, passed through an intense transformation, catching up with the trends of contemporary Europe. The first Serbian architects to bring modern architectural features to the kingdom of Serbia (independent from 1878) were educated in Vienna, similar to their fellows from the western regions.
The turning point in Slovenian architecture was the earthquake of 1895, after which the cultural capital of Slovenia, Ljubljana, was rebuilt following the plans of Camillo Sitte and Max Fabiani. Besides shaping the modern urban structure of Ljubljana, Max Fabiani (1865–1962) brought the Viennese Secession to Slovenia, designing many public and residential buildings, such as Hribar House (1905), Bamberg Palace (1906–07), and the girls’ school Mladika (1906–07).
The first decades of 20th-century architecture in Croatia are associated with the name of Viktor Kovacic (1874–1924), a student of Otto Wagner, who initiated an enthusiastic struggle against “dogmatic historicism.” Joining a group of young artists and writers, the founders of the Zagreb magazine Zivot (Life), Kovacic published a manifesto titled “Modern Architecture” in its first issue of 1900. Whereas his projects such as Frank House (1910) and the Church of St. Blaz (1913) vary the recognizable idiom of the Wagnerschule, other chief examples of the Croatian Secession, such as Ignjat Fischer’s Sanatorium (1908) and Rudolf Lubinsky’s University Library (1913), both in Zagreb, pres ent a closer interpretation of the Viennese “geometric” forerunner.
After the Austrian occupation of Bosnia-Herzegovina of 1878, the favored style for new public buildings, chosen to present the distinctiveness of the mixed population, was the pseudo-Moorish. Richly decorated edifices in Sarajevo, such as Wittek and Ivekovic’s City Hall (1892–96, almost destroyed in the civil war, 1992–95) or the Evangelistic Church (1899), designed by the leading architect of the time, Karlo Parzik (1857–1942), exemplify the popular within-the-empire trend of compiling “exotic,” pseudo-Moorish and neo-Byzantine elements with the forms of Western Medieval Revival. With exceptions such as Jan Kotera’s Slavija Bank (1910–11) in Sarajevo, whose pure geometric forms anticipated his “revolutionary” Urbánek’s Mozarteum Building in Prague, characteristic Secessionist buildings in Bosnia-Herzegovina were a mixture of eclectic features and new decorative motifs, as on the Post Office in Sarajevo (1907–13, severely damaged in the civil war, 1992–95), designed by Josip Vancas (1859–1932).
Before the establishment of an architectural program at Belgrade Technical Faculty in 1897, the first generation of Serbian architects earned their degrees from universities in Vienna, Munich, Berlin, Karlsruhe, and Zurich, bringing back both the academic traditions as well as the new, turn-of-the-century tendencies. The Secession appeared in Serbia in two different manners, one of which came as a synthesis of the eclectic method and modern architectural elements (e.g., large continuous glass screens, characteristic railings, and floral decoration) that can be seen on Svetozar Jovanovic’s Officers Union (1908) in Belgrade. The other Secessionist manner, represented in the work of Branko Tanazevic (1876–1945), such as the Telephone Exchange (1907–08) and the Ministry of Education (1912–13), both in Belgrade, was closely related to the turn-of-the-century National Romanticism of the Central European countries that introduced modern, stylized folk motifs as the new forms of expression. This mode of Serbian Secession was a further step in the creation of a “true” national idiom, already announced in the academic neo- Byzantine designs of the earlier generation of Theophil von Hansen’s pupils.
After the formation of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes in 1918 (in 1929 renamed the Kingdom of Yugoslavia), building was intensive in the strongest economic centers, Ljubljana and Zagreb, and especially brisk in Belgrade, the capital of the entire country. The significant event was the foundation of architectural schools at the Technical Faculty of Ljubljana, led by Joze Plecnik (1872–1957) and Ivan Vurnik (1884– 1971); at the Technical Faculty of Zagreb, guided by Viktor Kovacic and Edo Schön (1877–1949); and at the Academy of Fine Arts, also in Zagreb, conceived by the radically modern Drago Ibler (1894–1964). At the same time, the architectural faculty at the Technical University of Belgrade was strengthened by a generation of professors who faithfully continued academic traditions. The architectural character of the three national capitals of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes (Belgrade, Zagreb, and Ljubljana) reflected their different cultural climates and political aspirations. Whereas Belgrade’s desire to grow into the capital of a major nation was promoted by the forms of “late academicism” and the architectural face of Ljubljana was changed with enthusiasm to demonstrate Slo-vene national character, Zagreb became the only strong center of the architectural avant-garde of that time.
