Urban design, ideology, and power: use of the central square in ...
29
This article was downloaded by: [UQ Library] On: 19 February 2015, At: 16:40 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Click for updates Planning Perspectives Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rppe20 Urban design, ideology, and power: use of the central square in Tirana during one century of political transformations Dorina Pojani a a Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment, Department of Urbanism, Delft University of Technology, PO Box 5030, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands Published online: 09 Apr 2014. To cite this article: Dorina Pojani (2015) Urban design, ideology, and power: use of the central square in Tirana during one century of political transformations, Planning Perspectives, 30:1, 67-94, DOI: 10.1080/02665433.2014.896747 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02665433.2014.896747 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Transcript of Urban design, ideology, and power: use of the central square in ...
This article was downloaded by: [UQ Library]On: 19 February 2015, At: 16:40Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office:Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Click for updates
Planning PerspectivesPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscriptioninformation:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rppe20
Urban design, ideology, and power: useof the central square in Tirana during onecentury of political transformationsDorina Pojaniaa Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment, Department ofUrbanism, Delft University of Technology, PO Box 5030, 2600 GA Delft, TheNetherlandsPublished online: 09 Apr 2014.
To cite this article: Dorina Pojani (2015) Urban design, ideology, and power: use of the central squarein Tirana during one century of political transformations, Planning Perspectives, 30:1, 67-94, DOI:10.1080/02665433.2014.896747
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02665433.2014.896747
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”)contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and ourlicensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, orsuitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publicationare the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor &Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independentlyverified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilitieswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantialor systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, ordistribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and usecan be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Urban design, ideology, and power: use of the central square in Tiranaduring one century of political transformations
Dorina Pojani∗
Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment, Department of Urbanism, Delft University ofTechnology, PO Box 5030, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands
(Received 14 February 2013; final version received 8 January 2014)
This article recounts the history of urban design in the centre of Tirana, the capital of Albania,during five political periods (Ottoman Empire, Italian domination, communist regime, post-communist anarchy, and Western-style planning). Starting in the 1910s, successivegovernments have imposed their urban design visions for a grand city centre and tried toerase the built heritage of their predecessors, thus creating an eclectic space. In the post-communist era, the city government has made attempts to develop a new grand vision forits use but has met with failure. The author argues that the reasons for this outcome lay inthe contemporary nature of the state, as well as the nature of development in a marketeconomy.
Keywords: city centres; public space; monumentality; totalitarianism; Tirana; Albania
Introduction
By European standards, Tirana is a relatively young city. When it became the capital of Albaniain 1920, it was a small town of 17,000 inhabitants. Today, it is a metropolis of nearly one millioninhabitants. Within a century, Tirana has experienced the rise and demise of the OttomanEmpire, fascism, and communism, and (since 1990) the rise of consumerism. This article isabout the transformation of its centre, which has been remade several times to mirror the trans-formations that occurred in Albanian politics and society.1
Following Albania’s independence from the Ottoman Empire in 1912, subsequent totalitar-ian governments, each bringing a new ideology and a new set of rules, imposed their grandurban design visions on Tirana’s central square and main boulevard and tried to erase the heri-tage of their predecessors. Each totalitarian regime succeeded in leaving its mark, but the grandvisions of the new democratic regime have been largely unaccomplished. The result is an eclec-tic and unfinished space that comprises an assortment of layers, styles, and iconographies fromdifferent eras, and a perpetual flow of traffic.
In the last decade, the city government has made attempts to develop a new grand vision forthe use of the city centre. However, these visions, based on an engrained tradition of centralplanning by an all-powerful government and a potent nostalgia about the past role of thecentre, have met with failure. This failure is the outcome of the contemporary nature of thestate, as well as the nature of spatial arrangements in a market economy. None of the post-com-munist governments has been able to exercise definitive control and affirm its power by bringing
# 2014 Taylor & Francis
∗Email: [email protected]
Planning Perspectives, 2015Vol. 30, No. 1, 67–94, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02665433.2014.896747
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
a workable vision and resources to readapt the centre to fulfil an attractive role in the new contextin which it must function. A pluralistic elite, which replaced the monolithic powers of the pasteras, is inept at crafting a new collective meaning, to which contemporary society can anchor itsidentity in flux.
While the centre fits the needs of totalitarian regimes, it is out of place with the logic and theuse of centrally located space in a market economy. Now, urban uses of space are dominated byinhabitants uninterested in political demonstrations and parades, which require purposely builtlarge plazas and wide avenues. Private developers have taken over the role of the state in creat-ing public life outside the city’s central square. In the time-honoured tradition of many SouthernEuropean cities, the defining character of these new communal spaces is a combination of strol-ling, consumerism, intimacy, and so-called ‘third places’ (cafes, bars, clubs, and the like)accommodated in narrow streets, back alleys, and refurbished courtyards. By contrast, thecentre is a sterile space.
The urban planning and design of the centre of Tirana can be divided into three periods:Italian ‘protectorate’ (1920s–1945), communist police state (1945–1990), and pluralisticmarket economy (1990 to the present). While the current academic literature on the design ofthe centre is limited, debates on this issue abound in the media, particularly in newspapers,TV, and the Internet. Numerous newspaper and magazine articles, as well as a few designreports, written between 2002 and 2012 by Albanian and foreign architects, designers, journal-ists, and political analysts, were identified and pieced together to reconstruct the public discourserelated to Tirana’s centre (Table 1).2
The centre of Tirana
Italian efforts to Westernize the centre
In 1912, Albania declared its independence from the Ottoman Empire after five centuries ofdomination, during which it had absorbed Ottoman culture (Figure 1). Eight years later,Tirana, which was a small town with 17,000 inhabitants and an area of 3 square kilometres,became its capital. Several commentators described it as little more than ‘a big village’.3
The town centre consisted of a lively bazaar of two or three hectares that dated from the1700s, in which most stores were clustered. A description is provided by an Italian geographerin 1941, who notes that the bazaar had changed little since Ottoman times:
[t]he bazaar, which makes up the heart of the city, is one of a kind . . . A maze of streets and paths,flanked by plain cottages, often single-storey, with a shop opening on the street and a backroomserving as storage and workshop. Tiny shops next to each other, in two rows on every street,over the entire quarter.4
Landmarks in the centre included a very small mosque and a clock tower, which were built in1789 and 1830, respectively. The residential neighbourhoods that surrounded the centre,especially in the east and northeast, were created piecemeal in a typical Muslim vernacularstyle. The main roads radiated from the bazaar all the way out of town.5
The regime of the newly independent state wished to transform the town into a WesternEuropean capital based on professional concepts and plans. Austrian consultants, who werehired in 1923, prepared a plan to widen and straighten urban roads and ‘rationalize’ the
68 D. Pojani
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
Table 1. Empirical research.
Year Article/report
2002 de Campo, Francesca. “Tirana Rinasce.” Nel Blu, November.
2003 Arosio, Enrico. “Tirana Lumiere.” Klan, September 25.
2003 Jano, Agron. “Per Qendren e Tiranes dhe Planin Rregullues te Saj.” Gazeta Shqiptare, August2003.
2003 Kellici, Ermal. “Qendra e Tiranes dhe Historia.” Gazeta Shqiptare, July 8.
2003 Klosi, Ardian. “Jeruzalemi Yne.” Shekulli, February 2.
2003 Plasari, Aurel. “Replike me Dr. Klosin: Ndertimi i Kishave ne Qender te Tiranes.” Shekulli,February 25.
2003 Vlahou, Evi. “Tirana: Ekeı Opou Ta Oneira TiS Ntoras Eginan PragmatikotiTa.” BHMagazino146, July 27.
2004 Agalliu, Lorjan. “Maketi i Francezeve dhe ‘Ulerima’ e Edvard Munch.” Tema, May 6.
2004 Architecture Studio. “A New Master Plan for Tirana City Centre.” City of Tirana, report.
2004 Cuyvers, Wim. “Tirana – Mercedes, Houses and Rubbish.” Archis 4: 39–43.
2004 Fevziu, Blendi. “Tirana mes Brasinit dhe Parisit.” Korrieri, February 25.
2004 Jano, Agron. “Qendra e Re e Tiranes, Dobia e nje Projekti.” Shekulli, April 19.
2004 Lubonja, Fatos. “Tirana si Qytet i Qytetareve dhe Kryeqytet i Pushtetareve.” Korrieri, February24.
2004 Rama, Edi. “Nje Projekt i Forte ne Dy Gjuhe.” Shekulli, February 22.
2004 Sopoti, Ilir. “Spekulimi Urbanistik per Qendren e Tiranes.” Tema, April 25.
2004 Velo, Maks. “Qendra e Re e Tiranes, Zgjidhja me Optimale.” Korrieri, April 21.
2005 Baze, Mero. “Rreziqet si Gazetar dhe si Urbanist nen Hijen e ‘Ciklopit’ te Tiranes.” Tema, January27.
2005 Bicoku, Arben. “Qikllopi dhe ‘Intelektuali.’” Shekulli, January 22.
2005 Boeri, Stefano. “Tirana alla Bataglia del Colore.” La Repubblica, July 3.
2005 Kramer, Jane. “Painting the Town: How Edi Rama Reinvented Albanian Politics.” New Yorker,June 27.
2005 Lloncari, Xhelal. “Tirana dhe Debati per Arkitekturen!” Korrieri, February 9.
2005 Lubonja, Fatos. “Disa Mendime mbi Qikllopin e Tiranes.” Korrieri, January 21.
2005 Ndreca, Ardian. “Kryeqyteti i Shemtimit.” 55, September 18.
2006 Fink, Bill. “Not Such a Joke: Accidentally Enjoying Albania.” San Francisco Chronicle,October 1.
2006 Mansfield, Paul. “Albania Steps in From the Cold.” The Observer, April 9.
2006 Winner, Christopher P. “Tirana Gets Real.” The American, June 1.
2008 51N4E. “Scanderbeg Square design concept.” City of Tirana: report.
