WEL

TSTA

DT E

DITO

RS:

MAT

THIA

S BÖ

TTGE

R,

ANGE

LIKA

FIT

Z

2BE

LGRA

DE

THE URBAN INCUBATOR: BELGRADE

WW

W.G

OETH

E.DE

/ WEL

TSTA

DT

THE

PROJ

ECT

WEL

TSTA

DT –

WHO

CRE

ATES

TH

E CI

TY?

IS A

JOI

NT IN

ITIA

TIVE

OF

THE

GOET

HE-IN

STIT

UT A

ND T

HE G

ERM

AN

FEDE

RAL

MIN

ISTR

Y FO

R TH

E EN

VIRO

NMEN

T, NA

TURE

CON

SERV

ATIO

N, B

UILD

ING

AND

NUCL

EAR

SAFE

TY (B

MUB

)

BANG

ALOR

E, B

ELGR

ADE,

BER

LIN, C

URIT

IBA,

DAK

AR,

JOHA

NNES

BURG

, LIS

BON,

MAD

RID,

NEW

YOR

K,

PORT

O AL

EGRE

, RIG

A, S

ALVA

DOR,

SÃO

PAU

LO,

SEOU

L, TO

ULOU

SE, T

URIN

, ULA

N BA

TOR

PERFOR MATIVE URBANISM

EDITORIAL: PERFORMATIVE URBANISM

Savamala. © Tim Rieniets

How may one improve living conditions in a city if adequate solutions are lacking at the level of official urban planning? If funds are lacking, if responsible institutions are too weak or if policy-makers or society give up in resignation when confronted with these challenges? Such questions are bitter reality in many places and put into question the self-conception and practical capabilities of established urban planning. Can established urban planning fulfill its responsibilities or do other methods exist for upgrading urban spaces in this situation?

The questions are being asked in the Belgrade district of Savamala, too. The Serbian economy is at rock-bottom, the transition from a socialist to a free-market system has brought numerous unsolved ownership issues on the real-estate market in its wake, and the young democracy is crippling its own administrative apparatus through internal power struggles. At the same time, urban planners are still deeply rooted in the conceptual world of socialist urban development. They draw up grandiose plans and hope to realize them in better times. But they, along with their grand visions and technocratic tools are running up against limits in the current crisis situation – in particular in a quarter like Savamala.

Once the city’s most modern and cosmopolitan quarter, Savamala was neglected for decades. Even today, many historic buildings bear witness to the grandeur of times past (see p. 2), but in the present, Savamala is mainly characterized by traffic gridlock, dilapidation and disrepair, and social and economic problems. But the quarter has great potential. In addition, policy-makers and planners are aware of this fact and have proclaimed Savamala to be Belgrade’s creative district and tourism magnet of the future. At present, investors are positioning themselves with the aim of profiting from Savamala’s upswing at some point. But in face of the weakness of the responsible authorities and the strength of a few tycoons, nothing good is to be expected for Savamala.

Nonetheless, the crisis also harbors opportunities. It offers space and time to experiment with other forms of neighborhood development and to open up different future perspectives for Savamala. With this motivation and in cooperation with curator Tim Rieniets, the Goethe-Institut Belgrad has created the project “Urban Incubator: Belgrade.” The goal of Urban Incubator is to permanently upgrade the quarter by involving the public, not however with grandiose plans and costly construction work, but instead through artistic and social activities. A total of 10 projects from the areas of architecture, design, art and music are at work on location (see p. 3). A new architecture magazine has opened up its editorial office in Savamala and is encouraging its authors to reflect on and reinterpret the quarter’s multifaceted history (see p. 13). Art students from Hamburg are helping a disadvantaged Roma family to design and build furnishings to improve their daily lives (p. 14). Architecture students from Belgrade, in dialog with the residents of an apartment building, are designing a community space.

Although these projects cannot solve the quarter’s major structural problems, they can produce different spatial qualities: they can create new networks and neighborhoods, generate new ideas and visions, and enhance public perception of the quarter. This has also not escaped the attention of responsible parties in policy-making and administration. And thus it has come about that both the Goethe-Institut and the project authors are no longer operating in the protected space of the cultural area, but have entered the political space of district development (see p. 15). What potentials and risks await both the participating stakeholders and Savamala itself is the central question of this newspaper.

Tim Rieniets is curating the Urban Incubator: Belgrade. The trained architect is director of Landesinitiative StadtBauKultur NRW (Northrhine-Westfalia). Currently he is co-curator of the platform Weltstadt.

Tim Rieniets

Savamala is situated on the southern bank of the River Sava and was, in the 19th century, the first Belgrade city quarter to be erected outside the Kalemegdan fortress in the manner of a European city. The name of the quarter is ambiguous and refers to the multi-cultural history of Belgrade: It is composed of the river’s name, Sava, and the Turkish word Mahale, which means neighborhood or city quarter. In Serbian, Savamala translates as “Little Sava”.

Savamala is only half a mile from Belgrade´s city center. It has a colorful history as port and center of trade and commerce and was once the most modern and urbane quarter of the city. Today, Savamala shows a rich heritage of valuable historical buildings from the 19th and early 20th century and a few relics from the Ottoman Empire. Many historical buildings were lost in the Second World War when Belgrade, in 1941 and 1944, suffered under air raids – first by the German and later by allied forces.

Savamala also hosts major city infrastructure, including the nearby main train station, the bus terminal and two of the city’s main bridges, connecting the city center to New Belgrade over the River Sava. However, Savamala is economically underdeveloped and socially disadvantaged, and has a reputation as a home to outcasts, prostitution, and criminality. Many buildings are vacated and in a state of dilapidation.

The former Sava port is used as a cemetery for abandoned hulks. Karadjodjeva Street, in days gone by one of Belgrade´s most glamorous streets, today serves as a main traffic artery, used by heavy trucks –a constant source of noise and pollution– on route to the new Danube port and destinations across the River Danube. The reasons for the poor condition in which Savamala is now found reach back into the era of socialist Yugoslavia, when the quarter was disregarded as the legacy of feudal and capitalist eras.

Suffering from systematic neglect, Savamala became dilapidated, while on the other side of the River Sava New Belgrade was built – the biggest and most prestigious of all urban developments in the former Yugoslavia. In consequence, in Savamala testimonies to socialist avant-garde architecture are only rarely found.

More than thirty years after Marshal Tito’s death and more than ten years after the Balkan wars of the 1990 have ended, the sad state of Savamala has hardly improved. However, the city authorities and private investors are aware of the untapped potential of Savamala. The prospect of a future “creative quarter” of Belgrade as a business and tourist attraction exits the imagination of planners and decision-makers alike. Cultural Initiatives such as the Cultural Center Grad (KC GRAD), Mikser Festival, or the Design

Map of Savamala. © Goethe-Institut

SAVAMALA Incubator Nova Iskra are forerunners of this development.

However, due to economic and political circumstances, the promising future of new master plans seem a distant prospect. Many property issues are still unsolved and further complicated by difficult legal procedures. Due to limited public resources, urgent investment in infrastructure and public spaces has been put on hold. The combined impact of these challenges and the current financial crisis has effectively resulted in the collapse of the real estate market and investor economy.

Savamala´s future prospects seem unclear. The post-war experience, however, shows that a combination of weak public authorities and influential tycoons would leave very little room for socially and culturally sustainable development in Savamala. But perhaps, the times of crises are times of opportunity, too. Liberated from the economic and bureaucratic restraints of a prospering real estate market, Savamala currently offers ideal conditions to put alternative forms and approaches of city quarter development to the test.

THE SPANISH HOUSEWhen you approach the ruin of the Spanish House underneath Branko´s Bridge, you don´t see anything special – just a dilapidated house, a historic façade. At second glance, though, you will notice some bright yellow elements inside, shining through the walls´ openings.

You will enter the Spanish House at its former main entrance and walk up a rough but beautiful flight of concrete stairs. The purpose of these stairs was most probably to lead to a new hotel reception. In the 1990’s, the Spanish House was given to an investor who wanted to convert the historic building into a modern hotel. He took out all interior walls, ceilings, and the roof and started to rebuild it from the inside. But due to financial problems he couldn’t accomplish his plans and left the Spanish House with a second layer of dilapidation: A new but unfinished concrete basement, some columns and an open elevator shaft – the remains of an unfulfilled future, which are now in stark contrast with the natural stones of the historic facades.

Once inside the Spanish House, you will be confronted with a third layer: bright yellow formwork, usually used to cast concrete, are now positioned inside the ruin in between the left-over concrete elements of the hotel investment. “Are these yellow elements remains of the investor’s concrete works, too?”, you may ask. No, they are a new temporary construction, turning the seemingly useless space of the Spanish House into a temporary event space.

This decision to use formwork was made for many reasons. Firstly in order to be able to build the event space in a short period of time and with a very small budget only. The formwork technology can be put up and removed, at the project´s defined end of tenure, without leaving traces and without

having even touched the interior structure of the heritage protected façade which was left as an empty shell by the former investors.

Secondly, the decision was taken for aesthetic reasons: The concrete formwork pays tribute to the general impression of the rough and the unfinished.

And thirdly, the formwork puts emphasis on the transitory nature of Savamala and the Urban Incubator: Formwork is never built to stay, it is always built for something else to become real. However, the formwork panels inside the Spanish House will not be filled with concrete, but with ideas, creativity, encounter and fun, before they will be eventually removed and reused at another building site.

Moving around in the Spanish House, you will understand the general lay-out of the event space consisting of three closed boxes made of formwork, dividing the floor space inside the ruin into a sequence of open spaces.

The first open space is the entrance area; the second one is the central space, or square, of the pavilion, connecting all elements of the event space with each other; the third open space is a rather small and intimate one, allowing a glimpse at the river Sava.

Framed by the three boxes, the left-over concrete elements in between look like perfectly staged sculptures in an open space. Again, this gesture stands for the Urban Incubator as such revealing the true value of a seemingly poor and neglected neighborhood.

From the central open space you will enter one of the boxes. Once the rough and dusty exterior is left behind, you will find yourself in a smooth and bright shell, without any unnecessary details. The plain walls are

just perforated by double doors and the roof by simple skylights. These skylights are integrated into a ventilated roof construction, which is covered by yellow translucent plastic panels. During the day, soft sunlight is coming in from outside. At night, electric lamps, which are integrated in each skylight, are illuminating both the inside and the outside of the event space.

While you are inside the Spanish House you may witness an event of the Urban Incubator; maybe you will join others who are enjoying the quiet and peaceful atmosphere inside the ruin; or maybe you are alone, just you and the artifacts of three different periods of Savamala’s history.

The Spanish House. © Tim Rieniets

Inside the Spanish House. © Tim Rieniets

A MODEL FOR SAVAMALAThere is no unified description of Savamala. This is not only due to Savamala´s long and varied history or the complicated situation of the present. It is also due to the fact that both professionals and the public have, for a long time, ignored this city quarter by the River Sava. Savamala – it is a locally well-known no-man´s land.

