Intra-urban landscapes of priority: the Soviet legacy

Abstract

Based on the urban experience of the Soviet Union, this article explores the value of the so-called priority approach for understanding the mechanisms that contributed to the creation of the spatial structure of the Soviet/socialist city. The changes in priority status that the various urban functions were subject to are highlighted. It is then proposed that these variations were instrumental in the formation of the internal functioning and social differentiation of the Soviet/socialist city and, to the extent that the pre-1991 urban fabric persists, of its post-Soviet successor. Finally, the authors propose a new model of the development of the Soviet/socialist city, fusing the priority approach with an extensive survey of previous scholarly work within the field.

Notes

¹For a review, see Ruoppila (2004).

²Khrushchev-era buildings, see Figures 1 and 2.

³‘Khrushchoba’ derives from the combination of Khrushchevka and trushchoba (slum).

⁴G. A. Moskal'tseva, architect and urban planner, former Chief Architect of the city of Ust'-Kamenogorsk, Kazakhstan, interview with Gentile, 6 September 2000.

⁵Amongst other things, it also led to the phenomenon that women, typically employed in non-priority activities, tended to marry men with jobs in heavy industry in order to achieve improved housing conditions (Lehmann & Ruble 1997).

⁶For example, the medium-sized cities of Ust'-Kamenogorsk and Semipalatinsk, in East Kazakhstan oblast' contain relatively small but extremely run-down Soviet-era private housing neighbourhoods with nothing but electricity. These neighbourhoods are located away from public sight, often ‘behind’ a large factory. When asked about the history of one such neighbourhood, the mayor of Ust'-Kamenogorsk stated that ‘criminals and people who did not want to work lived there during Soviet times’ (V.N. Sukhorukova, Governor of East Kazakhstan oblast', then Mayor of Ust'-Kamenogorsk, Kazakhstan, formal interview with Gentile, 9 September 2000).

⁷We do leave out, however, the interesting and often imaginative studies that focus primarily on the city centre, and those that similarly emphasise the symbolism of the urban landscape (Rugg 1978, pp. 96 – 98 and 1979, ch. 11; Anthony 1979; Karger & Werner 1982; Book 2000).

⁸Needless to say, informal sector activities did play an important part (Borén 2003b; Sampson 1985; Sedlenieks 2003) and may have reinforced the outcomes produced by formal sector arrangements.

⁹The use of various types of restriction on population movement was one of the first and most characteristic features of the Soviet repressive apparatus. In particular, the internal passport and propiska system have been the focus of a rich body of literature (Matthews 1979 and 1993; Popov 1995a and 1995b; Moine 1997; Kessler 2001). At this juncture it is particularly important to note that during the post-Stalin epoch the purpose of these restrictions turned more explicitly economic and military-strategic, reflecting the planners' growing interest in optimal city size on the one hand, and the re-scaling of the control apparatus to allow for greater control of population movements to and from cities with significant military – industrial activities rather than throughout society on the other.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Michael Gentile

Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the Inaugural Nordic Geographers' Meeting, held in Lund, Sweden, 10 – 14 May 2005, and at the Second International Social Geography Workshop, Gdańsk, Poland, 22 – 24 September 2005. Michael Gentile wishes to thank the Wallander-Hedelius Research Foundation of the Svenska Handelsbanken for generous financial support for this research in the form of a Wallander scholarship and the Swedish Research Council (Vetenskapsrådet) for equally generous support in financing the ‘Post-Socialist City in the XXI Century’ project hosted by the Department of Social and Economic Geography at Uppsala University. The presentation at Lund was made possible by generous support from the Bank of Sweden Tercentenary Foundation. The authors also wish to thank Professor Bolesław Domański and two anonymous referees for useful comments on previous drafts of this paper.