2008 Faja, Enver. “Projekti Belg i Qendres se Tiranes, nje Atentat Kunder Qytetit.” Tema, May 23.
2008 Greca, Adelina and Valbona Koci. “Tirana is now a Step Closer to a New European City.” City ofTirana, report.
2008 Grosi, Petrika. “Kolaneci: Si e Ndertuam Piramiden per Enverin.” Albania, October 4.
2008 Lila, Oliverta, a. “Bulevardi i Tiranes, Pasuri Kulturore e Europes.” Gazeta Shqiptare, July 9.
2008 Lila, Oliverta, b. “Tirana po Shkaterron Simbolet e Arkitektures.” Gazeta Shqiptare, October 24.
(Continued)
Planning Perspectives 69
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
Table 1. (Continued ).
Year Article/report
2010 Newspaper Staff Writer. “Berisha: Sheshi i Shqiptareve, te Ruhet Identiteti i Tij.” BalkanWeb,April 9.
2010 Newspaper Staff Writer. “Keshilltari i Kryeministrit Berisha per Territorin Flet per Konfliktin.”Shqip, April 11.
2010 Newspaper Staff Writer. “Rama Perdhunon Kujtesen Historike te Tiranes: Interviste me FatosLubonjen.” Koha Jone, April 27.
2010 Bogdani, Gert. “Kurthi i Rames per Sheshin.” Standard, April 16.
2010 Bozdo, Eno. “Sheshi ‘Skenderbej’ Pertej se Majtes e te Djathtes.” Panorama, April 7.
2010 City of Tirana. “Rama: Sheshi ‘Skenderbej’, Sfide e Perbashket e te Gjitheve.” Lajmet e Ditarit,April 21.
2010 Dervishi, Kastriot. “Ç’mund te Ishte Qendra e Kryeqytetit te Shqiperise? Historia e Sheshit‘Skenderbej.’” 55, April 26.
2010 Faja, Enver. “Nderhyrja ne Sheshin ‘Skenderbej’, nje Atentat Kunder Kryeqytetit.” 55, April 9.
2010 Fevziu, Blendi. “Projektuesit Belge: Çfare u Ofrojme Shqiptareve ne Qender te Kryeqytetit.”Panorama, April 13.
2010 Kadilli, Fatbardh. “Mediokriteti Monumental i Sheshit.” Korrieri, April 12.
2010 Kolevica, Petraq. “’Skenderbej’, Sheshi qe Mban Historine e Nje Shteti.” Telegraf, May 17.
2010 Kuci, Elis. “Tafaj: Sheshi ‘Skenderbej, Pre e Interesave te Rames.” Rilindja Demokratike, April13.
2010 Lame, Artan. “Lamtumire Lulishjta Ime!” Shqip, April 26.
2010 Lubonja, Fatos. “Sheshi ‘Skenderbej’ si Placke Lufte.” Ekspres, April 18.
2010 Stefani, Andrea. “Berisha Kunder ‘Skenderbeut’ si Tursun Pasha.” Shqip, April 7.
2010 Stefani, Andrea. “Qeveri qe Dhunon edhe ‘Skenderbeun’, edhe Kushtetuten.” Shqip, April 12.
2010 Tafaj, Arben. “Rama, mes ‘Rruges se Trete dhe ‘Neomesjetarizmit.’” Panorama, April 4.
2010 Vata, Arben. “Rama, Loja e Fundit me Nervat e Shqiptareve.” Koha Jone, April 22.
2010 Xhaferri, Ferdinand. “Pse do Bllokojme Punimet.” Korrieri, April 12.
2010 Zaimi, Arber. “Frengjite, Belget dhe Tirana qe Dua.” Shqip, April 17.
2011 51N4E. Double or Nothing. London: Architectural Association Publications.
2011 Baze, Mero. “Sheshi Skenderbej, ose Çfare Di te Beje Lulzim Basha.” Tema, November 25.
2011 Klosi, Ardian and Artan Lame. Piramida e Tiranes, e Hijshme, e Braktisur, e Rrezikuar. Tirana:Dudaj.
2011 Lame, Artan. “Ai dhe Ne.” Shqip, July 21.
2011 Lame, Artan. “Lamtumire Shesh e Skenderbe!” Shqip, November 3.
2011 Lubonja, Fatos. “Dilemat e Sheshit ‘Skenderbej’.” Panorama, November 30.
2011 Mullaj, Artan. “Sheshi dhe Leshi i Tiranes.” Shqip, December 5.
2011 Rama, Edi. “Projekti per Zemren e Pertrire te Kryeqytetit.” Shqip, November 9.
2011 Vehbiu, Ardian. “A Ka Qender Tirana?” Shekulli, November 21.
2011 Ypi, Edison. “Persheshi Skenderbej.” Standard, May 5.
2012 Lekbello, Kesiana. “Tirana Kryeqytet ne 1920 apo ne 1931?” C, February 19.
2012 Tafaj, Arben. “Historia e Tiranes mes Hamendesimeve e Propagandes.” Panorama, February 24.
2012 Velo, Maks. “Konkurset qe Ndryshuan Tiranen.” Presentation at the University La Sapienza,Rome, Italy, May 14.
70 D. Pojani
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
design of the city.6 This approach was typical in South-eastern Europe and the Eastern Mediter-ranean between 1900 and World War II. In conjunction with nation-building projects, in oppo-sition to the ‘oriental others’,7 urban projects, including comprehensive plans for the radicalremodelling of the city, embellishment projects, and garden suburb designs, were drawn upfor all major cities in the region. Urban aesthetic ideas (rationalistic configuration, functional
Figure 1. From top: (a) plan of Tirana in 1921; (b) aerial view of the first nucleus; and (c) bazaar. Photoscourtesy of the National Planning Archive.
Planning Perspectives 71
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
organization, and visual harmony) were adopted as a vehicle to consolidate new national iden-tities, establish novel, nationally relevant urban forms, make art available to the urban masses,and regulate the citizenry. The past was considered undesirable. Generally, classicist design,with its strong streak of modernity, proved the most powerful instrument to reshape citiesand overtly serve nationalistic and modernizing objectives.8 At the same time, capitals inWestern Europe, North America, and Australia too saw a resurgence of interest in monumentalstyles used to imprint different types of authority and forge national identities (i.e. the Washing-ton Mall in Washington, DC, Canberra’s plan, or the BBC’s building in London).9
This type of capital had also been the dream of the Albanian intelligentsia in the late nine-teenth century, who had organized the National Awakening movement against the Ottomanyoke. A leader of the movement described his vision:
[for the capital] we had better build a new city in the middle of Albania, on a healthy and beautifulsite. This city, which we can call Skanderbegas,10 will be arranged in a most pleasant manner withwide and straight streets, with fine houses, with squares, and everything necessary . . . So this citywill be unbound by the bad vices of old cities . . . 11
In 1926, an army official, Ahmet Zog, took power and proclaimed himself the King of Albania.His objective was to westernize Albanian society. A (non-practising) Muslim, he married aCatholic Hungarian princess in order to strengthen ties with christian Europe.12 In conjunctionwith his political efforts, he wanted to create a Western European capital city, which wouldreinforce the transformation. In order to implement his vision, Zog hired two renownedRoman architects for the redesign of the city centre, Armando Brasini and Florestano DiFausto. Di Fausto had already worked overseas, in Libya, and had gained a reputation for crea-tive versatility, circumvention of fascist imperialism, passion for the building traditions andanthropological costumes of other peoples, and hybrid architecture.13 The Italian governmenthelped with funds in order to extend its influence in the Western Balkans.14 Through a ‘Friend-ship Treaty’ and the debt contracted to implement the design, Albania effectively became anItalian protectorate.15
The Italian designs did not consist merely of a traslatio of pre-existing structures into a newurban context. In an autarchic vein, they rearranged buildings and space to reflect a differentvision of society and political power. This line of thinking shaped many colonial cities in thenineteenth and early twentieth centuries, creating hybrid identities across the world (British-Indian and French-Algerian). Colonial centres were laid out in large-scale, bombastic urbandesign schemes and public monuments. These were explicitly designed for prominent displaysof national prestige and glory – for example, the Haussmannization process of Paris16 – and todemonstrate the racial superiority and modernity of colonizers, in contrast to the ‘primitive’landscapes created by natives.17 (However, in some cases, as in French-controlled Casablanca,the colonies were used as a testing ground for innovative building practices, which were meantto be introduced to the imperial centre, if successful.18)
In Tirana, unconcerned about the prominent Oriental character of the city, Brasini envisioneda baroque central isle, inspired by the St Peter piazza in Rome. He hoped to thus launch thecapital into the European scene.19 His concept included a complex of six two-storey buildingsfor the ministries placed around an oval plaza with a sunken garden in the middle (to opticallyincrease the height of the ministries). This complex, named Skanderbeg Square, after thefifteenth-century Albanian hero, was built later but its shape was modified from oval to
72 D. Pojani
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
hexagonal. A straight, wide, monumental boulevard (called Viale del Impero, inspired by theRoman cardo maximus concept), lined with other government buildings of the emergingcapital, was planned to extend from the ministry plaza in the south direction.20 It was meantto symbolically separate the Eastern nucleus and the Western peripheries and exalt thesymbols of power. Although criticized by the local press at the time as being alien to thecity,21 the grand boulevard was eventually constructed but only a few of the proposed buildingsalong it were completed (Figure 2). According to some accounts, construction and coordinationworks of Italian firms in Tirana were carried out amid a climate of hostility and sabotage.22 AFrench architect, who visited Tirana at that time, made a remark that has become well known: ‘Ihave seen cities without boulevards, but I never saw a boulevard without a city!’23
When Italy occupied Albania at the beginning of World War II, Zog fled the country, and theItalian government declared that Albania was part of the Italian empire. Then, the Mussolinigovernment aimed to fully carry out the national and corporate policies that were cornerstonesof fascist architecture and urban planning.
