Socialism for Everybody?

Abstract

The concept of a socialist state system was originally based on the idea of an egalitarian, caring society. But during the so–called normalisation era in Czechoslovakia (after the occupation in 1968) the reality rather deviated from the initial proclamations. The architecture of public buildings split roughly into two more or less independent and very different lines.
The first line is represented by politically high–profile showcase pieces, existing or planned, that served to promote the regime internationally or acted as an ideological ‘mask’ in the media. These included, in particular, buildings connected with cultural and historical identity (e.g. the Palace of Culture or the New Stage of the National Theatre), ones that provided evidence of the ‘world–class’ quality of the country’s architecture (often these were built for important international sports events, such as the Štvanice tennis stadium, the ski jump(s) in Harrachov, the rowing canal in Račice), and ones that demonstrated the country’s technological sophistication (e.g. Prague Metro, Žižkov TV tower). A specific group of structures was consisted of buildings that were often spectacular and prominent, but in their actual use were less well–known by the public and were sometimes almost a secret (e.g. recreational and medical facilities for leading figures of the regime or the international hotels). These buildings usually had strong political support, a more individual approach by designers, the exclusive supply of structural components and materials, and, last but not least, pressure to meet deadlines.
Compared to these ‘triumphs’ of ideological representation, however, everyday reality offered a joyless environment and grim hope for the future. With the onset of normalisation, public investment priorities were reduced mainly to panel housing estates and fulfilling the requirement to build as many apartments a year as possible. There was little energy left for quality public amenities. At the same time, however, for architects in the younger and middle generations, small– and medium–scale public buildings presented a way to brighten the bleak environment of the newly built housing estates and neglected city centres and for these architects to fulfil their own visions of better architecture. Luckily, prefabricated concrete frames developed for these purposes and the ‘percent for art’ was introduced at the end of the 1960s. Architects were able to modify standardised structural systems and cover the buildings with more creative façades (mainly by applying ceramics, glass, or coloured paints and cladding. Such efforts, combined with a touch of postmodernist or high–tech features and executed in collaboration with artists, allowed architects to fulfil their dream of creating humanised, socially responsible architecture. In addition, these buildings were supposed to blend with the local historical or landscape context, and, over the course of the 1980s, they came to address the broader challenges in society as well (e.g. the construction of comprehensive housing for the disabled and for seniors, and attempts to save energy with the use of insulation, solar panels, or shapes efficiently adapted to local weather conditions, etc.).