Most of the knowledge about Savamala cannot be found in books or archives, but rather, barely accessible, in the memories of Savamala residents. To uncover the residents’ knowledge and make it public was the objective of A Model for Savamala. At the center of the activities lies the creation of a 1:2000 model of the quarter, which was developed over several months with the support of international experts. This model represents not only a specific form of Savamala as a cityscape of buildings and houses, but also a physical form of collecting, exhibiting, and publicly exposing local knowledge.

As A Model for Savamala simultaneously collects and stores local knowledge about the quarter, it contributes to future visions of Savamala in two ways: Firstly, this local knowledge is the necessary basis for planning the future of the quarter adequately. Secondly, this knowledge will constitute a new appreciation of and create a new awareness for Savamala. Over the course of the project the team undertook thorough research and data collection, initiated design workshops and a model building studio, as well as a co-operation with local and international studios for designing concepts and ultimately the manufacturing of several 3D-models.

Team:Maja Popović, Boba StanićGuests: Ljubo Georgiev, Kaita Shinagawa

THE SPANISH HOUSE The Spanish House is a historic customs house that has been in a dilapidated condition since Tito´s era. After the introduction of free market reforms, a private investor intended to turn the building into a hotel. Due to financial problems the investor had to withdraw from the project after the building had already been gutted and partially reconstructed. In 2012, temporary right of use of the premises was conferred to the Goethe-Institut Belgrad. Now, the Spanish House has, through a temporary pavilion building designed by Tim Rieniets / Nikola Banković, as a communication venue that contributes functionally, programmatically, and symbolically to the revitalization of the quarter.

The temporary architecture of the Spanish House is reflected in construction elements, i.e. form work panels, which are typically used on building sites for casting concrete. The pavilion is a “space of enablement”. It was designed to provide adequate working conditions for both Urban Incubator: Belgrade project participants and for the residents of Savamala. The space provides public access to information about the project and is a venue for cultural events, such as exhibitions and workshops as well as other social events.

Historical components of the original building, together with new concrete elements, create a unique atmosphere and leave a sculptural imprint on the ruins of the Spanish House. The pavilion does not attract attention as a building in its own right but as a design that integrates the characteristics of the place as it is: emptiness transforms into space, the weeds into gardens, and the concrete elements into sculptures. The metamorphosis of the Spanish House is a symbol of the renaissance of the whole of Savamala.

Team:

Tim Rieniets and Nikola Banković In cooperation with Nemanja Zimonjić

The Spanish House project is supported by the Municipality of Savski Venac and PERI d.o.o., Serbia.

Situated on the southern bank of the river Sava in a neighborhood of the old town, Savamala is one of the most beautiful areas of the city. Savamala is rich both in tradition, history and heritage, which is visible in the many valuable historical buildings in the district. But world wars, authoritarian rule and the current economic crisis have left their marks. Today, Savamala is in a state of dilapidation, economically underdeveloped and socially disadvantaged.

The Urban Incubator: Belgrade aims to improve the quality of life of local residents, arguing strongly in favor of a city on a human scale, and aims to encourage the residents of Savamala to take charge of their quarter. It is the quarter’s cultural and social values that should drive Savamala´s re-vitalization, rather than commercial and real-estate business interests. The Urban Incubator: Belgrade represents a participatory approach to urban development and could serve as a model for other cities in Serbia and the region.

The Urban Incubator is a Goethe-Institut ‘project of excellence’, supported by the City of Belgrade and the Municipality of Savski Venac, Dom Omladine / House of Youth, BHSF Architects and ETH Zurich, the proHelvetia foundation, as well as the Embassies of Switzerland and the Netherlands. Media partners include the most widely spread print, TV / radio and online media in Serbia, “Blic”, “B92, and Politika. The Urban Incubator: Belgrade involves more than ten local and international projects from the fields of art, architecture, urbanism and social engagement, which have been operational in Savamala during 2013. Project authors include Raumlabor Berlin, the University of Technical Sciences (ETH) Zurich, “Third Belgrade” Artists´ Initiative (Belgrade), the University of Fine Arts of Hamburg, the Zurich University of the Arts, Nexthamburg (Hamburg), GingerEnsemble (CH), Camenzind (Zurich), Maja Popović and Boba Stanić (Belgrade / Amsterdam), Goethe-Guerilla, and many others.

MICRO-FACTORIESMicro-Factories creates new products and production facilities that transform the knowledge, capacities, and ideas of Savamala into innovative products in new, small production plants.In recent decades the relationship between urban space and industrial production has been lost. Small-scale production workshops have been replaced by large-scale logistics, and production and sales facilities have been relocated from the city center to the urban periphery. This has led to the loss of microeconomic structures that had greatly contributed to the urban and social qualities of many city´s central zones, which shaped intense street life, vivid neighborhoods and a shared feeling of local pride and identity.

The Berlin-based Raumlabor contributes to re-inventing the idea of micro-factories in Savamala, helping to stabilize traditional, still existing infrastructure of Savamala. Over the course of the Urban Incubator: Belgrade they reclaimed an office cum exhibition and working space, designed and manufactured furniture, organized workshops and built networks with local architects, urbanists, as well as small-scale craftsmen from Savamala.

Team: Raumlabor Berlin (Axel Timm, Christof Meyer)

SLUŠAJ SAVAMALA!We usually perceive changes in urban spaces with visual means – through photographs, pictures or maps. But you can also hear the changing of a city. Slušaj Savamala!, literally “listen Savamala!” is a sound-art project which collects old and new sounds and feeds them back into the urban space in formats such as installations, concerts, or radio programs.

Savamala looks back onto a colorful past. This phrase not only describes the historical changes of an urban space like Savamala, but it also illustrates that we usually describe changes as a visual phenomenon. We look at old photographs and pictures or we study historical maps. The same is true to the future of urban spaces which we usually try to illustrate through images and sketches of architects and urban planners. We seem to have un-learned: that we can hear the changes of a city, too.

THE URBAN INCUBATOR: BELGRADETHE URBAN INCUBATOR: BELGRADE IS A CULTURAL PROJECT SUPPORTING THE REVITALIZATION OF THE NOW NEGLECTED BELGRADE CITY-QUARTER OF SAVAMALA. IT IS NOT PLANNERS, POLITICIANS, OR INVESTORS BUT ARTISTS, ARCHITECTS, ACTIVISTS AND THE RESIDENTS OF SAVAMALA AND BELGRADE WHO WILL CONTRIBUTE TO SHAPING THE FUTURE OF THE SAVAMALA CITY QUARTER.

The group undertook sound-walks and workshops, set-up sound installations, concerts of new compositions and several sound-art projects. Ultimately, they founded Radio Savamala, which will now be handed over to locals in order for Savamala to have its own radio station.

Team:Klara Schilliger, Lara Stanić, Valerian Maly, Cyrill Lim (GingerEnsemble)

“Slusaj Savamala!” is supported by proHelvetia Fund and the Swiss Embassy in Serbia.

CAMENZINDA new architectural magazine has been established in Savamala: Camenzind, a new Serbian journal covering architectural issues, simultaneously producing print and radio coverage and organizing public events in and about Savamala highlighting Serbian authors and topics in national and international architectural debates.

The Serbian architectural and urban discourse can be seen as isolated within the national and international context. Publishing a Serbian edition of the Swiss magazine Camenzind contributes to changing this situation substantially. Moreover, interdisciplinary knowledge transfer between Switzerland and Serbia is created through an open platform for debate and by strengthening networks in Serbia and beyond.

So far, three issues, guided by a local editorial board, have been published. The team also undertook radio workshops and programs, as well as public events such as lectures and discussions. In the long run, the management of Camenzind in Savamala will be completely passed on to the Serbian project participants, fully localizing the project.

Team: Axel Humpert, Tim Seidel, Benedikt Boucsein, Jeannette Beck (BHSF Architekten, Zürich)

Ana Djordjević (local coordination), Tamara Popović, Marko Gavrilović and Iva Bekić.

Experts on the project are: Robin Warren, Florian Graf, Prof. Dr. Bettina Köhler und Axel Langer

International participants: Yaniya Lee und Leila Peacock

Camenzind is supported by the following institutions: BHSF Architects Zurich Pro Helvetia Foundation Embassy of Switzerland in Belgrade

NEXTSAVAMALA— CROWDSOURCING A CITY VISIONHow do the citizens of Belgrade envisage the future of Savamala? What are their ideas? And how can those ideas be realized? NextSavamala supports the citizens of Belgrade to develop their own vision for Savamala through a web-based public forum and workshops.

There is a growing demand among citizens for more participation in the development of their city. In post-socialist countries, where city development over a long period has been in the sole responsibility of authoritarian regimes and their experts, a new desire for active engagement is also emerging strongly. But how can participatory processes be organized if there is a lack of adequate structures and traditions?Web-based communication offers new possibilities to actively involve citizens. In Hamburg, these instruments have been developed and tested. The NextHamburg project has been very successful in collecting and filtering citizens’ visions through our internet platform and, through workshops, developing ideas that can implemented in actual planning processes.

Set within the Urban Incubator, the NextHamburg team came to Belgrade to develop, together with the citizens of the city, a city vision for Savamala. Consequently, the internet platform NextSavamala has been established and through many local activities, all citizens, from children to seniors were invited to take part in the future development of Savamala.

Team: Julian Petrin, Cynthia Wagner

PUBLIC DESIGN SUPPORTDesigning a local environment always involves a social dimension, as it creates new relationships between various actors: people that are responsible and people that are affected, experts and ordinary citizens, representatives of pro and contra. In this sense, design is not only a tool that improves the aesthetic qualities of our environment but, at the same time, something that can be used to create social value. The Hamburg University of Fine Arts (HfbK Hamburg) has taken this perspective as their objective and is engaging with Savamala through two projects:

Projekat Alat / The Toolkit Project

Savamala today is caught in a state of stagnation. But considering its attractive location and its historical substance, it is only a question of time until new investment, new residents and new life styles will change this city quarter. Can old-established traditions of life and work survive this change?

Projekat Alat is an attempt to trace, understand and archive local everyday practices. Students from HfbK Hamburg engaged with Savamala residents in order to learn from them: for example, how to conserve food, how to re-use residual materials, or how to solve structural problems of commercial or residential buildings and apartments. This re-discovered local knowledge was documented in an “open-source manual”, which contributes to uncovering the fragile and invisible everyday knowledge of citizens and highlighting its local cultural value.

Za Javni Dizajn / Public Design Support

The Public Design Support project is a contact point where Savamala residents can find advice and active support for their own design and construction demands and requirements.