Figure 2. Aerial view of the boulevard (top) and the ministry plaza (bottom). Photos courtesy of theNational Planning Archive and Istituto Luce.
Planning Perspectives 73
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
As many autocratic leaders did before him, Mussolini saw architecture not only as a govern-ing tool but, due to its potency and capacity for suggestion, also as an education medium and anaccomplice in the process of totalitarization of society. In terms of architectural archetype,fascism adopted avant-garde rationalism, with the intention to liberate people from bonds toa traditional past, while at the same time forging a bond between people and the regime.24
Rationalist architecture had to have clear and understandable modern forms, but at the sametime be able to resuscitate national pride and a sense of belonging (as opposed to internationalistsocialist architecture), and constitute a reassuring icon against the anguish accompanying mod-ernism. Hence the frequent use of porticoes, arches, and colonnades. Within Italy, Mussolinisubjected the historic centre of the Eternal City to spectacular demolitions with the purposeof tearing away the nineteenth-century urban tissue associated with the liberal monarchy:25 Mar-cello Piacentini, the fascist architect par excellence, was nicknamed The Disemboweler. Fascistarchitecture was declared to be the legitimate heir of ancient Roman architecture – assumed tobe the carrier of universal values – and entitled to exercise an artistic primacy over all othernations.26 Italian colonial architects and planners operating overseas, who wanted to build theimage of fascist culture, tried in different ways to assert this centralized, integrated modelwhile entering into a dialogue with local, ‘picturesque’ traditions.27
In Albania, master planning, implying total control of urban projects, was the most com-monly used tool of the Italian government.28 A new master plan was prepared by two Florentinearchitects, Gherardo Bosio and Fernando Poggi, who had also been posted in the Italian coloniesin East Africa. Bosio’s architecture had a reputation for its awareness of local folklore and atten-tion to the landscape within the ambit of the civilizing role of Italy in overseas colonies. Poggi’sprior work reflected the fundamental features of the Florentine culture of the epoch, character-ized by a fusion of minimalism and a search for national identity in architecture.29 The NationalConstruction Archives of Albania contain more than 20,000 drawings from that era.
Under this plan, a rigorous, functionalist approach prevailed.30 The architecture and urbandesign were clearly affected by dictatorship, as demonstrated by an obsession with sheer size,symmetry, and durable building materials and the employment of literal iconography forfloor plans, elevations, or facade decorations.31 The boulevard was extended symmetricallyon the other side (north) of the central plaza to connect the centre to a new train station,cutting through the complex but fragile structure of the Ottoman town. The avenues leadingto the centre were further broadened for the purpose of serving pompous military parades.The placement of new social, cultural, and administrative facilities along the boulevard, aselements of conquest and dominion, was done in accordance with the shape of the fascistfasces lictoriae (Figure 3). A prominent Italian architect, Vittorio Morpurgo-Ballio, designeda few buildings including the central bank in Skanderbeg Square and a large plaza (Piazza Lit-torio) at the southern end of the main boulevard. This plaza housed the Casa del Fascio, theheadquarters of the fascist government. A luxury hotel was also built along the boulevard.32
The rationalist austerity of these structures was meant to convey the colonizers’ virtue, inaddition to their greatness.33 By 1944, despite the war, the Italians completed a substantialportion of their plans for Tirana, which by then had become a city of 60,000 inhabitants.34
The Italian viceroy, Francesco Jacomoni di San Savino, commented in his memoirs that ‘[in1936] thanks to our contribution, the former village had disappeared. Tirana had indeedbecome a livable capital city’.35 In the late 1930s, an Italian geographer noted,
74 D. Pojani
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
[w]hile preserving much of the old town, i.e. from the Turkish era, in 1939 Tirana has radicallytransformed some of its quarters, has spread out and modernized more than any other Albaniancity . . . These transformations . . . have caused significant losses in the characteristic aspects ofold Tirana; these losses have been compensated by a bit more order and hygiene, if not real aestheticadvantages.36
However, an Austrian traveller noted that life in Tirana went on much as it had done before thewar, despite the Italian interventions in the centre.
Low houses remain unchanged since Turkish times, bazaars and half-decayed booths of artisans,there is a continued smell of donkey manure and rancid mutton fat, and where hens and pigsrefuse to be disturbed by any mere pedestrian . . . Everywhere people wear national costume. Theold traditional patriarchal way of life has been destroyed but a new one suited to prevailing Alba-nian circumstances has not yet been discovered.37
The centre as the showpiece of the communist government
After the war, Albania was taken over by an exceptionally repressive and isolationist communistregime, led by a local dictator, Enver Hoxha.38 It directed every facet of life and left indeliblemarks on Tirana’s urban fabric. As in other totalitarian states during the Cold War, the builtenvironment was set to dominate, or suffocate, the masses, like dictatorship itself.39 Likeother communist leaders and cult dictators,40 Hoxha set an agenda of grandeur and socialengineering.
Although Albania remained independent, Stalin’s Soviet Union constituted Hoxha’s primarymodel. In that model, a high degree of ideological significance was attached to urban design bythe leaders, and minimal deviating from aesthetic codes was allowed.41 Architects created
Figure 3. Fascist projects for new buildings in the centre (top); along the axe-shaped boulevard(bottom); at the southern end of the boulevard – Casa del Fascio (right). Photos courtesy of the NationalPlanning Archive and Istituto Luce.
Planning Perspectives 75
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
‘palaces for the everyday man’ – isolated points of opulence in a wrecked country.42 Subjectswere held together with public rituals rather than common political beliefs.43 Therefore, publicspace was designed to accommodate such rituals. Mystical areas were created for emotionallyintense liturgies exalting and glorifying the regime, complete with parades, songs, flags, and fire-works that engaged all the senses.44 Idolatry, for example, the mummified corpse of Lenin in theRed Square, was used as a device to press the public into submissiveness.45 At the same time, asurgical scalpel was applied with brutal efficiency to the main city centres, particularlyMoscow’s, in order to annihilate the artefacts of the pre-Soviet world. Religious buildingswere a main target of the demolition fury.46 Vigorous political propaganda surrounded demoli-tion and construction.47
Eastern European communist countries, which, like Albania, were not formally Soviet sat-ellites, showed similar signs of monomania. Major construction works often occurred in tandemwith major demolitions of buildings from the pre-communist period. In the early 1980s, Roma-nia’s Ceausescu razed almost the entire historic district in Bucharest and replaced it with an1100-room People’s House, and he destroyed large swathes to make way for huge boulevardsthat evoked Haussmann’s Paris.48 In Yugoslavia, Tito used the occasion presented by Skopje’sdestructive earthquake in 1963 to create a new city, a sort of European Chandigarh or Brasilia,which was to become the spatial expression of a solidary socialist society. The new ideal citywas designed by avant-gardist Kenzo Tange, who won a spectacularized competition againstother high-calibre designers.49
In a 1948 speech, Albania’s Hoxha stated in regard to Tirana that a clean, well-lit, low, andverdant city must be created:
Tirana’s planning issues are of uttermost importance, for Tirana, as capital of Albania, must be ofexample to the other cities. Tirana must become the most beloved city of the people . . . Tiranamust be one of the cleanest cities . . . Tirana must have bright lights . . . Everything built mustabide by the principles of our people’s regime. Buildings must be horizontal, not vertical: architectsmust respect our folk styles . . . Attention must be paid to group administrative buildings in the center,in apposite places where they can serve and beautify the city. The streets of the capital must be wider,and maximal efforts must be made to create parks and gardens . . . The whole city must resemble agarden, with shadow trees and fruit trees . . . To achieve these goals we need devoted architects andengineers who will take [urban renewal] upon their honor.50
The redesign of the capital’s centre was to be the piece de resistance of the government. In acountry with very limited resources, this major undertaking required countless sacrifices onthe part of the population. Specific plans for the centre were drawn in 1963 and 1974, dismissingformer plans as ‘bourgeois’. Consistent with communist planning approaches in other EasternEuropean countries, authorities wished to clear away as much of the past as costs permitted,in order to expulse capitalist remains. A prevailing principle was that, unlike Western citycentres but similar to other communist centres, Tirana’s core should not include commercialactivities. The centre had to appear monumental and solemn. According to a leading urbandesign textbook of the time, it must represent the ‘rebirth and powerfulness’ of the new Albanianstate and serve the purpose of the ‘political edification’ of the population.51
The practice of religion was outlawed and many religious buildings were bulldozed, or con-verted to other uses. The Orthodox Cathedral was torn down. The demolition wave also elimi-nated non-religious historic and ethnic references in the centre, including the City Hall, the
76 D. Pojani
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
traditional bazaar, and an old landmark cafe. However, an exception was the small mosque,which was preserved as a museum. Also, the clock tower, the bank, the complex of ministries,and the large Piazza Littorio ensemble (which by then housed the Polytechnic University and theArt Academy) escaped demolition.
