20.500.12556/RUL-181113 Cold War architectures global discourses, Slovenian practices, and ideological fractures Architecture functions simultaneously in at least two separate ways – as a physical and symbolic object, while its perception can change over time. When the situation arises in which the same architectural form begins to be perceived in symbolic terms as a vehicle for values that are antithetical to those that the same building represented at the time of its construction, irony cannot be dismissed with a wave of the hand as a bad joke, since its effects cut into all the pores of everyday life. The fact that the same architectural form can influence different modes of perception over time raises the question of its content and purpose in a wider context of space, which is directly linked to visions of progress and thus to constant technological and social transformations. In the contemporary world, a sense of irony could be linked to the many renovations and new buildings that, with their glittering facades, no longer convince anyone of a just and bright future. The perception of contemporary spatial effects is today largely conditioned by building technologies and digital presentations. Both are accelerated or decelerated by the media landscape. The field of architectural discourse has therefore inevitably expanded into these areas in recent decades. What is often overlooked is that the development of digital technologies related to architectural design has two parallel trajectories, both of which were shaped after the Second World War. One is related to planning buildings and presentation techniques. The other concerns less visible but no less important processes – spatial planning methodologies. The role of architects in the development of both trajectories was not negligible and as such it is interesting for analysis. The pioneering spirit of the architects of the post-war period, navigating between the interests of the Cold War, inevitably collided with the barriers of different discourses that were outlining different futures. In the context of architectural collaborations between the Eastern and Western blocs, it was impossible to find a common denominator regarding ideological tendencies, which is why they were often avoided at professional meetings. A telling example were the initial congresses and meetings of the UIA, where, when writing the founding charter, Eastern Bloc architects, unlike their Western counterparts, advocated a democratic organisation of the association. But the apolitical stance won the day. The avoidance of political topics was supposed to allow for truly professional discussions. In such environments, architectural discourse became increasingly formalistic. At the same time, when it came to establishing conditions for financing individual projects, for example the Marshall Plan or the Molotov Plan, discourses related to architecture were increasingly distanced from formal issues into the domain of the societal planning in the East, and the free market in the West. The involvement of architects in this context was significant, which can be discerned also from the developments of the American-Yugoslav Project [AYP] in the 1960s, supported by the governments of both countries and the Ford Foundation. Using the Ljubljana region as a model case study, the experts were concerned with planning modernised settlement patterns as well as with the long-term aim of establishing a training centre for Eastern Bloc planners in Yugoslavia. In fact, the project was an excellent field for the exchange of knowledge in both directions and had positive effects on both sides. It could also be said to have influenced many of the successful architectural projects of that period in Yugoslavia. Planners from different disciplines worked together with the help of computer technology to develop models and complex procedures for the design of efficient space in accordance with the societal plan, which worked only so long as the socialist state apparatus existed to guard, even if only theoretically, the outcome. The protocols of state administration, although separate from the development models, were therefore intrinsically linked to them. The engine of development was, however, like in capitalism, based on managing societal differences, but not increasing them, rather equalising them, while the pursuit of a certain lifestyle was built into the very fabric of the planning system. Yugoslavia played a bridge-building role by helping to develop planning methods interesting for countries of both blocs, which paved the way for Western investment. At the same time, an analysis of AYP documents shows that the development of working methods and many development projects were financially supported to win the Cold War. The post-WWII spatial planning protocols, including the associated computer technologies in the context of architecture, thus became a part of international operations that were as important as the arms or space race. Backed by international financial mechanisms, they significantly influenced political decision-making, technological development, and alliances on both sides of the Iron Curtain. By the 1980s, the work of architects, which had on the one hand produced many architectural achievements in physical space, distanced the discourse from political issues and thus formalised it. The fall of the socialist state placed political differences on the common denominator of the free market, which changed the symbolic framework of planning and rendered the perception of many iconic architectural achievements as failed. Ironically, the very planning methods that allowed for the development of the most engaged architectural practices in the post-war period contributed to this. The article focuses on the interpretation of the events surrounding the founding of the UIA and its exhibitions on the one hand, and on the American-Yugoslav project on the other, to shed light on the described dilemmas through the specific role of Yugoslav architects in the international post-WWII environments. irony irony in architecture architecture ideology planning International Union of Architects UIA Cold War American-Yugoslav Project AYP spatial planning strategies Slovenian architects architectural history transition from socialism to capitalism ironija ironija v arhitekturi arhitektura ideologija Mednarodna zveza arhitektov UIA hladna vojna ameriško-jugoslovanski projekt AYP strategije prostorskega načrtovanja slovenski arhitekti arhitekturna zgodovina tranzicija iz socializma v kapitalizem true false true Angleški jezik Slovenski jezik Podatek o licenci CC BY-NC 4.0 je naveden na spletni strani nadrejene revije https://ar.fa.uni-lj.si/the-ar-ethic-statements. (Datum opombe: 8. 9. 2026) Članek v reviji 2026-03-25 12:35:09 2026-03-25 12:35:11 2026-09-17 12:53:12 0000-00-00 00:00:00 2024 0 0 Str. 291-324, 374-376 no. 1 2024 0000-00-00 Zaloznikova Objavljeno NiDoloceno 0000-00-00 0000-00-00 0000-00-00 72.01:327.54(497.4) 1580-5573 254914051 Nika_Grabar_.pdf Nika_Grabar_.pdf 1 AE6E69BC0E50E39B170F1AA658D3ED1B f5e02e0b58135d09d78c32a22a497d0d7bf2f99c579180c64ef57995471c094d 79931399-ac30-11f1-8bc5-0050569b8976 https://repozitorij.uni-lj.si/Dokument.php?lang=slv&id=246679 https://ar.fa.uni-lj.si/2024/nika-grabar-irony-of-in-between 0 79603f81-ab59-11f1-8bc5-0050569b8976 https://repozitorij.uni-lj.si/Dokument.php?lang=slv&id=246423 https://ar.fa.uni-lj.si/2024/2024-architecture-and-irony?content=download 0 173b26f3-ab5c-11f1-8bc5-0050569b8976 https://repozitorij.uni-lj.si/Dokument.php?lang=slv&id=246436 Fakulteta za arhitekturo AR 0 0 0