Students of HfbK Hamburg discuss design and construction problems together with residents, elaborate practical design options and establish an open dialogue with the neighborhood to collectively find solutions to their problems. The Public design support project enables therefore not only the development of construction and aesthetical design but also the creation new intercultural exchange in the neighborhood. Their activities included: renovation of a reclaimed office / gallery space and practical design for a discussion- and workshop space; practical design support for a local

Roma family; workshops and support for Urban Incubator: Belgrade projects to create a community space (Crnagorska 5), reclaiming a historical Sava ship and re-using it for workshops and events around traditional cooking, singing and gathering on the Sava riverbank; the project 1000 oaks for Savamala, as well as a kitchen tool-book for cooking and chatting.

Team: Jesko Fezer, Marjetica Potrč and students

BUREAU SAVAMALAHow can artistic projects influence urban development? Art theoreticians and sociologists from Belgrade and Zurich carried out research into the influence of the Urban Incubator: Belgrade project on Savamala.

Artists and other creative actors have increasingly become involved in the revival of run-down buildings and derelict city quarters – which is the case in Savamala. Some of the results of this artistic approach are, however, disputed. Critical voices argue that creative milieus are exploited for commercial and political purposes, contribute to gentrification, and, eventually, even damage their own city quarters and creative energy.

Bureau Savamala therefore focuses on critically monitoring and analyzing the contribution of artists and other creative projects on the development of Savamala. The Bureau pays special attention to the various activities of the Urban Incubator: Belgrade and other projects and events that are ongoing in Savamala. Using empirical methods, Bureau Savamala seeks to establish how the quarter changes and how the perception of local citizens and the broader public has changed accordingly.

Bureau Savamala serves the Urban Incubator: Belgrade as a critical commentator, contributing to the socially sustainable development of Savamala. In addition to data and material collection, ethnographic research and observation, the Bureau prepared a series of surveys and documentations reporting changes in the Savamala neighborhood.

Team: Philipp Klaus, Jürgen Krusche, Dobrica Veselinović

In cooperation with Zurich University of the Arts (Zürcher Hochschule der Künste (ZHdK)

Micro-Factories. © Matthias Müller-WieferigNextSavamala. © Nebojsa Vasic

SCHOOL OF URBAN PRACTICESHow can the future of a city be designed when there are no financial means for investment, when legal issues remain unclear, and when institutional procedures are slow? The project School for Urban Practices will research and test new forms of city quarter development, using Savamala as laboratory.

Does handing over the future of this city quarter to artists, cultural workers and activists create alternative options to the established procedures of city planning? Students of the Faculty of Architecture, Belgrade, investigated these questions. The School of Urban Practices took the Urban Incubator: Belgrade as a model for scrutinizing alternative methods of urban development. They followed the Urban Incubator: Belgrade projects closely and developed their own ideas in and about Savamala.Besides renovating and re-claiming Crnagorska 5 in co-operation with various other Urban Incubator projects, they undertook participatory design workshops with apartment block owners / residents. Co-operation between residents and authorities, mediation of trust-building processes, as well as clearing and physical preparation of designed space were core to their engagement.

Team: Ivan Kucina and students from the University of Belgrade

GOETHE GUERILLA

The fourth generation of the Goethe-Guerilla has taken up their position as artists and creators at the Goethe-Institut Belgrad; and just like previous Guerilla generations since 2010, they are extremely interested in Savamala, the city-scape and mental landscapes of locals and residents. Within the Urban Incubator: Belgrade, the new generation of Guerillas have been developing ideas and interventions asking questions that are interesting for young people in all kinds of places, such as “What can we do?”, “Who does the city belong to?”, “How can we shape our future in our own ways?”

In cooperation with the Goethe-Institut Belgrad, the Goethe-Guerillas have developed programs aimed at bringing German language and culture closer to their own Serbian peer group in new and direct ways, simultaneously stimulating the development of the culture in which they live and work. Their activities included sound-art and visual art exploration and exhibitions in Savamala (Spanish House), the EU-program Youth in Action participation of 25 young cultural activists in Savamala / Spanish House from Vilnius, Budapest, Chemnitz, Sarajevo, and Belgrade.

Team: Zorica Milisavljević, Bojana Babić, Dajana Đuka, Jovana Sibiniović, Milka Mitrović, Mirjana Jeremić, Nina Vujasin, Katarina Simić, Stefan Lazić, Anita Knežić, Simon Marić

WE ALSO LOVE THE ART OF OTHERSFor most of its history, Savamala was Belgrade´s gateway to the world, a place of exchange and encounter. Here, at the confluence of the Danube and Sava rivers, different people and cultures found the best conditions for international trade, networking, and innovation. Today, very little of this dynamic past remains. The port of Savamala has been re-located, commercial and cultural institutions have vanished, and a spirit of openness and innovation has been replaced by the stifling feeling of stagnation and backwardness. Savamala feels isolated – a remote and inaccessible place in the middle of the city.

The Belgrade artists´ initiative Treći Beograd / Third Belgrade has actively contributed to change the situation and re-vitalize the historic role of Savamala. Envisaging Savamala as a place where artists from Belgrade and beyond can enter into dialogue, the MediaLab has been established in Savamala, serving artists as their space to work and communicate. Under the title We also Love the Art of Others, artists of different origins and positions found a new meeting place where they can engage in and share the same focus of attention: Savamala.

Treći Beograd is fostering a network among the artistic scenes of Belgrade and beyond, and in instigating artistic research and intervention in a forgotten place that has the potential to stimulate Belgrade´s city life. After having renovated a reclaimed gallery / office space, the initiative hosted several local and international workshops, numerous artists´ exhibition projects in and for Savamala, social events and gatherings connecting artists and the local communities, as well as lectures and talks. Lastly, the team set up the Savamala Art School educational program.

Team: Third Belgrade

URBAN INCUBATOR FEATURING…

The Urban Incubator: Belgrade hosts various multifaceted programmes of local initiatives and projects in the Spanish House, i.e. space for research and work for “A Model for Savamala”, construction and installation of furniture for “Raumlabor”, Goethe-Guerilla sound installations, exhibitions (i.e. about architecture and urbanism), documentation of working processes, workshops, concerts of local and international bands (e.g. GRUBB-Roma-workshop), Bicycle Kitchen and an exhibition of the “Beograd Velograd”-bike initiative et al.

A Model for Savamala. © Nebojsa Vasic

VISITING THE URBAN INCUBATOR — WELTSTADT CORRESPONDENT ANNA HOHLER IN BELGRADE

Urban Incubator Workshop. © Nebojsa Vasic

No doubt about it: Belgrade offers Western European visitors an amazing lesson in urban development even today, more than ten years after the appearance of an article that drew attention to the astonishing informal construction activity underway in the Serbian capital as early as 2002 – only three short years after the NATO airstrikes. “The city’s face is changing, urban planners are in despair, policy makers can’t be bothered with it (yet),” wrote Ruedi Weidmann, historian and editor of TEC21, at the time in an exciting article about the chaotic state of affairs and proliferating informal urban growth in Belgrade1. “A well-informed planner estimates that by now the majority (of inhabitants) is living in illegal residences, is renting them out or is profiting from their construction,” is to be read there. “In Serbia, house and apartment construction is the only investment option for savings.” And: “Today, anyone who must rely on an official procedure and is not in urgent need of a way to dispose of cash, will therefore take his time with building: ( … ) planning offices wait for domestic or foreign investors ( … ) Potential investors wait until new planning legislation simplifies the complicated legal situation and ownership issues are clarified.”

Although the latter is currently underway, the retransfer of real-estate property to its pre-Communist owners is decidedly complex. At this time, Belgrade’s city administration is seeking to take a middle ground approach between retransfer and rights of use involving individual construction and renovation projects, even if the legal and ownership issues have not yet been completely clarified or if private investors withdraw due to financial difficulties. A prominent example here is the Spanish House, an historic customs house that had been abandoned following failed renovation measures, and thanks to the interim use rights granted to the Goethe-Institut Belgrad and with the aid of a temporary architecture, now functions as a central event venue for Urban Incubator: Belgrade. Meanwhile, intense activity prevails in the Spanish house, resurrecting the ruins of the formerly derelict site.

Until now, most studies and projects involving Belgrade’s urban development focused on unofficial development at the outskirts of the city or in Novi Beograd, the New Belgrade established in socialist Yugoslavia. A case in point is the 2012 study of the ETH Studio Basel Belgrade Formal, Informal: “In scarcely any other European city have the public and the government lost their influence so swiftly and radically on the city’s planning,” states the foreword by Roger Diener, Marcel Meili, Christian Mueller-Inderbitzin and Milica Topalovic.

“Conversely, scarcely anywhere else have so many players participated in such different ways in the stabilisation of these informal developments. ( …). In the course of the study, it became apparent that the dialectical juxtaposition of formal and informal reveals a noteworthy reflection in the city’s planning itself: while the destabilisation of the contemporary city expectedly manifests itself most acutely in the epochal model of Novi Beograd, almost all significant zones of informal growth are located in the outskirts of the city. The area

between these two poles, the river area, is a zone with fewer clear-cut rules, in part local and evolved in small-scale terms.” 2 And in the text Urbane Gegenwelten (i.e. urban counter-worlds), Christian Mueller-Inderbitzin even goes so far as to conclude that “on the contrary, the areas along the Danube and Save are ‘on stand-by,’ without any stirrings, indeed without any ‘energy flow:’ a lethargic waiting for a better future?”.

Urban Incubator: Belgrade is now seeking to remedy this state of affairs and contribute to drawing public attention to this part of the river bank area closest to the city centre; an intermediate area of historic city districts and a stretch of river banks: the project’s interest is focused on Savamala, the old-city quarter by the river – literally the quarter on the Save.

The project, launched in spring 2013, organized and mainly financed by the Goethe-Institut Belgrad and supported by the City of Belgrade and the Borough of Savaski Venac is a novel attempt by means of cultural and social projects to create a basis for an urban-development revitalisation of a formerly prestigious quarter that had deteriorated under Tito. Savamala is located on the eastern bank of the Save between two bridges – the Branko bridge to the north and the old Save Bridge to the south – surrounds Belgrade’s main train station, two bus terminals, and

absorbs the entire transit traffic, at least until the opening of the second bridge over the Danube in the the city’s northwest planned for late 2014. An idiosyncratic mix of growth and stagnation prevails in the quarter. On the one hand major structural changes are planned for the coming years – thanks to the new bridge, the lorries will vanish, in four or five years the two bus terminals will be relocated to Novi Beograd; scarcely two kilometers south of the current main train station, the expansion (underway since the 1970’s despite various

interruptions) of the planned new main train station Prokop is proceeding, the centerpiece of Belgrade’s rail transport that still awaits its completion. The grounds laid open as a result and the existing abandoned land make up the so called Save Amphitheater, surely one of the city’s most valuable zones for which countless practically unrealizable plans are currently being made.