In 1960, the bazaar was replaced with an austere, multi-functional Palace of Culture, atypical feature of Eastern European cities denoting the communist belief in science and edu-cation, for which Khrushchev laid the first brick. During the 1970s, a massive National HistoryMuseum (replacing the old City Hall), and a monolithic hotel (replacing the Cathedral) werebuilt next to the Palace of Culture. At 15 storeys, the hotel was the tallest building in Tirana forthe next few decades. Along the main boulevard, in the direction of the Piazza Littorio, theNational Art Gallery, the Palace of Party Congresses, the Party Central Committee seat, thePresidency seat, and the dictator’s museum (shaped as a pyramid and designed by Hoxha’sdaughter and son-in-law, both architects), were built in the 1980s. The newer stretch of theboulevard on the other side was mostly lined with low- to mid-rise residential buildings(Figure 4).
Most of these buildings bore the typical rigidity of Soviet architecture.52 Some had a barefunctionalist style. As one well-respected architect assigned to work on the high-rise hotellater recalled in his memoir, this was due partly to the architects’ lack of exposure to inter-national currents:
Year 1972 . . . [T]he design for the big hotel in the center of Tirana was sensationally announced . . .[Our design team] openly admitted a major shortcoming: We, the architects, had never seen a realtourist hotel. We took it up at the Directorate, at the Ministry. [A Politburo member] backed us up,and the Minister [ . . . ], an avowed hater of architects, cornered, said: ‘Fine, they can go to Yugo-slavia, but the trip budget will be minimal.’ . . . [Later], due to my being ‘influenced by foreignarchitecture’, I was sent to ‘work with the people’, demoted to site supervisor . . . .53
However, Eastern European communist architecture and urban design was not unilaterallyoppressive. Sections of the Communist Bloc included porosities or even channels of com-munication with the decried and fascinating Western world behind the barriers. TheCongres International de architects moderne’s theories were widely adapted in the socialistrealm.54 In some cases, for example, in Bratislava, monumentalism was interpreted by localideologues as a conveyor of national emancipation from a long-time peripheral status.55 Inthe centre of Tirana, too, a few of the later buildings showed a search for an autonomouslanguage.56 On Skanderbeg Square their placement was perimetral, encompassing a vastand portentous expanse in the middle, mainly bare except for a small central fountain.A last intervention before the fall of the regime in 1990 was the erection of a mega-sculp-ture of the dictator on a raised platform, purposefully higher than the nearby equestriansculpture of the historical national hero Skanderbeg, which had been placed in the plazain the 1960s.
The impersonal quality and size of the space thus created, reminiscent of de Chirico’s dis-quieting paintings, suited the government’s taste for kitsch parades and manifestations. Thecentre and the boulevard were heavily used by citizens for daily promenades because therewere few alternative entertainment options. The sunken garden in front of the ministries wasparticularly attractive to families with small children. The centre was free of vehicular trafficbecause private car ownership was prohibited in Albania.
Planning Perspectives 77
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
Figure 4. From top: (a) 1960s model for the centre, with the Palace of Culture on top; (b) centre in the1980s – the Palace of Culture on the left and the platform for Hoxha’s statue on the right; (c) centre in the1980s – view of the National Museum on the left and the Palace of Culture on the right; (d) May Dayparade along the boulevard. Photos courtesy of the National Planning Archive and National Library.
78 D. Pojani
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
Notwithstanding stringent population movement controls, the capital’s population andgeography grew substantially during communism, due to natural growth and industrialization.At the end of the 1980s, its urbanized area covered 12 square kilometres and its population hadincreased to almost 300,000.
The move to a market economy: marginalization and shift of the city centre
In 1991, Albania began a transition from a dictatorship to a democracy and from a centralized,planned economy to a largely unregulated, free-market economy. This transition was marked bypolitical chaos, economic polarization, and delegitimization of the law. As economic and insti-tutional systems dissolved in rural areas, the capital experienced massive in-migration. The pol-itical and economic transformations resulted in dynamic and chaotic development patterns,substantial formal and informal construction, densification and intensification of land uses,neglect of public space, and high demand for consumer goods, including private cars.57
Within two decades, Tirana more than doubled in population and surface area, to more than850,000 inhabitants and 56 square kilometres. Controls over new development were minimal.A high volume of mid-rise apartment construction for the middle class filled the central areasof the city. Whole towns were constructed in the periphery without permits, mainly for migrantsfrom the rural areas.
In response to the absence of any available space for the myriad new small businesses(stores, restaurants, and offices) in the early 1990s, free-standing kiosks were built informallyin the central square and along the boulevard and river. They were laid out haphazardly, follow-ing an entrenched tradition of oriental bazaars. As the owners’ profits improved and the fear ofaction from the authorities evaporated, many kiosks were converted into small but ‘permanent’cement structures ranging up to a few storeys. Although kiosks injected vitality in the centre,their appearance was negatively perceived by most of the public (Figure 5).
In 2002 to 2003, the City of Tirana initiated a ‘Clean and Green’ public programme, duringwhich a large majority of kiosks were removed and the public spaces that they occupied wererestored to their prior state. While the kiosk owners had promised to lead the city into anarchy iftheir kiosks were taken away, in reality the implementation of the programme was relativelysmooth. Most businesses in kiosks simply relocated into legitimate buildings, which were bythen more readily available. These small businesses, and others that followed, did much to revi-talize formerly dormant areas.
The originator of the ‘Clean and Green’ programme was a charismatic new mayor andformer artist, Edi Rama, elected in 2000. A flamboyant politician, Rama directed other success-ful urban renewal programmes. The most remarkable was ‘A Return to Identity’, which earnedinternational fame. Under the programme, dull Stalinist buildings along the main streets werepainted in bright, playful multicolour pastels. His projects contained a pedagogical aspect inthe sense that they aimed to transform the relationship of city dwellers to their surroundings.Change in the built environment was translated into a political capital for Rama, who wastwice re-elected. He received acclaim in the international media,58 as well as two prestigiousinternational awards: the United Nations Poverty Eradication Award and the World MayorAward. One of Rama’s famous statements was that ‘being the Mayor of Tirana is the highestform of conceptual art’.59 He described his relationship with Tirana and his urban planningstaff as visceral:
Planning Perspectives 79
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
I have always had a few people as point of reference. Now it’s these architects. My project is them.And, to be frank, maybe it’s also to fulfill my own ego, to be identified with something big in theeyes of everybody. I know that this obsession I have to make a big work, this identification with thiscity – I know it makes problems for me with my family, my friends. But for me Tirana is a mirror,an affirmation, a confirmation of my vision, or call it will, or my person. This is something thatcomes from far away, like a destiny.60
Rama’s interventions into urban design are by no means unique among political leaders indemocracies. For example, Mitterrand viewed his Grands Travaux in Paris (e.g. the LouvrePyramid and La Defense) as an essential part of his strategy to make the city the undisputedcapital of modern Europe. His proclivity for pure geometric forms defined the character ofthese iconic landmarks.61 In 1981, Mitterand stated, ‘A civilization is judged by its architecturalachievements. Will we be able to inscribe in space and sculpt in matter our cultural project? I’llput all my energy into it’. During his administration, the ‘government fiat’ and the ‘president’sconstruction sites’ were the object of violent public battles, with local elected officials ironicallynoting that ‘the President might as well be nominated Mayor of Paris too’.62
Out of concern that the empty centre might end up flooded with ordinary apartment buildingsas in the rest of the city, the City of Tirana put a moratorium on construction in the centre until anagreement was reached over further development. The centre, comprising Skanderbeg Squareand the areas immediately next to it, as well as the boulevard, were assigned a protected land-mark status (though publicly owned).63 Local authorities believed that the centre had to be aspecial, monumental place, charged with symbolism, rather than a business- and consumer-orientated activity space. Passing comments from visiting foreign architects and academicson the need to protect the built heritage in the centre fuelled this notion.64
Figure 5. The centre taken over by kiosks in the early 1990s. Photo courtesy of CoPlan.
80 D. Pojani
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
The creation of the Bllok
While politicians planned for the centre, Tirana’s reviving business activity, heavily fuelled byremittances, targeted the nearby Bllok, which had been the gated residence area of the commu-nist politburo. It had narrow roads in a grid pattern, mature trees, gardens, low old buildings, anda charming atmosphere. Developers gradually demolished most of the existing villas and built10- to 12-storey mixed-use buildings at high densities (height limits applied). Cafes, restaurants,bars, and clubs with outdoor seating occupied the ground floors and remaining green areas. Thisredevelopment process, carried out entirely by the private sector, turned the Bllok into a vibrant,‘hip’ entertainment district with plenty of shopping, eating, and music venues, packed with ped-estrian activity until late at night. While the area was intensely developed, it retained an inter-esting mixture of heights, designs, and green spaces (Figure 6).65
Dreams to revive the centre: what to do about a dead centre in a lively city?
While the Bllok evolved into a playground, the centre froze in time. In the 2000s, it lookedessentially the same as in the 1980s, encircled by government building and faceless cultural
Figure 6. Bllok, aerial view and street cafe. Photos courtesy of Olli (top) and Blerta Kambo (bottom).