Different methods of dealing with historical vocabulary dominated the architectural production of Yugoslavia during the interwar period. In addition to Belgrade, where academic historicism determined the architectural scene during the 1920s and resulted in noteworthy projects, such as those by Nikola Nestorovic (1868–1957), including the University Library (1919–26, with Dragutin Djordjevic) and the Technical Faculty (1925–31, with Branko Tanazevic), the eclectic method was also employed by architects from the other regions. The Mortgage Bank (1923) in Zagreb, designed by one of the most remarkable Croatian modernists, Hugo Ehrlich (1879–1936), who became well known as Adolf Loos’s collaborator on the Villa Karma, on Lake Geneva, confirms that the strict line between the eclecticist and the modernist cannot be drawn. For the academic tradition, the writings of Belgrade architect Milutin Borisavljevic (Miloutine Borissavliévitch, 1889–1970) were the only theoretical statements from interwar Yugoslavia to receive a world reputation.
The Wagnerschule associates, Joze Plecnik and Viktor Kovacic, originated recognizable modes of modern expression without denying historical references. Plecnik’s achievements in Ljubljana, Zale Cemetery (1939–40) and the National University Library (1936–40), as well as Kovacic’s works in Zagreb, among them his masterpiece, the Stock Exchange (1922–27), can be considered distinguished examples of European modernism in general. A specific modern idiom of treating the past through the transformation of folk motifs—a National Romantic variant of the Art Deco—arose in Yugoslav regions, as among the majority of “small” European nations, from an attempt to create a unique national style. A colorful facade of the Trade Union Bank (1922) in Ljubljana, decorated with painted motifs reminiscent of peasant fabrics, informs Ivan Vurnik’s vivid approach of generating a Slovene national style. In Serbia, an established agenda of shaping a national style found its passionate devotee in Momir Korunovic (1883–1969). His most famous buildings, Post Office No. 2 (1927–28) and the Postal Ministry (1927–30), demonstrate his method of mixing motifs from folk art with elements from Serbian medieval architecture.
Zagreb was the only Yugoslav center to accept the avant-garde ideas of European functionalism. Most of the leading Croatian architects of the time were either educated in the avant-garde European schools or worked with some of the most famous European architects: Loos, Behrens, Poelzig, and Le Corbusier. Peter Behrens’s involvement with the reconstruction of the Elsafluid Building in 1927 had a special impact on Zagreb’s architectural scene. Two architectural groups, Zemlja and Radna Grupa Zagreb (RGZ), became leading generators of the new climate, working both on new, radical designs and on architectural publications and exhibitions. The members of RGZ took an active role in CIAM (Congrès Internationaux d’Architecture Moderne) of 1933 in Athens, opposing, with their own proposals, the charter advanced by Le Corbusier.
One of the rare examples of Belgrade functionalism is the Union Bank (1929–30), the masterpiece of Croatian architect Hugo Ehrlich. In contrast to the “monumental modernism” of the 1930s, which was gladly received by Serbian architects, functionalism found only a few followers: Djordje Tabakovic (1897–1971) in Novi Sad; Nikola Dobrovic (1897–1967), who built mainly outside Serbia; and Milan Zlokovic (1898– 1965), whose University Children’s Clinic (1933–40) in Belgrade is the main avant-garde accomplishment. Works of Dragisa Brasovan (1887–1965), among them the Government Building (1930–39) of the Danube Region in Novi Sad and the Air Force Headquarters (1935, damaged in the NATO bombing of 1999) in Zemun, offer key examples of the monumental Modern idiom, created through a refined juxtaposition of Expressionism and “purified” Neoclassicism. The Albania Palace (1938–40) in Belgrade, designed by a team of architects from Zagreb and Belgrade, and especially the Yugoslavian Pavilion at the Paris International Exhibition of 1937, by Croatian architect Josip Seissel (1904–87), are outstanding examples of this “monumental manner.