The district mayor Dusan Dincic speaks of a new opera house and other cultural facilities, and one of the numerous master plans for the coming decades envisions a charming riverside promenade: on paper more than 50 pictograms indicate the activities being planned, from sunbathing and ice-cream parlors to bird-watching, weight-lifting or Segway riding.

One thing that the authorities have scarcely taken into account is the numerous local initiatives and activities underway despite

the relatively low capacity for mobilization on the part of the Serbs, marked as they are by a socialist regime and by war. This has already been changing, though, since the start of Urban Incubator: Belgrade: today, the district mayor has a seat at the table as a guest at a meeting together with all project participants, and Serbian media have reported on the unique project repeatedly and in detail. Awareness of the problems and the development of the quarter is thereby increasing among the population as well, and thus one of the most important goals – or at least the basis – of this Urban Incubator has already been achieved: the residents’ involvement in advancing both the cultural and social values of the quarter as well as its participatory and open-ended evolution. Over the long term, one of the more than ten sub-projects of Urban Incubator, the Bureau Savamala, studies its concrete effects on the quarter and critically examines the artistic contributions to the development of the quarter.

All sub-projects are set up in such a way that they develop beyond their limited lifespan within the framework of Urban Incubator. In a conversation, Curator Tim Rieniets explains his concept: the Incubator is neither a festival nor an artist-in-residence program; it has its own, unique structure. The selected projects are housed in unused spaces and buildings in Savamala, and are active for at least a year. They deal intensively with a wide range of aspects involving the quarter, its evolution and its residents, are open and accessible to all, and promote exchange and cooperation among international and local players.

Camenzind goes Belgrade as a case in point has started a Serbian architecture magazine in Savamala, and organized public events such as lectures, panels and workshops in the tiny rooms of the new editorial board. Camenzind, a research and publication platform launched in 2005 by the three architects Benedikt Boucsein, Axel Humpert and Tim Seidel in Zürich (augmented in 2007 by Jeanette Beck) is cooperating with the local coordinator Ana Djordjevic-Petrovic and others on location to enable this. Over the long term, the project is to be turned over to the Serbian participants and become a permanent institution. By now, the first three of four planned issues appeared with articles taking as their point of departure where local history meets urban mythology, thus the editor.3

In this respect, Savamala is a paradise – if something not lacking here, it is stories and legends. The authors found the proof in their attempt, in conversations with residents, to mark Savamala’s boundaries on a map. The result: the various records diverge so greatly that it is impossible to clearly define the extent of the quarter.

“The areas along the Danube and Save are ‘on stand-by,’ without any stirrings, indeed without any ‘energy flow:’ a lethargic waiting for a better future?” — Christian Mueller-Inderbitzin

What sort of city should be developed here? Until now, basically no one in Belgrade has been asking fundamental questions of this kind. — Anna Hohler

Another project investigates the same question in three-dimensional terms: A Model for Savamala by Maja Popovic and Boba Stanic. The two architects constructed a model of the quarter on a scale of 1:200, a model whose form is as diverse as the information contained within it: facts that go far beyond the mere location and form of the buildings and streets, and among other things include property ownership, social profiles of the residents, infrastructure and historic events.

Savamala, according to Boba Stanic, is a no-man’s land with information about the area. Most of the information about Savamala is not to be gotten from books or officials, but from the memories of the residents. And that was the goal: to collect and choose experiences and create an installation that will be displayed in the Spanish House, and thus make the collected knowledge available to the public.

With Slusaj Savamala! – literally “Listen, Savamala!” – Klara Schilliger, Lara Stanic, Valerian Maly and Cyrill Lim of the GingerEnsemble take the view that one can not only see changes in a city, but also can hear them. Their sound art is therefore an acoustic journey of discovery, in a way, a forensics of sound in Savamala that identifies new tones, noises and sounds, archives them, combines them in new ways and plays them back. However, the project’s centerpiece is the launching of a local radio station and here, too, the goal is to hand over the broadcaster to the local team at

the end of the year when Urban Incubator: Belgrade will be officially concluded, and to have the project continue as an alternative local Serbian radio.

The members of the GingerEnsemble therefore view their main task as organizational and administrative in nature – founding a non-profit supporting association, putting together a broadcasting station, organizing a broadcast vehicle, negotiation with the authorities about obtaining a broadcasting license – and emphasize that here in Belgrade, the issue is not to create art, but instead to link art and cultural activities with problems of everyday life (and their possible solutions!), thus laying the groundwork for coming developments in urban revitalization.

All agree about one thing: gentrification is a very real threat. Not only Urban Incubator is actively involved in the revitalization of Savamala, but also the Mikser Festival, a multidisciplinary event that organizes workshops, concerts, exhibitions and also a so called Urban Lab, and also devoted a week to the theme Transit in late May 2013.

The KC Grad, already launched in 2009, is a cultural center and bar located in an old warehouse directly next to the Spanish House. And in 2012, the Oktobersalon – one of the most significant exhibitions of contemporary art in South-east Europe – was held in the city’s former Geodetic Institute, a massive building from the turn of the 20th century.

But these praiseworthy cultural initiatives might also have their downsides: rising rents, outflow of financially weaker residents, etc. In addition, one of the urban planners’ main jobs will be to cope with the probable loss of the train and bus terminals as catalyzers of city life and the urbanity of the quarter. What will replace them? What sort of city should be developed here? Until now, practically no one in Belgrade has been asking fundamental questions of this kind. But Urban Incubator: Belgrade addresses these questions and draws the public’s attention to them in a completely unpretentious, refreshingly un-didactical manner – and that is in and of itself a great success.

1 Ruedi Weidmann “Belgrad wächst nachts”, in “Balkan: Stadtentwicklung”, TEC21 Nr. 25, June 2002

2 ETH Studio Basel, Institut Stadt der Gegenwart (ed.), Belgrade. Formal, Informal. Eine Studie über Städtebau und urbane Transformation, Scheidegger & Spiess, 2012, pp. 15

3 Camenzind Newspaper, available from Urban Incubator Website: www.goethe.de / urbanincubator. 4 www.savamala.rs

Anna Hohler is a Swiss architectural critic and publicist. In May 2013 she visited the project Urban Incubator: Belgrade for Weltstadt. In Savamala, the quiet terrace of a café in the main train station became her favourite spot. What will become of it if one day no more trains run here?

Place Leon Aucoc. © Lacaton Vassal

The social dimensions of architectural thinking and acting take on relevance when we conceive of architecture not merely as object-, but as situation- and context-related. With this shift on focus, questions are raised concerning the relationship between structure (object), improvisation (situation) and acting subject. Currently, an architectural strategy is emerging from this reflection that I would like to describe as a transition in urban planning, an “urbanistic turn.” This strategy recognizes that the city qua phenomenon is embedded in a context of process that cannot be interpreted as a closed, completed product, but instead must be conceived as performative practice. But what does performative mean and what is the relationship between perfomativity and improvisation? We maintain that action is a performative act: in other words, something that is carried out.

And vice-versa: in order to become an emancipatory force, performance presupposes an art of action, a practical-reflective knowledge, a constructive, intersubjective approach with disorder: improvisation. If we speak of improvisation as performance here, we are dealing with improvisation’s “showing of itself” in its cultural, technological and social meaning as representation, achievement and execution at the same time.[…]

PERFORMANCEToday, performance is the modality that pervades all areas of production in capitalist societies, whether socio-cultural, technological or organizational. Performance is thus the hallmark of the current relations of production in society. If, following Henri Lefebvre, we conceive of space as something that is produced, performance thereby becomes the practical element of the way in which this space is “made.” Accordingly, every type of social organization generates a living space that stands in direct causal context with social relations. In this way, a dialectic of space unfolds that interprets space both

as a medium of social relations as well as the product that, as something that has been produced, can in turn retroactively affect society. This also entails that space is not objectively given, but instead is produced through social forces. Produced space is therewith dependent above all on our performance, and the performance of the technologies we utilize. Space and performance thus represent an interplay of relationships that permeates everyday life and has far-ranging effects on the intermeshing of individual and society. In summary, in industrial society, the individual was exposed to an absolute external control and supervision, and disciplined according to the principle of “discipline and punish.” In post-industrial society, by contrast, the performance principle tends to prevail inasmuch as supervision is shifted into the subject himself and social norms are internalized. Foucault formulated a theoretical basis for this power shift from a disciplinary to a perforative model in his study, “The History of Governmentality.” Here, he describes how the unfolding of power in modern society never occurs one-sidedly, but is instead always characterized by an interplay of self- and other-determined governance. Not only is the Archimedean point of almost all social problems of our times thus described, but also our relationship to space and therefore our role as subjects in space, more concretely as users and actors can be attributed to this.

THE BUILDING AS CYBERNETIC LEARNING MACHINE: CEDRIC PRICE’S FUN PALACEPrototypical for this development is the emergence of a new tactic with the aid of which marginalized groups or individuals aspire to the “center.” Instead of organizing a majority by means of a protracted political struggle, marginalized groups and persons now seek to penetrate directly into the center of societal debate from – seen in

social terms – the outer point by means of maximally performative effects. What previously could only be achieved by means of securing a majority now functions with the implementation of a tactic of positing. In this context, the Fun palace of the english architect Cedric Price can be highlighted as a central prototype from the 1960’s. As a round-the-clock multi-purpose entertainment center, the Fun palace combines communication technologies and building components into a performative machine aimed at adapting to the needs and wishes of its users. […] In order to do meet the requirements of convertibility, the Fun Palace’s flexible structure is constructed along the lines of a shipyard and, depending on changing situations, be able to be converted at the roof level by a crane structure. The circulating movement is made possible by connecting bridges and conveyor walkways. The concept of architecture as built space makes way here for a concept of a controlled space: functional governance regulates the constellation of construction. Symbolic expression makes way for a time-based automation: moveable sun shields replace the function of the roof, spatial division is organized by screens, optical barriers and steam zones. Specifically functional requirements such as sanitary facilities and kitchens are installed in standardized modules on mechanically moveable decks, thereby securing the improvisational options. Here, built space is replaced by the concept of the abstract meta-machine.[…]

LACATON & VASSAL — AN ARCHITECTURE OF ENABLEMENT AND IMPROVISATIONOne architectural firm expressly committed to opening up individual free spaces is Lacaton & Vassal. Anne Lacaton and Jean

Philippe Vassal seek to grasp the essence of improvisation, form from movement and to transport this into architecture. Here, they do not take the event-oriented program of the 1980’s and 1990’s that aims to supply forms in order to generate events as their point of departure. They also do not conceive of form as an architectural problem of continual elaboration, but instead: Form is the aggregate of an architectural analysis of a particular situation. Architecture is then primarily something that emerges from a situative movement: first life, the appropriation, the enabled improvisation are what constitute the spatial quality. In the case of Lacaton & Vassal we can therefore speak of an architecture of enablement, a second-level production of space. They produce spatial structures that in turn enable the production of space. For Lacaton & Vassal, the spatial added-value is measured not in additional square meters alone, but also in the added potential of living movement, lived experience and ultimately in quality of life. The connection with time produces a lightness in architecture that counters the idea of the monumental, the eternal, removed from time. We discover a direct line to Price here: inasmuch as architecture includes time as a factor of life and production in a building, it becomes lighter, more capable of transformation, even its own disappearance has been taken into consideration as well.