Planning Perspectives 81
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
centres. Commercial activities were virtually absent. No landscaping or weather protection fea-tures were provided, which are especially important during Tirana’s very hot summer months.(A few evergreen trees growing in Brasini’s sunken garden were cut down to render the ministrycomplex more visible.) At the same time, the circular road in the centre was flooded with cars.Traffic came from all directions, due to the fact that Skanderbeg Square is the converging pointof all the city’s radial axes. Also the very wide boulevard became an eight-lane traffic barrier thatdivided the city. As a consequence, the centre and the boulevard entirely lost their appeal as alocal destination, though occasionally they were used for political meetings.66
Concerned about the fading importance of the centre, the City government issued calls forinternational competitions in 2004 and 2008 to redevelop and redesign the space. The entirelength of the boulevard was included in the scope of the first competition, which resulted in a‘master plan’. The second competition was limited to Skanderbeg Square, leading to a detailedsite plan. Funding for the first competition was provided by the German and Dutch governmentsvia the German Organization for Technical Cooperation (GTZ). The second competition wasfinanced through a grant from the government of Kuwait, which was particularly interestedin the renovation of the mosque and the clock tower.67 These plans kindled fierce debatesamong stakeholders and the public.
In many ways, these debates echoed the dominant discourses in other post-socialist cities,which are still grappling with place identity. Often, they are subjected to external processesof identity formation, which cast them as ‘Eastern other’. Meanwhile, the internal discoursesof post-communist place identity reemphasize the ‘Europeanness’ of these localities throughpast links with Western Europe (e.g. looking back to a pre-communist Golden Age and revisinghistory); a rejection of associations with the East and the socialist past (e.g. destruction of social-ist-era statues, reconstruction of what has been destroyed by communist urbicide, or highlight-ing of anti-communist resistance); and internationalization or Westernization of their city’sidentity (e.g. employing major international architects or building high-profile flagship pro-jects).68 These strategies closely follow the experience of Western cities, which have drawnselectively on their pasts to create urban imagining of the present and the future.69
The Mayor of Tirana’s call for the 2008 competition revealed a desire to restore the square toits former greatness, and his conclusion that neutral outsiders were needed to provide a view notmarred by the past:
[t]hrough [this space] has paraded the history of fascism, communism, and democracy. A spacewhere manifestations beyond comparison were organized . . . [Is this space] a chaotic [traffic] junc-tion or a plaza where we all can meet? Is it a square where ghosts and edifices of the past hold reignor where new architectural volumes can be erected that may lend a new dimension to the echoes ofhistory? . . . These are some of the questions, as yet unanswered, concerning this square where thehistory of the Albanian state . . . was written. In order to find the answers, we need assistance fromthose that look at Skanderbeg Square from the outside, whose eyes have not been bloodied by thehistory we have lived through and are . . . free of prejudices . . . 70
The competitions were proposed as a tool to bring Tirana closer to an ideal European city.71 TheMayor, as well as professionals, romanticized the Italian architecture of the interwar and WorldWar II period, which provided Tirana with a European legacy.72 Meanwhile, the national historymuseum, the socialist hotel, and the Palace of Culture built during communism and the devel-opments in the early post-communist transition were vilified.73 Also, Tirana’s pre-communist,
82 D. Pojani
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
oriental past was rejected. Prior to Rama’s appointment, Tirana was commonly referred to dero-gatorily as ‘Kandahar’ – a symbol of oriental backwardness.74 Some commentators argued thatthe emphasis on the European traits of Tirana was necessary to attract foreign investors, who haduntil then perceived it as an undesirable place for business.75
The competitions attracted attention within Albania and abroad, and took place with muchfanfare and media coverage. Proposals were received from international celebrity architects,including Daniel Libeskind of New York and Winy Maas of the Netherlands. Juries were com-posed of renowned European architects and academics and were chaired by the Albanian PrimeMinister. These events were reported with major enthusiasm by the press.76 However, the publicwas not involved in the selection process.
Architecture Studio (AS) of Paris won the first competition, and Brussels-based 51N4E wonthe second competition. Both presented typical examples of designer interventions (Figure 7).AS proposed the conversion of the centre into a pedestrian zone. Part of the open area in Skan-derbeg Square would be taken up by two new low-rise, transparent buildings in front of theNational Museum, which would enclose a U-shaped plaza and figuratively divide the cityinto two parts: the old, communist northern side and the new, democratic southern side. Theplaza itself would be decorated with fountains and palm trees arranged in a formal manner. Acommercial centre would be built behind the Palace of Culture to revive the historic marketplacetradition truncated earlier. An orthodox cathedral and a mosque would be built adjacent to thecentre. A new tram line would stretch the length of the boulevard. Ten 25-storey towers
Figure 7. AS’s plan (left) and 51N4E’s plan (right). Images courtesy of the City of Tirana.
Planning Perspectives 83
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
(skyscrapers by local standards) would fill the few remaining empty lots immediately outsideSkanderbeg Square, which would symbolically watch over the centre. A high-rise towerwould also be built in the courtyard of the National Museum. Behind the mosque and clocktower complex, an L-shaped, glass high-rise would semi-enclose and reflect the two landmarks,restoring the historic effect obliterated by an earlier 16-storey apartment building constructed inthe background.77 The designers argued that high-rises were necessary from a compositionalperspective, claiming, ‘We needed to make a big square. So [the towers] are [sic] as a frame.Here is not a Manhattan. What we propose is just a frame’.78
Similarly, 51N4E’s approach was to create an enclosed plaza. A flat pyramid79 would coverthe surface of the square to symbolically place the users at a higher level in relation to the adjoin-ing communist-era buildings.80 Numerous water fountains with fluid shapes would beembedded on the pyramid faces. The designers explained that the hollow plaza would contrastwith the city surrounding it, which they viewed as untidy and frenetic.
A very simple and clear gesture will have a very strong impact. The city is not defined by its edgessprawling outwards, but by its core . . . The city giving way, like if it holds its breadth for a moment.The square as a space where the bustle and the chaos stops . . . The [green] belt functions like anantechamber to the main square: negotiating between the congestion of the city and the opennessof the square . . . The square will [provide] mental and physical space for its citizens.81
The purpose of the proposed plan extended beyond aesthetics and accommodation of dailyactivities, as noted by one of the foreign jury members: ‘[t]he competition asked for the squaringof the circle: it called for the symbolic manifestation of the new, democratic Albania . . . [A]spirit of empathic catharsis . . . underlies [this project]’.82
While an upscale shopping mall was proposed for the site where the dictator’s statue stood,51N4E was against the inclusion of small-scale commercial activities in the square.83 It tookthe position that ‘filling the square with bars and restaurants, in an attempt to make a square ona human scale, would be the wrong answer to the right question. All of Tirana is already aboutconsumption: consuming the square as well would be a political failure’.84 This positionreflects the opinion of one portion of the professional community, which was that ‘templesthat can go down in history’ were needed. A comment by a Kosovar architect illustratesthat perspective:
Tirana is ugly because it lacks identity . . . [Its] buildings lack symbolism . . . Empedocles wrote thatAgrigentinos built homes and temples as if they were immortal, and ate as if every day was theirlast. Our cities too are full of assorted eateries . . . which give the impression that Albanians areresolved to make up for the era of food rationing . . . but nowhere have I seen temples thatcan go down in history!85
The first plan was approved, with a 30-year-long implementation plan reminiscent of the com-munist era. The legal status of the second plan remained unclear. Both plans relied on substantialprivate investment. The orthodox cathedral foreseen by the first plan was built, while a majorinternational design competition (with the participation of iconic firms including Zaha Hadidand BIG) was held for the mosque, and construction has started. International competitionswere held for 3 of the 10 skyscrapers as well, and the construction of two is under way. Thereconstruction of Skanderbeg Square began in 2010, while no construction has begun on thetram line.
84 D. Pojani
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
Skanderbeg Square magnified and dissected
The press and political players became consumed by the debate about the plans. Acrimoniousdebates followed among professionals and the general public. Some commentators lauded thecompetition processes per se, as capable of mobilizing local dynamics and setting the basisfor a fertile dialogue on the city’s future.86 However, the scale of the debate was out of pro-portion with the issues under consideration, while other pressing issues about the city’s infra-structure were ignored. Much of the siding in the debate was determined by political partyaffiliation or allegiance. Moreover, analysts attached bewildering symbolic significance to thevarious site design details.
Despite the intense rivalry and mutual animosity between Mayor Edi Rama (political leftwing) and Prime Minister Sali Berisha (political right wing), they clearly agreed on onepoint: Tirana’s centre was the most important space in the entire country and its redevelopmentwould have major implications for the identity of the Albanian people as a whole.87 Their officeswere in neighbouring buildings in the centre.
