| Project Detail |
For societies undergoing profound transformations, the architectural heritage of the recent denounced past is central to both urban planning and political campaigning. I will explore how after regime change the fate of such heritage – monuments, signature buildings and other sites perceived as cultural products and symbols of the ousted regime – is justified, debated and contested among the political establishment and the professional society of architects. I argue that while the former group’s decisions on heritage conveyed memory politics, architects engaged with the issue driven by ‘politics of professionalization’, i.e. a pursuit for expert agency and public recognition. Looking into the confrontations and dialogues between and among politicians and architects, I highlight nationalist or civic values attached to architectural heritage and the inclusive or exclusive dimensions in its conceptualization. My research (CONDEM) focuses on Sofia and Plovdiv, Bulgaria’s two largest cities, and three periods of political transformation: nation-state building after 1878, state socialism after WWII and liberal democracy after 1989.
Located at the intersection of three research fields – urban history, memory studies and critical heritage studies – this is an interdisciplinary project combining historical and sociological methods. I will trace the evolution of the problem of heritage in legal documents, political papers and architectural critique over more than a century and conduct discourse analysis of heritage debates on the basis of identified case studies. For their selection, I employ four categories of ‘events’ that triggered intensification of the heritage debate: urbanist, corporate, heritagization and mnemonic. By investigating how the meaning of architectural heritage changed over time reflecting competing political interests, I aim to address the bigger question to what extent public representations of the past promote plurality or entrench discrimination. |