Lacaton & Vassal proceed analogously to conceptual art: they analyse the interior of a situation and from this develop a conceptual program that transforms itself as long as it remains open until the time is ripe for admitting formal determinations. The given is what determines: the question is posed in accordance with the consciousness for the situation. This can go so far that the architects refrain from intervening because they recognize that the situation already functions just as it is, as in the case of Place Leon Aucoc in Bordeaux. Changes in the previously existing, subtle balance of the place are out of the question. Lacaton & Vassal restrict themselves to simple maintenance work. Period!

THE PERFORMANCE OF SPACEChristopher Dell

Just as a place can become a ready-made, technology can become an instrument of reinterpretation, of détournement: hot-houses are transformed into housing machines (Le Corbusier, unité d’habitation / Wohnmaschine – translator’s note). And since hot-houses are also inexpensive and at the same time generate maximum openness, the view of the economy is likewise changed. Paradoxically, Lacaton & Vassal have integrated the economy as driving force in such a calculated fashion that on the other hand, they liberate themselves from it: “We never start from the idea that we’re going to build inexpensively; we ask ourselves how we’re going to be able to offer ourselves everything we want.” The buildings are so inexpensive that they enable luxury without a great deal of money: luxury for all. “Se libérer de l’idée de forme” thus does not mean dispensing with form, but deriving form from movement. This frees our attention for the significance of people’s every-day life and its movements generated from within.

PER-FORMED SPACECedric Price and Lacaton & Vassal have shown in exemplary fashion how architecture can function as a temporary expository machine of this transition in the social production of space. Thereby socio-political effectivity – in other words: the effects of socio-cultural performance of architecture – likewise takes center-stage. As an aesthetic form of action, architectural practice can also be a platform for new forms of political performance. In this connection, French philosopher Jacques Rancière speaks of the creation of stages for lending visibility to new political actors. When such stages of enablement are created, not only political goals play a role, but also the form in which they are per-formed.

Form sounds alluring to architects: the discourse of form seems to confirm an understanding of space as pure form, as something transparent and intelligible. This conception makes it seem possible that the chaos of the world can be tamed rationally by means of an intellectually understood space, as if the complex tangle that is the city can be “generated” with a series of precisely defined operations. But this is deceptive. According to Lefebvre, in the urban context we experience a non-transparent, occult form: Urban space purports to be transparent. Everything is symbolic […], everything stands in relation to pure form, is the content of this form […]. But one […] notices that this transparency is deceptive. The city, the urban, is also a mystery, occult. Lefebvre’s point about form ghere can be easily misunderstood. This is due to his definition of form in relation to movement, to time. Space is interpreted as story-line / course of action, as a dynamic entity that has a structuring influence on the fabric of social relations and is co-determined by the latter at the same time. In this process, everyday life retroacts systematically on the performance of space. The possibilities of constituting spaces performatively are dependent on the given symbolic and material factors found in an action situation, on the habits and disposition of the actors, on the access control embedded in the structure as well as on physical options. A shift in focus thereby begins, away from objects and towards that which objects make possible. Complexity and disorder arise from this field that constitutes the urban: improvisation is then the urban practice that seeks constructive ways of dealing with disorder on the basis of the performative. Here, it is of decisive importance to interpret the outward form of performance not as a determinant, but instead solely as the point of departure for new forms. Those who assume that movement follows from form, can, for

instance, as a city planner maintain that sufficient planning also produces the right urban movement. Lefebvre’s view is the exact opposite: for him, form emerges from movement and not the other way around! Thus, the issue here is to simply turn our understanding of form on its head. This is unspectacular, and for this very reason so effective. In this way, urbanism became situative: in the recognition that the doable, the real, the potential of the situation is drawn from the interplay of mutually influencing factors. If we desist from spending time pressing reality into forms, we have space for analysing those structures that regulate the course of the process of transformation. It has the effect of liberation: discovering coherence instead of avoiding disorder, and thereby taking life itself as our point of departure. Instead of a call to order and a return to an overriding subject-perspective, the issue now is the possibility of the subject to reconfigure himself in improvisation. This also means: the consistency of the subject also does not remain untouched!

FUTURE OUTLOOKHow can improvisation be consciously created? Through looking on or through action? Bith: through reflexive action within the given. Improvisation can be given shape only through the confrontation with ones own way of life and its irregular development, in other words through its random, contingent future. The spatial situation itself is then no mere addition of its elements or enumeration of diverse circumstances, but instead a unique, contradictory system. For architects today this also means that projects are initiated and developed from within an inner dynamic, without there initially having to be a corresponding commission. The commission

then follows the project. This is the moment in which the valences of function, form and structure change: they become real or potential forces in social space, usable for experimental design. Has form disappeared thereby? No. Form is only the updated appearance of the transformation that is taking place. For this reason, the central question remains: how we interpret the specific grammars, rules and forms, as a controllable plannable pattern, or as an improvisational structure for constructive approaches to dealing with the dis-order of the city?

This text is an edited version of: Dell, Christopher: Replaycity, Berlin 2011

Dr. Christopher Dell is a theorist, musician and composer. He taught architectural theory at the Berlin University of the Arts and the Architectural Association, London and elsewhere. He also served as guest professor of urban theory at the HCU Hamburg and the TU Munich. His research interests lie in practices and organizational processes of the contemporary city. Dell is the founder and director of ifit, Institut für Improvisationstechnologie, Berlin.

Sketch of the Fun Palace. © Cedric Price

A good deal can be said for describing Urban Incubator: Belgrade as a cultural project: it is organized and implemented by the Goethe-Institut and consists of 10 projects that can be assigned to the cultural sector in the broadest sense. But this characterization falls short of the mark, since Urban Incubator: Belgrade´s own understanding is above all as a contribution to district development in Savamala. What the involved projects are producing is no end in itself, but is instead intended to serve the development and upgrading of the quarter.

Apart from this, Urban Incubator has scarcely anything in common with district development as it is customarily carried out by urban planners and planning offices. The experts, procedures and tools that usually are deployed in district development are not to be found in Urban Incubator. And the most important of all tools that takes center stage at the outset of any and all spatial development does not exist with Urban Incubator: the plan. But what does it mean when we dispense with this central cartographic medium, the plan?

A little thought experiment will serve to answer this question. A thought experiment that might take place in Belgrade or anywhere else. It has no geographical reference, but instead is intended to clarify in principle, what an enormous influence plans have on the work of architects and planners, and what it would mean if they were to dispense with plans.

Imagine that you are an architect or an urban planner and are at the start of a project. What you need first of all are reliable plans that describe your project area, since in order to design and plan your project, you need exact information about property boundaries, applicable construction and design regulations, physiographical and

construction features of your project area, etc. You can usually obtain this information from standardized plans available from the responsible authorities. But what if this cartographic material is unavailable or – as in the case of Savamala – only available in inadequate form?

For good or ill, you would have to acquire this information through other channels. You could obtain much of this information through your own observations on-site. You could acquire other information from discussions with experts and other information sources. A complex and laborious undertaking, compared with the normal case in which you are able to obtain prefabricated plans.

You can begin with your design now that you have obtained all the necessary information about your project area. But here, too, you would normally need to make use of cartographic techniques. You would draft floor plans, sections and elevations if you wished to design buildings. Or you would draft urban plans in the case of an urban development project.

Imagine you wish to present your project to a principal or an administration official or an investor, but must do without any and all cartographic techniques. You would probably try to explain your project verbally or in the form of a text. But have you ever seriously tried to put a floor plan or a city plan in words? It is almost impossible to describe the geometry of a space in the same precision as that of a plan or map. For this reason, your presentation would not only be a challenge for you, but for your listeners, who must connect everything you say into a geometric whole in their minds once again.

Now imagine that you have the planning and approval process successfully behind you and can begin with construction. You

now must familiarize the workmen with your project, but are unable to provide them with any plans. Everything depends on your communication skills and on the comprehension and memory capacity of your counterpart. In all likelihood you would have to permanently remain at the construction site in order not to lose control over your project.

But however much you try, compared with a plan, your communication is becoming increasingly fragmentary and unclear. Scope for interpretation arises that must be filled by spontaneous decisions and improvisation. In short: what stands at the conclusion of the construction process would not be the exact implementation of your design, but instead the result of a dynamic process of communication.

What you have experienced with this thought experiment may seem pretty frustrating at first: a planning and construction process that has proven to be decidedly time-consuming, communication-intensive and error-prone. But perhaps you have been able to derive a worthwhile insight from this thought experiment, since dispensing with plans compels one to a more intensive approach to space and people.

If we make use of plans, we need not be on location. We can detach the process of designing and planning from the space in question and transfer it to such locations in which the world of experts usually operates: in the offices of architects, engineers, investors and administration officials. But this emancipation from space has a considerable influence on the manner in which we deal with our surroundings, since this emancipation creates distance: spatial distance, because it liberates us from the necessity of entering the space of our interest in person. And emotional distance

because it releases us from all empathic experiences that we would be exposed to on location.

In other words: although plans enable great efficiency in planning and construction processes, they keep us from emotional engagement with space and people. This dilemma may well have contributed in no small part to the criticism often levelled at architects and planners that they do not adequately take into consideration the needs of residents and the idiosyncrasies of their living space in their plans.

Through dispensing with plans another, more attentive and binding relationship with space and people emerges. We must be on location more, seek out contact more, and we must look more closely and become better listeners. That is what Urban Incubator: Belgrade is all about.

But perhaps the most important insight to be gained from our thought experiment is that other spaces arise on this basis than those that we bring about with plans. With plans we communicate in the imperative: this is how the space looks! This is the way the project has to be! If we dispense with them, the project emerges from communication rather than instruction, it changes and develops as an open-ended process.

One final insight from our thought experiment: without plans no project could meet the demands of modern construction. It would be too unpredictable, to imprecise, too uneconomical. And yet, dispensing with plans might achieve something that normally gets lost in the process: the circumspect and binding development of ideas and projects, from the conditions of the space itself and from our communication about it. That is the contribution that Urban Incubator can make to district development in Savamala.

PLANNING WITHOUT A PLAN?Tim Rieniets

PER-FORM!

PER-FORM!

Conditions in Belgrad are scarcely comparable with those in Dar es Salaam. Between Serbia and Switzerland, an exchange between equals is taking place; the intellectual and literary potential lying dormant is immense. This density of knowledge and talent offers the option of concentrating on a specific place. Whereas “Camenzind goes East Africa” focused on an entire region, the project “Camenzind goes Belgrade” has as its goal the creation of a platform for discussion and publication that is anchored locally in the Savamala neighbourhood and at the same time internationally linked, ansd whose members are regarded as a part of the regular Camenzind editorial staff.