All sides focused the rhetoric on ‘Europeanness’, even when dealing with minute designdetails. The mayor stated that Tirana would have one of the most beautiful centres in Europethanks to these plans,88 and the Albanian Architects Association applauded the perceivedbreak with tradition.89 Some architecture professionals were content that the AS plan preservedthe Italian boulevard axis,90 while 51N4E was criticized for interrupting this ‘city spine’ whenplacing buildings in Skanderbeg Square.91 Some of the criticism was directed at the strongemphasis on beautification, reducing the city from a complex social phenomenon into anabstract image condensed in the centre.92 In a secular culture, the proposal to add new,showy religious buildings near the centre was rejected by various political commentatorsmainly because of no recent precedents in European centres.93 The financial support ofIslamic Kuwait was viewed with suspicion by others. The shallow pyramid proposed by51N4E was denounced as a symbol of totalitarianism reminiscent of Hoxha’s museum, andeven death.94 A proposal by the Prime Minister to hold street markets for souvenirs in the remo-delled square was ridiculed as anachronistic. Even the idea of amorphous water pools texturingthe surface of the plaza produced negative associations, as it was a reminder to some of the pot-holes in deteriorating parts of the city. Some professionals and interest groups raised their voiceagainst the lack of transparency and participation surrounding the process of selecting thewinners.95 One of the jury members of the first competition later recalled in an interview thatthe decision was political.96
The proposed conversion of the centre into a pedestrian zone posed critical challengesrequiring public acquisition of privately owned land. Vehicular traffic would have to be reroutedinto a small ring road around Skanderbeg Square. A short, north-eastern stretch of the ring roadwas incomplete and private buildings stood in the right of way. Land owners were not coopera-tive and the central government was antagonistic, refusing to release a fund for their compen-sation. Moreover, around 2010, the ruins from an old castle were discovered underneath theexisting south-eastern segment of the ring road, thereby necessitating its realignment. Thatsection was converted into a narrow pedestrian street, in order to expose the archaeologicalsite (Figure 8). This complex situation led to criticism in terms of traffic circulation.97
However, it was the 10 skyscrapers proposed in the first plan that provoked some of thestrongest disagreements. This might have been expected, due to the fact that there are no
Planning Perspectives 85
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
precedents of newly created, glossy and imposing Central Business Districts in post-communistEastern Europe. Rather, this approach resembles contemporary mega-structuralism in China(e.g. Pudong in Shanghai), which has signed a departure from the Mao-era architecturearound Beijing’s Tiananmen Square. The first three Tirana towers were branded with namessuch as ‘Eye of Tirana’ (inspired by the tower’s night-time glow), ‘Tirana International Devel-opment’ (TID), and ‘Forever Green’, which evoked trends and progress. Mayor Rama said,‘Popes put up obelisks. These towers will be our obelisks. They are acupunctural!’98 Somewell-known professionals endorsed their construction, bringing forth similar artistic and ideo-logical arguments: ‘[high towers] will help create an interesting skyline, which has been lostdue to recent developments . . . Without a vertical skyline, no capital city identity can beformed’.99
Detractors viewed the skyscrapers as a literal, aggressive invasion in a mid-rise city, as thefollowing comments by two architects, the first Albanian and the second Kosovar, illustrate:
[I] had never seen an architectural model that looked so much like Japanese anime. A mold withten giants, half monsters and half robots, with heads full of pointy angles, which stomp over thecity in military formation and smash with their humongous feet all smaller buildings in theirway.100
Figure 8. Small ring road perimeter. Image by author, based on map by Google Maps.
86 D. Pojani
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
By planting itself where Enver Hoxha once stood, and by surpassing the height of the tallestbuilding he built, a skyscraper will not liberate the Albanian society from the memory of thedictator’s personality cult.101
One renowned political analyst dubbed one of the towers, Eye of Tirana, a ‘Cyclops of Tirana’,remindful of the communist era:
The construction of this [Cyclops] . . . brings to mind communist era memories: while the peoplelived in misery, to glorify itself and its leader the regime built in the center power ‘landmarks’like this, which cost a fortune . . . meanwhile, alas, destroying historic Tirana . . . They want tohave [ten] such Cyclops. Do we really need that many commercial centers . . . to siphon moneyoff the Albanians?102
A controversy related to TID’s design demonstrated that while Albania strives to underplay itsmuslim and communist pasts, these images persist in foreign visions.103 The initial facadedesigned by 51N4E included shading devices inspired by the Maghreb moucharabieh andthe modernist brise-soleil. The local client found the facade ‘too Muslim’ and ‘too Communist’and required its redesign.104
Some political analysts attributed the ideas behind these plans to the mayor’s personal egoand his ‘suffering from the “l’etat, c’est moi” syndrome’, like his predecessors.105 Othersassigned his motives to financial interests more than to art, ego, or ideology.106 They saw theplans as a way for the mayor to line his pockets and fund his electoral campaigns withmoney from developers.107 From 2010 through 2011, the reconstruction of the square proceededintermittently. One major hindrance was the incessant interference of, and creation of obstaclesby, the central government (in political opposition with the mayor). Backed by the Institute forHeritage Protection, it requested various modifications of the site details, and, as mentionedearlier, refused to issue compensation funds.108 During the works, the centre was in disarray,the traffic – forced to temporarily circumvent the centre – was chaotic, and pollution levelswere high. The City government was perceived as procrastinating. Partly due to this failedproject, Rama’s image was tarnished and his popularity waned. In 2011, he lost his mayoralre-election campaign in a controversial battle.
Immediately after taking office, the new mayor, Lulzim Basha, supported by the Prime Min-ister, suspended the works in the centre. His planning department hastily prepared a new, unpre-tentious site plan, which was executed within a few months. One noted journalist highlightedthis approach of scrapping the plans of an opponent as typical of the powerful in Tirana:‘[Basha’s treatment of Skanderbeg Square] parallels his behavior towards the office he inherited.His first gesture was to remodel it . . . He believes he will shake away the frustrating thoughts ofstolen votes by reversing his predecessors’ deeds’.109 The new plan simply enlarged the sunkengarden between the ministries to fill the empty area in front of the Palace of Culture and nar-rowed the vehicular rights-of-way. Car circulation was allowed back in the centre. Thesquare regained its role as an oval traffic roundabout with a grass centre. The area where thedictator’s statue stood became a small park with fruit trees (Figure 9).
Many were disappointed by this solution, which they saw as a final renunciation of the ideaof a grand city centre. Woeful eulogies were written by high-level politicians, architects, andjournalists.110 The nostalgia-driven search for identity and the desire to revive the past are under-standable in places and times of insecurity, rapid change, and memory loss when communities
Planning Perspectives 87
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
and traditions are shattered and fragmented. Many contemporary cities have made an effort tocreate urban landscapes that draw on memories in an attempt to authenticate themselves as sitesand to authenticate the identities of those who visit them by placing them within a stabilizing andfamiliar past.111 However, a few other political analysts reluctantly admitted the futility of priorredesign exercises searching for a contemporary image. They noted that the centre had long lostits relevance as a meeting point in the city fabric. They also pointed out that, with the conversionof Skanderbeg Square into a traffic circle, Tirana was left with no spaces of citizenry for protest,debate, and celebration. They blamed Rama’s passion for ‘starchitectural gestures’ and develo-pers’ bad faith for this outcome.112
In 2011, Mayor Basha promised that this solution was also temporary, and a new plan wouldcome soon.113 The plan is still awaited. In June 2013, in a reversal of roles after losing the 2011local elections, Edi Rama was elected Prime Minister.
Conclusion
Like many centrally located public spaces, the centre of Tirana has served as a means of expres-sing political visions and ideologies. In the space of a century, it was transformed from anOttoman market and prayer space to a scenographic colonial display, which included laic admin-istrative buildings; to a monumental communist parade ground; to a post-communist anarchic
Figure 9. Aerial view of the current centre. Photo courtesy of Alket Islami.
88 D. Pojani
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
marketplace; and finally to a traffic roundabout surrounded by public office buildings, a bank, alarge hotel, and a museum, but no human-scale spaces. These identities were imported fromabroad (e.g. by hiring foreign designers or copying foreign styles), or were the result of trans-formational forces from abroad, such as military invasions or so-called cultural imperialism. Thefinal outcome is poignant considering the intensive planning efforts and vigorous debates sur-rounding the development of this space, which implicated all levels of government, theprivate sector, the media elite, and ordinary citizens.
Italian era plans for the centre required this space to be highly symbolic but still left thebazaar in place. Communist plans excluded market forces from all places. The new demo-cratic-era plans ignored the market, which had come to dominate the society and its use ofspace. At the same time, the role of the government was diminished. Top-down planning,without top-down control and resources, was divorced from reality. The idea of a monumentalcentral plaza with commerce set apart elsewhere was sure to fail. Without state compulsion therewas no desire to visit a centre with no commercial, aesthetic, or recreational attractions. Under apluralistic regime with no single vision and no tradition of compromise or cooperation betweenrival parties, plans failed also due to the division of power in the political system (between themayor and the prime minister). A major dispute revolved around the proposed densification ofthe centre (disguised in modernizing garb), which was seen as a vehicle to financially benefitcertain groups, to the exclusion or detriment of others. The long-term nature of the new plansleft them exposed to political winds, which could change with each election.
Tirana’s road pattern is such that all urban traffic converges in the centre. The construction ofa small ring road circumscribing the centre to realign vehicular traffic required high levels ofpolitical goodwill, which the mayor was unable to gather. This was very unfortunate becausethe conversion of the centre into a pedestrian zone would have delivered tangible benefits tothe city residents, in terms of air quality and liveability, regardless of the specific designdetails. This outcome also reflects the inability to deliver new designs in crucial sphereswithout wider changes in the urban structure (e.g. traffic management), which, however, maybe difficult to achieve and/or may be strongly resisted by the public.
Its development frozen, the centre was doomed to see its hub value vanish. While plannersand politicians battled over the land uses and site design details of the centre, the Bllok (andother unplanned areas) flourished according to the market intuition of private developers,with little formal planning involved. In line with the nature of development in a marketeconomy – which is shaped and led by the private sector – this area thrived in terms of attrac-tion and economic vitality, while its heavily and ineffectively controlled counterpart languished.The chaos of the unplanned development in Tirana demonstrates that planning is needed whilethe failure of the central square plans demonstrates that planning must be grounded in reality.