After World War II, the political system in Yugoslavia was radically changed. First associated with the politics of the Eastern bloc, “Tito’s socialism” shifted its course, breaking with Stalinist politics. Because of the immense loans taken from the West from the 1950s until the late 1970s, the potential for a high standard of architectural productions was better than in other Eastern European countries. Being socialistic in content and capitalistic in form, Yugoslavian architecture of the post-World War II period dealt with a series of “socialistic” programs, such as collective housing, community centers, houses of culture, and partisan memorials (best represented through the work of Bogdan Bogdanovic), trying to keep abreast with current architectural trends in Western Europe. The urban planning associated with the controlled economy found its best expression in radical plans for new city districts, among which the one for New Belgrade was the most ambitious.
One of the rare examples of designs from the late 1940s, when Soviet models were still
recommended, is the Federal Executive Government Building (1947–61) in Belgrade, begun according to a project by a group of architects from Zagreb, although its “Eastern” monumental features modified into the International Style during the construction as a result of the political shift. During the 1950s and early 1960s, the International Style dominated architectural production. Le Corbusier’s vocabulary occurred in works of his assistants, Juraj Neidhardt from Sarajevo and the Slovene Edvard Ravnikar, but emerged more obviously in Milorad Macura’s Military Printing House (1953) in Belgrade and Drago Galic’s Apartment Block (1953–56) in Zagreb. The “constructional aesthetic” of Pier Luigi Nervi found its reinterpretations in Vladimir Turina’s Dinamo Stadium (1954) in Zagreb as well as in Milorad Pantovic’s new Belgrade Fair (1956–57). A new, more individualistic and expressive trend of the international architecture appeared at the very end of the 1950s with Vjenceslav Richter’s Pavilion for Expo ‘58 in Brussels, Nikola Dobrovic’s Secretariat of National Defense (1957–63, severely damaged in the NATO bombing of 1999), and Ivan Antic’s Museum of Contemporary Art (1960–65, with Ivanka Raspopovic), the latter two in Belgrade. The most striking architectural events in Yugoslavia of the time were the last meeting of CIAM, held in Dubrovnik in 1956, and Kenzo Tange’s engagement with the reconstruction of the Macedonian capital, Skopje, after the earthquake of 1963.
Yugoslav architects accepted the diversity of the late 1960s and 1970s following the manners of Brutalism, late modern Expressionism, structuralism, regionalism, High- Tech, and so on. Different Brutalist expressions can be summarized through a couple of remarkable examples, such as those in Skopje after the earthquake, including Alfred Roth’s Elementary School (1967), Janko Konstantinov’s Telecommunication Center (1971–74), and Marko Music’s University Complex (1974), as well as through others, in smaller Yugoslavian cities, including Svetlana Radevic’s Hotel Podgorica (1965–67) in the Montenegrin capital of Podgorica, Milan Sosteric’s Bakery (1971) in Makarska, Mladen Vodicka’s City Library (1976) in Karlovac, and the Military High School (1975) in Ljubljana, designed by the group Studio 7. Application of the High-Tech vocabulary found its best interpretations in Stojan Maksimovic’s Center Sava (1977–79) in Belgrade, Milan Mihelic’s Telephone Exchange (1978) in Ljubljana, Boris Magas’s Stadium Poljud (1979) in Split, and Stanko Kristl’s City Hospital (1979) in Izola. Designs of Bosnian architect Zlatko Ugljen include the National Theater (1978, with Jahiel Finci) in Zenica, Hotel Ruza (1978) in Mostar, and the White Mosque (1980) in Visoko, for which he received the Aga Khan Award of 1983 and which represents one the most respected works of the time.
Various Postmodern modes of the late 1970s and 1980s were welcome among architects of different generations. The leading designs of the new wave, related to the trends introduced by Aldo Rossi, Richard Meier, James Stirling, and the Berlin IBA, are associated with the names of Milos Bonca, the group Kras, Penezic and Rogina, Branko Siladjin, and Petar Vulovic. As a consequence of the civil war and the breakup of the country in the last decade of the 20th century, a possible summary of Yugoslavian architecture of the 1990s includes more examples of destruction than of construction.
TANJA DAMLJANOVIC
Sennott R.S. Encyclopedia of twentieth century architecture, Vol.3 (P-Z). Fitzroy Dearborn., 2005. |