The result is an issue that represents a unique mixture of neighborhood newspaper and international architecture magazine. Through this disposition, the magazine is in a position to perform an intermediary role between society and architecture that constitutes the central goal for all Camenzind projects. In this way, the magazine can perform an important urbanist and social function that focuses precisely on changes in a particular location. The first two editions of the magazine produced to date illustrate what this activity can target. Critiques of current developments and tendencies, subjective observations and interviews. Together with detailed portraits of individual places and buildings, Savamala thereby is provided with an assessment of its historic role and substance supported by knowledge. In addition, with the growing number of editions a type of archive is emerging that would be unique for a city district, if the magazine is continued over the long term. Finally the international aspect, made possible through English translations, contains the possibility of the district of Savamala also taking on a status as model in a certain sense, if developments on location continue to be critically reflected

Camenzind thereby makes use of the means of “performative urbanism” by intervening in the conditions of spatial production before these can be transported into built form.

because changes in spatial production take place with great difficulty, as if at a glacial tempo. In this situation, a magazine can have the effect of drops of water gradually hollowing out a stone: over several years, important issues are repeatedly addressed, discussions focused, hard-to-access information provided, projects and actions presented and fed into a further discourse. This is especially important in situations where the daily press scarcely deals with the conditions of spatial production in a critical fashion. Here, there is a genuine need for critical magazines as transporters of change. In particular in entrenched and problematic situations, many stakeholders are frustrated and resigned and act on their own, and a point of view from outside can help break through deadlocked thinking structures and support reflection on new perspectives – without these perspectives having been clear from the start of the project. Interventions such as this have nothing whatsoever to do with implementation of a previously defined concept.

Camenzind’s first project that dealt with this theme was “Camenzind goes East Africa” in 2011. At this time, in all of East Africa there was no magazine providing critical reflection on the rapid urbanization of the region. In response to this situation, together with local students and graduates, Camenzind produced the first issue of the magazine ANZA (Suaheli for “start”) in a four-day workshop in Dar es Salaam in Tanzania (here also as part of a project by the local Goethe-Institut).

Here, the entire production process of a magazine was carried out after the infrastructural and human-resources conditions having been established in advance. ANZA was conceived, content produced, layout designed and printing and distribution organized, all on location. In this way, a local editorial team emerged that is independently and successfully continuing the project and constantly evolving it to this day.

At the point in time when planning or building is begun in the city, most key elements are already in place. Architects and building owners are daily confronted not only with the technical, but also with the socially determined conditions of spatial production. Individual room to maneuver does exist, it is by no means the case that everything is predetermined. However, individual freedoms and divergences have little if any impact on the neighborhood’s perception since a large portion of the projects adapt themselves to the conditions of the context. In its built, everyday form, the city represents the society from which it arises.

One must therefore intervene earlier if one intends to change something about a city and the way it functions. Discussion with and in the local society must be sought. Only through intensive and long-term engagement at a specific location and by taking into account the specific conditions of this location can one achieve lasting change. Here, focus on a concrete neighborhood helps in addressing issues relating to the city as a whole without one’s having to carry out a general discourse, which, although it might be important, seldom results in changes.

Reflection on spatial production as the first step towards change can be encouraged in many different ways – performances, interviews, workshops, lectures, art projects in public space and much more. Each of these formats has its justification in this context, as for instance, the production of a magazine on architecture and urban planning such as Camenzind, since this can be taken up and held in one’s hand, and communicates content in a clear and vivid way. Thanks to its accessible format, it can be designed in such a way that it appeals to non-specialists as well and reaches people who previously had never before concerned themselves with architecture and urban planning. And above all, it can influence the course of individual events as long as it is published continually over a longer period of time. This is of particular importance

Camenzind represents a type of parallel space to that of Savamala that is closely meshed with the latter and a site for improvisation, experiments and fundamental reflection.

A MAGAZINE AS DISCURSIVE SPACETHE SERBIAN ARCHITECTURAL AND URBAN DISCOURSE CAN BE SEEN AS ISOLATED WITHIN THE NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT. PUBLISHING A SERBIAN EDITION OF THE SWISS MAGAZINE CAMENZIND CONTRIBUTES TO CHANGING THIS SITUATION SUBSTANTIALLY. THE LOCALLY PRODUCED MAGAZINE MAKES USE OF THE MEANS OF “PERFORMATIVE URBANISM” BY INTERVENING IN THE CONDITIONS OF SPATIAL PRODUCTION BEFORE THESE CAN BE TRANSPORTED INTO BUILT FORM.

Through the magazine, qualitatively new relations can be created between space and its users, and time and again, important themes be generated from Savamala’s specific situation. In doing so, Camenzind represents a type of parallel space to that of Savamala that is closely meshed with the latter and a site for improvisation, experiments and fundamental reflection.

Camenzind is the research arm of BHSF Architects, in this way the editors can combine in their practice both the practical necessities of construction work with an opportunity to reflect on architecture past, present and future and to generate discourse, all of which happens in one office.

It was launched in 2005 by the three architects Benedikt Boucsein, Axel Humpert and Tim Seidel in Zürich (complemented in 2007 by Jeanette Beck). For the project Camenzind goes Belgrade the team joined forces with British artist Leila Peacock and Belgrade activist Ana Djordjevic-Petrovic.

THOUGHTS ON PERFORMATIVE URBANISM

AT THE OUTSET OF THIS ISSUE WE POSED THE QUESTION, WHAT HAPPENS WHEN CULTURAL ACTORS ENTER INTO THE POLITICAL FIELD OF DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT. WE EXAMINED THE ROLE OF PERFORMATIVE URBANISM WHEN ESTABLISHED URBAN PLANNING FAILS TO FULFILL ITS RESPONSIBILITIES.ULTIMATELY, THIS SECTION OF THE PAPER GATHERS IDEAS AND STATEMENTS FROM PARTICIPANTS OF THE URBAN INCUBATOR: BELGRADE ON HOW DIFFERENT URBAN QUALITIES CAN BE PRODUCED, AND, MORE SPECIFICALLY, WHAT EFFECTS THE URBAN INCUBATOR´S INVOLVEMENT HAD ON THE QUARTER OF SAVAMALA.

JESKO, CAN YOU TELL US SOMETHING ABOUT THE PROJECT PUBLIC DESIGN SUPPORT AND YOUR EXPERIENCES IN SAVAMALA?

For two years now, the HFBK Hamburg’s Studio Experimentelles Design has been doing Public Design Support projects in a number of different spatial, social and cultural contexts. Since November 2011, we were able to carry out a number of projects in Hamburg that began as a weekly public design consultation in the St. Pauli district of the city. Here, our approach was always to offer residents support in working out design issues, based on research and local presence. In the case of the Savamala district in Belgrade, for instance, in the course of their research, tours through the area and discussions with residents, the Studio Experimentelles Design organizers’ attention was brought to a Roma family. A short time before, most of their small, improvised rear-courtyard house had been destroyed in a fire. In a hostile neighborhood, every day life there became difficult. Space and furniture for sleeping, eating, cooking, living and working were lacking. Together with the family, and especially with their 12-year old son, and geared to their needs and perceptions, a home was designed and built with simple tools and a minimal budget. Within three days, a set of stackable chairs, a sofa bed with room for three persons, a desk with a flexible storage system and a sideboard for the family computer had been provided.

OSTENSIBLY, THE GOAL OF YOUR PROJECT WAS “JUST” TO DESIGN AND PRODUCE A FEW OBJECTS OF EVERY DAY USE. BUT DON’T YOUR ACTIVITIES HAVE A SOCIAL AND URBANISTIC DIMENSION AS WELL? Since Public Design Support always takes place in specific urban contexts, the question was raised from the very beginning as to how design in this location can contribute to a different and better city? Can it be more than a distinguishing feature in competition between cities, as a means of individual status determination, as an element of labeling strategies on the part of upgraded city districts, as an instrument of

furnishings. But it has basically been shown that the stakeholders and clients working with us developed an interest in overarching urban problems in the course of the project. These problems were then addressed, not on the basis of generally accepted objectives, but concrete individual or collective interests. I see a great potential here. IN YOUR OPINION, WOULD IT MAKE SENSE TO HAVE MORE SUCH PROJECTS, OR DO YOU SEE PUBLIC DESIGN SUPPORT AS AN ISOLATED CASE INSTEAD?

It would be great to encourage more designers from a variety of specialties to get involved or even to establish institutional and economic structures for such project formats.

WOULD THIS BE CONCEIVABLE AS AN ELEMENT OF AN INTEGRATED URBAN DEVELOPMENT? Yes, I find this level of practical participation by residents via concrete projects such as designing their joint surroundings an important endeavor in the context of urban development goals. In this way, the demand for participation in urban development – which is often exhausted in mere surveys, join in type events or in information processing – can be realized in the form of concrete design processes.

Jesko Fezer is professor for experimental design at HFBK (University of Fine Arts) Hamburg.

PUBLIC DESIGN SUPPORT AS PARTICIPATION IN PRACTICETIM RIENIETS SPOKE WITH JESKO FEZER ABOUT THE SOCIAL DIMENSION OF DESIGN. WITH HIS PROJECT “PUBLIC DESIGN SUPPORT”, FEZER, TOGETHER WITH HIS STUDENTS, ESTABLISHED A CONTACT POINT WHERE SAVAMALA RESIDENTS CAN FIND ADVICE AND ACTIVE SUPPORT FOR THEIR OWN DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION DEMANDS AND REQUIREMENTS.

segregational urban planning? In any event, practically everybody is either a beneficiary or victim of design. Everything is designed one way or the other: social relations, the people in them just as the countless things that equip and identify them and their relationships. So, if everything is designed, then there are also infinitely many possibilities for change.

In consultation hours, weekly workshops or on-site visits, we work together with our clients on their concrete (design) problems. These are people who otherwise could not afford professional designers. They are animated and encouraged to investigate their problems and develop solution-oriented strategies in a cooperative design process. Here, the purpose of Public Design Support is to intervene in urban processes, animate the residents and affected persons to take the initiative and to become active as well as to introduce and work out social and design-related issues. The design consultation seeks to provide assistance for practical, independent action and to encourage the development of collective demands and alternative concepts of urbanity through tackling issues relating to design. As designers, we also wish to re-explore the expanded potential of design and thereby its societal function and (urban) policy significance.