Notes on contributorDorina Pojani is a postdoctoral fellow in the Spatial Planning and Strategy group of Delft University ofTechnology in the Netherlands. She previously taught urban planning in Albania.
Notes1. Kolevica, Arkitektura dhe Diktatura and Koha Jone 2010.2. The research was undertaken in the National Library of Albania and the publishers’ online archives,
where available.
Planning Perspectives 89
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
3. See debate between Lekbello 2012 and Tafaj 2012.4. Castiglioni, “Tirana: Appunti sulla Capitale dell’Albania all’Alba del Nuovo Regime.”5. Robinson, Albania’s Road to Freedom.6. Aliaj, Lulo, and Myftiu, Tirana, the Challenge of Urban Development.7. Todorova, Balkan Identities and Pantelic, “Designing Identities.”8. Hastaoglou-Martinidis, “Urban Aesthetics and National Identity.”9. See van der Wusten, “Dictators and their Capital Cities”; Sonne, Representing the State; Vale,
Architecture, Power, and National Identity.10. After the Albanian national hero, Skanderbeg, a 15th-century Albanian lord who organized a resist-
ance movement against the Ottoman expansion [author’s note].11. Frasheri, Shqiperia ÇKa Qene, ÇEshte e ÇDo te Behet.12. Among his achievements were the abolition of polygamy and the outlawing of muslim women’s
veil.13. Godoli et al., “The Presence of Italian Architects in Mediterranean Countries.”14. Qyqja 2009.15. Santoianni, “Il Razionalismo nelle Colonie Italiane 1928–1943.”16. Driver and Gilbert, “Imperial Cities” and Vale, Architecture, Power, and National Identity.17. Wright, cited in Jenkins 1999.18. Cohen and Eleb, Casablanca.19. Capolino “Tirana, a Capital City Transformed by the Italians.” At the time, Italy too had abandoned
futurism and was experiencing a return to the Novecento Italiano in architecture and the arts – seeSampo, “Perspectives on Modern Movement’s Architectural Heritage of the Early XX Century inWestern Balkans.”
20. Aliaj, Lulo, and Myftiu, Tirana, the Challenge of Urban Development.21. Bleta, Influences of Political Regime Shifts on the Urban Scene of a Capital City.22. Giacomelli and Vokshi, Architetti e Ingegneri Italiani in Albania.23. Bleta, Influences of Political Regime Shifts on the Urban Scene of a Capital City.24. Millon, “Some Smaller Italian Cities.”25. Baxa, Roads and Ruins.26. Nicoloso, Mussolini Architetto and Ciucci, Gli Architetti e il Fascismo. Architettura e Citta 1922–
1944.27. Giacomelli and Vokshi, Architetti e Ingegneri Italiani in Albania.28. Giacomelli and Vokshi, Architetti e Ingegneri Italiani in Albania.29. Godoli et al., “The Presence of Italian Architects in Mediterranean Countries.”30. Capolino, “Tirana, a Capital City Transformed by the Italians.”31. Sudjic, The Edifice Complex.32. Sampo, “Perspectives on Modern Movement’s Architectural Heritage of the Early XX Century in
Western Balkans.”33. Giacomelli and Vokshi, Architetti e Ingegneri Italiani in Albania.34. Menghini, Pashako, and Stigliano, Architettura Moderna Italiana per le Citta d’Albania.35. Quoted in Lekbello 2012.36. Castiglioni, “Tirana: Appunti sulla Capitale dell’Albania all’Alba del Nuovo Regime.”37. Quoted in Vickers, The Albanians.38. Hoxha’s communist allies were in turn, Yugoslavia (1950s), the Soviet Union (1960s), and China
(1970s). Eventually, he cut relations with them due to their introduction of more liberal policies, andby the 1980s Albania became fully isolated.
39. Abensour, “De la Complicidad.”40. Nizan, “Du Probleme de la Monumentalite – 1934.”41. van der Wusten, “Dictators and their Capital Cities.”42. McKernan, “Politics and Architecture.”43. Ibid.44. Hobsbawm, “Foreword.”45. Arentd 1958.
90 D. Pojani
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
46. Colton, Moscow.47. Miller Lane 1968; Aman, Architecture and Ideology in Eastern Europe during the Stalin Era;
Crowley and Reid, Socialist Spaces.48. Sudjic, The Edifice Complex.49. Tolic, Dopo il Terremoto.50. Hoxha, “Nga Fjala e Mbajtur ne Komisionin e Ngritur per Çeshtjen e Urbanizmit te Qytetit te
Tiranes dhe te Qyteteve te Tjera te Vendit, 19 shkurt 1948.”51. Faja, Urbanistika.52. Sivignon, “Tirana et l’Urbanisation de l’Albanie.”53. Kolevica, Arkitektura dhe Diktatura.54. Aman, Architecture and Ideology in Eastern Europe during the Stalin Era.55. Popescu, “Introductory Argument.”56. Sampo, “Perspectives on Modern Movement’s Architectural Heritage of the Early XX Century in
Western Balkans”; Kolaneci 2008.57. Pojani, “Tirana. City Profile.”58. See Kramer 2005; Winner 2006; Mansfield 2006; de Campo 2002; Vlahou 2002; Arosio 2003;
Boeri 2005; and Fink 2006.59. Cited in Cuyvers 2004.60. Quoted in Kramer 2005.61. Sudjic, The Edifice Complex.62. Chaslin, Les Paris de Francois Mitterrand.63. However, a low-rise luxury hotel and two high-rise office towers in the southern stretch of the bou-
levard were speculatively built in the 1990s and early 2000s, respectively. Along the more residen-tial northern stretch, too, some new construction filled gaps between buildings.
64. Lila 2008a and 2008b.65. Apart from the Bllok, no new, distinct centres appeared.66. Velo 2004. While the “dead center” phenomenon is not unique to Tirana (i.e. North American CBDs
are often described as “urban deserts” that shut down after business hours), in this case it was createdby specific government policies, or lack thereof, rather than citizens’ election to abandon this space.
67. On the occasion, the Emir of Kuwait became an honorary citizen of Tirana.68. Young and Kaczmarek, “The Socialist Past and Postsocialist Urban Identity in Central and Eastern
Europe”; Temelova 2007; Manoliu and Fartatescu, “Dream or Nightmare”; Marcuse, “Reflectionson Berlin”; Gittus, “Berlin as a Conduit for the Creation of German National Identity at the End ofthe Twentieth Century.” However, some cities are acknowledging their totalitarian heritage, asdemonstrated by the growth of “communist heritage tourism” (or, “red tourism” in China);various forms of nostalgia for that period are emerging.
69. The issue of post-communist demolitions mirrors the on-going discourse in Tirana surroundingcurrent plans to tear down the dictator’s museum, Piramida, which is shaped as a pyramid. In pro-posing the demolition, the Prime Minister (ill-advisedly) claimed that the building had been meantas the dictator’s mausoleum (containing his embalmed body). Piramida is in fact a major landmarkand its function has changed several times since the fall of communism. Press articles by design pro-fessionals and political analysts opposing the demolition were summarized in a book – see Klosiand Lame 2011, also Lame 2011.
70. Quoted in 51N4E 2011.71. Greca and Koci 2008.72. An irony, given that the fascist heritage is not considered the most valuable in Italy.73. Triantis, “Urban Change and the Production of Space”; see also Dervishi 2010.74. Kramer 2005; Winner 2006.75. Triantis, “Urban Change and the Production of Space.”76. Kellici 2003.77. AS 2004.78. Tisnado, one of the project designers, quoted in Durmishi, “Competing Urban Visions for the
Capital of Albania.”
Planning Perspectives 91
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
79. Base: 160 × 160 m; height at apex: 2.25 m.80. Reported in Fevziu 2010.81. 51N4E 2008.82. Ruby, cited 51N4E 2011.83. Fevziu 2010.84. 51N4E 2008.85. Ndreca 2005.86. Triantis, “Urban Change and the Production of Space”; Velo 2004; Velo 2012.87. Rama 2010; BalkanWeb 2010.88. Rama 2011.89. Jano 2003; Jano 2004.90. See Rama 2004; Jano 2004; Fevziu 2004; Durmishi, “Competing Urban Visions for the Capital of
Albania.”91. See Faja 2008 and 2010.92. Triantis, “Urban Change and the Production of Space”; Cuyvers 2004; Tafaj, quoted in Kuci 2010.93. See debate between Klosi 2003 and Plasari 2003.94. Faja 2008.95. Sopoti 2004; Tafaj 2010; Bozdo 2010.96. Zenghelis, quoted in Durmishi, “Competing Urban Visions for the Capital of Albania.”97. See comments of the urban planning advisor to the Prime Minister, cited in Shqip, April 11, 2010.98. Quoted in Kramer 2005.99. Bicoku 2005.
100. Agalliu 2004.101. Lloncari 2005.102. Lubonja 2005.103. Hall, “Representations of Place.”104. Bineri, “‘Negative’ Cultural Heritage.”105. Plasari, quoted by Lubonja 2004; Kadilli 2010.106. Tema, August 15, 2003; Tema, August 13, 2003.107. Lubonja 2010; Baze 2005; Zaimi 2010.108. Xhaferri 2010; Stefani 2010; Bogdani 2010; Vata 2010; Shqip, April 11, 2010.109. Baze 2011.110. Lame 2010 and 2011; Mullaj 2011; Ypi 2011.111. Dickinson, “Memories for Sale.”112. Vehbiu 2011; Lubonja 2011; Stefani 2010; Zaimi 2010.113. Panorama, August 5, 2011.
BibliographyAbensour, Miguel. “De la Complicidad: Arquitecturas y Regimenes Totalitarios.” Revista de Estudios
Sociales 35 (1997): 149–166.Aliaj, Besnik, Keida Lulo, and Genc Myftiu. Tirana, the Challenge of Urban Development. Tirana:
CoPlan and Seda, 2003.Aman, Anders. Architecture and Ideology in Eastern Europe During the Stalin Era: An Aspect of Cold
War History. Cambridge, MA: Architectural History Foundation, 1992.Arendt, Hannah. The Origins of Totalitarianism. Cleveland: World, 1958.Baxa, Paul. Roads and Ruins: The Symbolic Landscape of Fascist Rome. Toronto: University of Toronto
Press, 1968.Bineri, Nikelina. “‘Negative’ Cultural Heritage: Destruction or Conservation?” Paper presented at the
First International Conference on Architecture and Urban Design, Epoka University, Tirana,Albania, April 19–21, 2012.
Bleta, Indrit. “Influences of Political Regime Shifts on the Urban Scene of a Capital City. Case Study:Tirana.” Master diss., Middle East Technical University, Turkey, 2010.
92 D. Pojani
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
Capolino, Patrizia. “Tirana, a Capital City Transformed by the Italians.” Planning Perspectives 26, no. 4(2011): 591–615.
Castiglioni, Bruno. “Tirana: Appunti sulla Capitale dell’Albania all’Alba del Nuovo Regime.” Bollettinodella Reale Societa Geografica Italiana 6, no. 1 (1941): 9–27.
Chaslin, Francois. Les Paris de Francois Mitterrand: Histoire des Grands Projets Architecturaux. Paris:Gallimard, 1985.
Ciucci, Giorgio. Gli Architetti e il Fascismo. Architettura e Citta 1922–1944. Torino: Giulio EinaudiEditore, 2002.
Cohen, Jean-Louis, and Monique Eleb. Casablanca: Colonial Myths and Architecture Ventures.New York: Monacelli Press, 2002.
Colton, Timothy. Moscow: Governing the Socialist Metropolis. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press ofHarvard University Press, 1995.
Crowley, David, and Susan E. Reid. Socialist Spaces: Sites of Everyday Life in the Eastern Bloc. Oxford:Berg, 2002.
Dickinson, Greg. “Memories for Sale: Nostalgia and the Construction of Identity in Old Pasadena.” TheQuarterly Journal of Speech 83, no. 1 (1997): 1–27.
Driver, Felix, and David Gilbert. “Imperial Cities: Overlapping Territories Intertwined Histories.” InImperial Cities, edited by F. Driver and D. Gilbert, 1–17. Manchester: Manchester UniversityPress, 1999.
Durmishi, Odeta. “Competing Urban Visions for the Capital of Albania: International Projects for TiranaCity Centre.” Master diss., Middle East Technical University, Turkey, 2008.
Faja, Enver. Urbanistika. Tirana: SHBLU, 1983.Frasheri, Sami. Shqiperia ÇKa Qene, ÇEshte e ÇDo te Behet. Bucharest: Shoqeria Dituria, 1899.Giacomelli, Milva, and Armand Vokshi, eds. “Architetti e Ingegneri Italiani in Albania.” Proceedings of
Third International Conference “The Presence of Italian Architects in Mediterranean Countries,”Tirana, December 5–6, 2011. Florence: Edifir Edizioni, 2012.
Gittus, E. J. “Berlin as a Conduit for the Creation of German National Identity at the End of the TwentiethCentury.” Space and Polity, 6, no. 1 (2002): 91–115.
Giusti, Maria Adriana. Albania Architettura e Citta: 1925–1943. Florence: Maschietto, 2006.Godoli, Ezio, Benedetto Gravagnuolo, Giuliano Gresleri, and Giuliana Ricci. “The Presence of Italian
Architects in Mediterranean Countries.” Proceedings of First International Conference, Alexandria,November 15–16, 2007. Florence: Artout-Maschietto Editore, 2008.
Hall, Derek R. “Representations of Place: Albania.” The Geographical Journal 165, no. 2 (1999):161–172.
Hastaoglou-Martinidis, Vilma. “Urban Aesthetics and National Identity: The Refashioning of EasternMediterranean Cities Between 1900 and 1940.” Planning Perspectives 26, no. 2 (2011): 153–182.
Hobsbawm, Eric. “Foreword.” In Art and Power: Europe under the Dictators, 1930–45, edited byD. Ades, T. Benton, D. Elliot, and I. Boyd White, 1–15. London: Thames and Hudson, 1995.
Hoxha, Enver. “Nga Fjala e Mbajtur ne Komisionin e Ngritur per Çeshtjen e Urbanizmit te Qytetit teTiranes dhe te Qyteteve te Tjera te Vendit, 19 shkurt 1948.” In Vepra 4, edited by Instituti iStudimeve Marksiste-Leniniste prane KQ te PPSH, 453–458. Tirana: Naim Frasheri, 1970.
Kolevica, Petraq. Arkitektura dhe Diktatura. Tirana: Marin Barleti, 1997.Manoliu, Raluca, and Mariana Fartatescu. “Dream or Nightmare: The Architectural Illustration of
Conflicted Cultures and Identities in Post-Communist Eastern Europe.” In Representation,Expression and Identity: Interdisciplinary Insights on Multiculturalism, Conflict and Belonging,edited by T. Rahimy, 224–232. Oxfordshire: Inter-Disciplinary Press, 2009.
Marcuse, Peter. “Reflections on Berlin: The Meaning of Construction and the Construction of Meaning.”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 22, no. 2 (1998): 331–338.
McKernan, Andrew. “Politics and Architecture: At the Crossroads with Young Moscow Architects.”Inquiry Journal 5, Spring (2009): Paper 11.
Menghini, Anna Bruna, Frida Pashako, and Marco Stigliano. Architettura Moderna Italiana per le Cittad’Albania: Modelli e Interpretazioni. Tirana: Dudaj, 2012.
Miho, Koco. Shqiperia, Veshtrim Urbanistik. Tirana: Extra, 2003.
Planning Perspectives 93
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
Millon, Henry. “Some Smaller Italian Cities.” In Art and Architecture in the Service of Politics, edited byH. Millon and L. Nochlin. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1978.
Nicoloso, Paolo. Mussolini Architetto: Propaganda e Paesaggio Urbano nell’Italia Fascista. Torino:Giulio Einaudi Editore, 2008.
Nizan, Paul. “Du Probleme de la Monumentalite – 1934. Le Projet d’Andre Lurgat.” L’Architecture etl’Avant-Garde Artistique en URSS de 1917 a 1934 VH 101 7–8 (1972): 206–208.
Pantelic, Bratislav. “Designing Identities: Reshaping the Balkans in the First Two Centuries: The Case ofSerbia.” Journal of Design History 20, no. 2 (2007): 131–145.
Pojani, Dorina. “Tirana. City Profile.” Cities 27, no. 6 (2010): 483–495.Popescu, Carmen. “Introductory Argument: Architecture of the Communist Bloc in the Mirror.” The
Journal of Architecture, 14, no. 1 (2009): 1–6.Robinson, Vandeleur. Albania‘s Road to Freedom. London: Allen & Unwin, 1941.Sampo, Luca. “Perspectives on Modern Movement’s Architectural Heritage of the Early XX Century in
Western Balkans”. Paper presented at the First International Conference on Architecture and UrbanDesign, Epoka University, Tirana, Albania, April 19–21, 2012.
Santoianni, Vittorio. “Il Razionalismo nelle Colonie Italiane 1928–1943. La ‘Nuova Architettura’ delleTerre d’Oltremare.” PhD diss., Naples Federico II University, 2008.
Sivignon, Michel. “Tirana et l’Urbanisation de l’Albanie.” Revue de Geographie de Lyon 50, no. 4(1975): 333–342.
Sonne, Wolfgang. Representing the State: Capital City Planning in the Early Twentieth Century. Munich:Prestel Verlag, 2003.
Sudjic, Deyan. The Edifice Complex: The Architecture of Power. London: Penguin Books, 2005.Temelova, Jana. “Flagship Developments and the Physical Upgrading of the Post-Socialist Inner City:
The Golden Angel Project in Prague.” Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography 89, no.2 (2007): 169–181.
Todorova, Maria. Balkan Identities: Nation and Memory. London: C. Hurst, 2004.Tolic, Ines. Dopo il Terremoto: La Politica della Ricostruzione negli Anni della Guerra Fredda a Skopje.
Reggio Emilia: Edizioni Diabasis, 2011.Triantis, Loukas Urban. “Urban Change and the Production of Space: The Case of Urban Renewal in
Tirana (2000–2008).” Paper presented at workshop “Bringing the city together”, Tirana, Albania,October 3–10, 2008.
Vale, Lawrence J. Architecture, Power, and National Identity. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press,1992.
Vickers, Miranda. The Albanians: A Modern History. London: I.B. Tauris, 1995.van der Wusten, Herman. “Dictators and Their Capital Cities: Moscow and Berlin in the 1930s.”
GeoJournal 52 (2000): 339–344.Young, Craig, and Sylvia Kaczmarek. “The Socialist Past and Postsocialist Urban Identity in Central and
Eastern Europe: The Case of Lodz, Poland.” European Urban and Regional Studies 15, no. 1 (2008):53–70.
94 D. Pojani
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
UQ
Lib
rary
] at
16:
40 1
9 Fe
brua
ry 2
015