CAN PROJECTS SUCH AS THESE MAKE A CONCRETE CONTRIBUTION TO DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT? Yes, but this contribution comes from the individual stakeholders or smaller groups, who arrive at joint solutions to problems and also to trans-individual themes relating to neighborhood and district development on the basis of their personal issues. WHICH ARE THE POTENTIALS AND WHICH ARE THE RISKS HERE? In fact, our concern was that with Public Design Support we would come across only very small, isolated and private problems and that we would only be able to assist in fulfilling wishes in the area of home

Completed collaborative design with a Roma family. © Daniel Pietschmann

During a Camenzind workshop. © Camenzind

Design support through Jesko Fezer´s students. © Nebojsa Vasic

Savamala Design Studio.© Nebojsa Vasic

bureaucratic jungle of institutions, agencies, and responsible persons. “Why is it that a German cultural institution can start such a large scale artistic intervention project”, they asked at the conference, “where we could not over the last few years?” Thus, it was clear that we must learn how to take advantage of the Goethe-Institut’s status as an international organization, without offending the local actors that we wanted to work with. When the Cultural Centre Grad, the next-door neighbor of the Spanish House ruin, learnt that the Goethe-Institut was interested to use the Spanish House as a temporary pavilion structure, they quickly and informally re-claimed the space between the buildings for a beer garden. MIKSER festival used our initiative to move their festival into Savamala the next year. Now the new MIKSER House is another center of cultural and creative activities in Savamala.

Beside these rather particular reasons, which encouraged us to engage in urban development, there is also a more general reason: There are many international organizations operating and engaging in urban development in Serbia and elsewhere today. However, the “third sector” –the international community in general, the EU and German institutions represented by GIZ, Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau, EU-funds etc.– usually invest in mainly economic sectors, such as water, energy, traffic infrastructure, agriculture and land management, even anti-corruption measures and reforms of, for example, local government and the legal system. Facing a deep economic crisis, Serbia is in constant need of large-scale international credit and investment projects.

The low-budget “cultural investment” of the Goethe-Institut does not directly contribute to building infrastructure and the physical re-shaping of the Savamala quarter. Our cultural funding for urban development, rather, aims to create “mental spaces”, to bring people together, to initiate new cultural activities and, thus, heighten the awareness of the importance of culture and knowledge as the basis for a new understanding in Europe.Finance and support from a cultural institution can only serve to kick-start new synergies, support local initiatives and initiate a wider network to spread and grow.

responded very positively when the Goethe-Institut announced it would become engaged in Savamala: “This is the right time and the right place”. Recognizing the value of the Goethe-Institut’s international network of architects, artists, and initiatives from cities like Hamburg, Zurich, Amsterdam and, especially, Berlin, local political leaders and other stakeholders in return stated their interest in what we had to offer: “We very much need international impulses, to get out of our own limited approaches, which we, in Belgrade, tend to get stuck in”, the then deputy mayor and City architect Dejan Vasovic assured us.

However, not being part of the existing local community of residents, planners, investors, or politicians was actually the conceptual starting point of the Urban Incubator: Belgrade. The Urban Incubator would offer a fresh approach, bringing new ideas and new partners to Savamala. Introducing a renowned international curator, international methods and management, and innovative approaches to participatory processes were also very much welcomed.

But how did it happen that the Goethe-Institut succeeded where others have struggled? In our first public conference, announcing the Goethe-Institut’s engagement in Savamala, there was a rather telling situation: One already active cultural initiative, The Ministry of Spaces, had already identified all the derelict and unused public property in Belgrade – the city’s cadaster records clearly indicated which of the buildings and spaces that are owned by the state, city, and municipalities were unused. All sorts of cultural and social initiatives had written applications to the authorities requesting use of the available spaces – most of them did not even get a response or got lost in the

The living experiment and its many bottom-up initiatives in the squares, streets, spaces and even ships in this city quarter also create a new intercultural dialogue from different perspectives, local and international. The exchange of innovative art forms fosters knowledge transfer of new forms of participation. For architects, urbanists, politicians, local residents and the many young teams of students and activists this might change their perspectives about how to deal with their own professional or private environment.

Instigating innovation, creating new cultural energy through international exchange, building networks among cultural and artistic communities, introducing international approaches – this fits closely to the cultural remit of the Goethe-Institut. This cultural and artistic approach to urban development is the reason why a cultural institution such as the Goethe-Institut may enter a field that, usually, is reserved for technical and political institutions. In a period of political and economic slowdown the Goethe-Institut and the alternative approach we bring can obviously be more effective than those of established players, who are stuck in local arguments.

But to take on responsibility for Savamala and the future of urban development is beyond the Goethe-Institut’s role. From the outset of the temporary Urban Incubator: Belgrade project we encountered high hopes and expectations, most of them higher than we could possibly hope to fulfill. Within the clearly defined

There are many reasons – some more general, some rather particular – why the Goethe-Institut Belgrad has entered into the field of urban development, a field that is usually reserved for technical and political institutions, rather than cultural ones.

In 2011 a very particular situation arose that prompted the Goethe-Institut to take on this new role: the need to temporarily relocate the Goethe-Institut, while renovation of the current premises – in order to comply with German earthquake safety regulations – was carried out. The municipality of Savski Venac kindly offered to help relocate to Savamala, perhaps hoping to bring further permanent international investment and cultural landmarks to Savamala.

However, further studies concluded that the current premises of the Goethe-Institut are, in fact, safe; the idea of temporary relocation had become obsolete. But the idea of physical relocation then evolved into a vision of operative relocation: Instead of moving our offices to Savamala, the Goethe-Institut – in collaboration with Curator Tim Rieniets – would move its cultural activities to Savamala, with an agenda to initiate visible and sustainable urban change, through cultural and social impulses. This was the moment that we, the Goethe-Institut Belgrad, took up a role in urban development that was rather new to us.The City authorities and our cultural partners

Savamala. © Nikola Markovic

THE ROLE OF CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS IN CONTEMPORARY URBAN DEVELOPMENTSMatthias Müller-Wieferig, Goethe-Institut Belgrad

WHAT OBSERVATIONS DID BUREAU SAVAMALA SUCCEED IN MAKING? HAS THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHANGED SIGNIFICANTLY IN RECENT MONTHS?

Any number of changes could be observed in the relatively brief observation period from May until November. Investments by private interests were made in various locations, on one hand shops – a bicycle shop, for instance, a big event in Belgrad, which isn’t known for being cycling-friendly – and on the other a variety of new bars and clubs. At the same time, more traditional businesses and shops such as vulcanizers or ironware shops were closed. Likewise, some facades were given a fresh coat of paint or decorated with wall paintings. One distinctive feature is the increase in the number of hostels that have been set up on individual floors of residential buildings. They are a response to increased demand for overnight accommodations in the wake of an increasingly popular party life in Belgrade and Savamala. The landlords profit, but the neighbors experience the negative consequences of this development, in particular the night-time noise made by

THE RISK OF GENTRIFICATION ANNA HOHLER IN CONVERSATION WITH PHILIPP KLAUS, AN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL GEOGRAPHER. HIS PROJECT, THE BUREAU SAVAMALA WAS TASKED WITH IDENTIFYING THE EFFECTS OF THE URBAN INCUBATOR.

guests eager to go out and socialize.Our surveys have shown that the people in the neighborhood expect a change for the better, even a better future. They interpret the signs in this direction, but also give voice to fears that the quarter will become too trendy and therefore too expensive for them. We have not yet finished with our investigations. In particular, we are waiting for the results of the very last survey that we made as close to the conclusion of the project in November as possible, in order to completely exhaust the observation period. WHAT EMPIRICAL METHODS UNDERLIE THESE OBSERVATIONS?

We have applied an entire set of methods. First of all, the classical methods of conducting a survey in which the population was surveyed with standardized interviews, experts and stakeholders by contrast with semi-standardized interviews. On the other hand, starting in May we created a photo documentation – house by house through the entire quarter. Furthermore, the various night-life scenes in bars and clubs

were studied by means of participatory observation, for instance gender proportions, price levels, etc.

DID YOU TRY TO INVOLVE THE POPULATION DIRECTLY IN THE STUDY?

Apart from the interviews, a photo reportage entitled “Like-Dislike” was carried out. Five people from the neighborhood were handed disposable cameras with which they were to photograph places or things they liked and those they didn’t like, five of each. With this method, their subjective perceptions could be recorded in visual terms, because this often doesn’t work with words so directly. The pictures were subsequently exhibited in the Bureau Savamala’ and discussed by the visitors at the opening.

WHAT CONCRETE EFFECTS HAS URBAN INCUBATOR HAD ON SAVAMALA?

At the moment, the effects of the Urban Incubator: Belgrade are isolated and related to the activities themselves. At this time, the party life, new bars and the Mikser House are far more present and

more effective than the Urban Incubator: Belgrade. In general, the Urban Incubator’s activities connect up with these far stronger currents. However, the effects of the project are more subtle. They will make themselves felt in the mid-term and lie in the encouragement of discussions through the projects, the development of ideas, for example doing something together, etc. This will trickle through to a greater or lesser extent. Perhaps some ideas for the future will take root in people’s minds. But processes such as these always take longer and are hard to quantify at this time.

But the fact remains that Serbia’s and Belgrade’s increasing breaking free from isolation is being supported by the Urban Incubator: Belgrade. The exchange between the local population, students and local administration with international teams is a positive sign. However, the balance between the introduction of international know-how and the feeling of being colonialized is by no means easy to discover.

A wall as indicator for change: First “electronic metals”…

… then art. both © Jürgen Krusche

Savamala. © Tim Rieniets

cultural strategies and budgetary procedures of the Goethe-Institut, and in line with the aim of sustainable and, eventually, independent local development in Savamala, there has to be a clear focus and a timeline. That is why many of the ten projects that form the Urban Incubator: Belgrade are designed to be taken over by local partners, once the Goethe-Institut ends its engagement.

To conclude, there are many reasons, why a cultural institution can make an important and positive impact on the transformation of a city quarter in crisis. However, we still need to be self-critical and investigate the wider consequences of our engagement. What does it mean when the Goethe-Institut takes over responsibility and invests cultural funds in projects that are usually invested in other ways? Is there a risk that the Goethe-Institut, and all the artists and activists it has invited to join the Urban Incubator: Belgrade, are playing into the hands of other parties that may have other and even contrary interests to our own? These are questions that have to be asked, not only by us, but by the other cultural institutions that are also currently entering the urban arena.

WHAT CAN ARTISTIC PROJECTS ACCOMPLISH IN URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN GENERAL?

They can accomplish a great deal, as we have already seen in other cities. But the relationship between art and culture and urban development is always ambivalent. Art is often a catalyst for change. If social and cultural investments ensue, this brings new life and also improved living conditions into so called disadvantaged neighborhoods. At the same time, you have the danger of investment pressures where the poorer local population cannot keep up and is driven out.

ABOUT URBAN INCUBATOR ITSELF: WHAT ARE THE CHANCES OF A PROJECT LIKE THIS? WHAT ARE ITS LIMITS?

The project’s chances consist in sounding out the possibilities for change and especially in the identification of the problems in a neighborhood and making them visible. The limits mostly have to do with (financial) resources, less so where ideas are concerned. Although the Goethe-Institut spent a lot of money, much more was needed. Either the individual Urban Incubator: Belgrade projects found additional financing or they put in additional work on their own account. This is of course not the way things ought to be, but unfortunately is often the rule in the art and cultural sector.

In our view, what is extremely important is cooperation with local stakeholders and the population. This was aimed for, but has to be implemented more strongly. The participants in the Urban Incubator:

Belgrade projects from Germany and Switzerland brought dedication and know-how. But it is still too early to tell whether they can sufficiently implement this over the long haul. Building up relationships in the local population requires ever-greater efforts, suitable vessels and patience. Participation is faster said than done. The mobilization of residents and working people is bound up with a lot of effort, and success also depends on the political culture and its system. One shouldn’t set one’s standards too high here, to prevent disappointments. Our project’s run-time was very short we are also not entirely finished – a final round of interviews is still before us. Despite this, an amazing dynamic was noted in the neighborhood. Maybe individual Urban Incubator: Belgrade projects will be continued. If we succeed in getting funding, we shall extend our studies until autumn 2014. A six-month observation period allows us to identify small changes. Sometimes developments just ferment along by themselves and then are suddenly ripe for realization, then things can go really fast.

Dr. Philipp Klaus is a social and economic geographer. His research focuses on the role of culture, arts and creative industries in the competition among cities and the impacts of cultural strategies on urban development. He runs the INURA Zurich Institute and is secretary of the International Network for Urban Research and Action INURA. He teaches at the chair of sociology in architecture at ETH Zurich and the department of Geography at the University of Zurich.

Within the ‚Bureau Savamala’ he works with Dobrica Veselinovic and Jürgen Krusche.

Art is often a catalyst for change that might bring improved living conditions into disadvantaged neighborhoods. But at the same time, you have the danger of investment pressures where the poorer local population cannot keep up and is driven out. PK

We still need to be self-critical and investigate the wider consequences of our engagement. What does it mean when the Goethe-Institut takes over responsibility and invests cultural funds in projects that are usually invested in other ways? Is there a risk that the Goethe-Institut, is playing into the hands of other parties that ? These are questions that have to be asked. MMW

The School of Urban Practices is an ongoing collective set up as an educational component of the program envisioned for the urban transformation of Savamala from the bottom-up, which is based on the idea of regenerating deprived districts by infusing small-scale educational, cultural and artistic practices and self- organized cooperatives. It has been launched as a working station from the Faculty of Architecture of the University of Belgrad in order to conduct educational work that redefines the profession of architecture as a field of transformative activities. It draws its projects from the trans-disciplinary field in the interstices between academic research and urban activism and uses professional opportunities that are emerging as consequences of ongoing urban change. The School of Urban Practices is founded upon the belief that education is generating new knowledge through sustained knowledge exchange between citizens and architects. The learning process is facilitated in deprived areas where their exchange could offer the most from real-life experiences. Following the ‘learning by doing’ method of direct education, students are also helping citizens to seek ways for upgrading their everyday environment, whether through public policy, mediation, urban planning and architecture design, or any other form of design that involves citizens from the very beginning of the project. Interaction between students and citizens is taking root in people’s minds as signs of a new life, a life that is injected into the devastated urban body, opening the way for new beginnings.

Students do not impose their visions; instead they create a platform for exchanging ideas in order to support / facilitate the process toward agreement / consensus among many different citizens’ standpoints. Citizens’ participation

redirects urban projects from its orientation on the design of physical objects toward negotiation and collaboration with people. Moreover, it is strengthening relationships among the citizens involved and ensuring awareness of mutual dependence and solidarity that are necessary for upgrading their common environment. Building together is helping citizens understand the importance of collaboration and sharing for expanding their capacities for changing their city for the better.

Almost as a side effect, collaboration with citizens reveals an opportunity for architectural design and urban planning to reestablish its social and cultural influence. Contemporary architecture just needs to develop a new sense of commonality in order to become a relevant force in today’s society. Architects are the ones who could articulate citizens’ demands and influence authorities to set forth alternative models of urban transformation. Bottom-up citizens’ initiatives which meet up with top-down procedures could transform the disintegrating effects of the accepted urban development model into an integrative impetus.

It is the economy of social exchange and collaboration that is continually contributing to the integrative power of the city. Exchanges among different urban actors could initiate a diversity of projects that corresponds to the needs, demands and resources of their urban context. Plot by plot, building by building, and street by street, a series of emergent interventions could develop a kind of urban transformation which relies on communication among individuals, citizens’ associations, public services and private entrepreneurs as equal participants in the social realm. These procedures are

Renovating Crnagorska 5. © Nebojsa Vasic

imagined as a cycle of incremental change through phases of conceptualization, building, evaluation and learning that feeds back into itself to foster continuous improvement. This kind of urban transformation program embraces contradictory relationships among citizens, architects, authorities and developers. It is no longer based on any of their fantasies of order and omnipotence, but instead serves as the staging of their discussions and collaborations. It no longer aims for stable configurations but for the creation of open fields that accommodate processes that are making the city.

The priority goal of the School of Urban Practice is to create a type of educational environment as a long-term participatory realm for making the most of a range of opportunities for non-institutionalized, flexible and dynamic activities through various levels of sharing knowledge and creative practices. It is hoped that citizens will upgrade their urban environment in the long run and finally revalorize and reposition the Savamala neighborhood within the greater context of Belgrad. This would be the moment for the School for Urban Practices to move on and create a new learning environment elsewhere.

THE EDUCATIONAL POWER OF PERFORMATIVE URBANISM – THE SCHOOL OF URBAN PRACTICES Ivan Kucina

The imperative of the event has not only reached all art genres, but urban development as well. In particular in the case of urban renewal, the combination of planning and artistic interventions is enjoying a boom. Performative strategies are becoming an important medium in the conglomerate between design and enactment of the city. This interface of art and planning goes hand–in-hand with changes in both disciplines. On one hand, soft methods are making inroads into the hard practice of urban construction, and on the other artists and architects who are acting performatively in urban space are being increasingly confronted with questions relating to the production of public(s), with exploitation logic and the balancing act between ephemerality and permanence.

Criticism of traditional methods of urban analysis and planning already began in the 1950’s in the practice of the Situationists, whose central hypothesis was that, in order to perceive the city in its complexity, its niches, surpluses and deficits, one must surrender to it, let oneself drift with it, for instance in aimless strolling (dérive). Against this backdrop, Henri Lefebvre’s theoretical reflections on the production of space arose, which the sociologist no longer conceives as a give magnitude, but instead as the product of processes that take place simultaneously in physical, social and aesthetic dimensions, and are co-shaped by constellations of power.

This discourse has its beginnings in the 1920’s with Georg Simmel, who described space not as a static or mathematical magnitude, but instead as a process of social and cultural production of space. It thereby became possible to dispense with a purely territorial concept of space and to formulate process-oriented spatial concepts as they would later also be (further) developed by Michel de Certeau, Michel Foucault, Marc Augé, Gilles Deleuze or currently Martina Löw.1 Lefebvre viewed

WELTSTADT EXCURSUS: PERFORMATIVE URBANISM IN DAKAR AND SOUTHWEST EUROPE

the “differential spatial practice” required of him as a utopian zone between the production of “abstract space” through capitalistic representations and “social space” as quotidian utility value. Such a practice would produce heterogeneity, prevent unbridled economization and allow for niches.2

The Goethe project “We-Traders. Swapping Crisis for City” identifies impressive examples of such a differential spatial practice in the crisis-ridden cities of south-western Europe. When markets and policy fail, citizens take the initiative and take charge of city-making themselves. We call them “We-Traders” because they are redefining the relationship between value, profit and the common good. All have in common that they are bringing fluidity into the relationship between seller and buyer: consumers become co-producers. Thus, in Madrid, a group of neighbors responded to a municipal planning failure with a temporary occupation, the results of which were more sustainable than an official plan. After one of the last city-center indoor public swimming pools was torn down, but funds for a new building were not available, the citizens took over the utilization of the empty space.

Campo de Cebada is a space shared by all – a little piece of city that designs itself, a surface that is being changed in such a way through an intensive cooperation among neighbors, architects, cultural representatives, neighborhood associations and the city administration that the greatest possible number of persons can take part in decision-making. The residents decide themselves which activities will be implemented and which projects tackled, whereby all are jointly responsible for how the space is used: thus, a theater and concert arena complements a basketball court and not far off, a vegetable garden. Campo de Cebada is a continually self-materializing critical position for peaceful cooperation and community, transparency and open data, and not least for a future in

which citizens once again play a significant role in the city.

The example of Campo de Cebada shows that the performative strategies of “We-Trades” are of particular interest because here, co-determination is becoming concrete, physical co-shaping. “We-Trades“ enhance environmental, economic and social sustainability, since those who are actively involved in development, production and exchange take care of things. The Madrid collective Todo por la Praxis is also working on a new relationship between use and production. It is working on a catalog of micro-architectural and micro-urban tools that enable direct influence and social effectiveness on the part of users. DIY construction is supported and promoted as a method that implies a direct responsibility during all project phases, and that generates a rapid and direct visibility in urban space.

In recent years, in his works on art, architecture and the city, philosopher and activist Jacques Rancière has repeatedly underscored the political significance of such alternative productions of visibility.3 Rancière defines the political as conflict over the creation of new stages on which those who have hitherto been invisible, who have had no speaker position, can encounter those who are already visible and audible. The Lisbon project O Espelho (the mirror) is establishing just such a counter-public in the form of a wall newspaper. Founded in 2012 on the occasion of a visit by Angela Merkel to Portugal, the newspaper has since then been appearing again and again at sensitive moments and sensitive locations in the city. Recourse to this classical communications format as a mouthpiece and means of agitation as well as instrumentalization of urban space is both consequence and reaction of a group of journalists, artists, architects, writers, photographers – many of them unemployed – to the precarious situation, but also to Portugal’s increasingly uncritical media landscape. The wall newspaper is

Angelika Fitz, Artistic Director of We-Traders and Weltstadt Co-Curator

financed through independent initiative, crowdfunding and subscribers for a small print edition.

It is projects such as these that, in Jacques Rancière’s terms, are changing the “distribution of the sensible.” They unfold their specific potentials precisely at that moment when they transcend the strategies of self-organized substitution of social benefits. Providing urban spaces with infrastructure, designing them attractively, remain important. But the political aspect is located at the level of temporality, of the event. That moment is political which enables the familiar to be seen in different ways. The expansion of the spatial practices of architecture and urban planning involving interventionistic tactics, for example through temporary alliances with such projects, can be a way of enhancing the element of movement. As a utopian zone between the production of abstract planning space and social space as quotidian utility value, a differential spatial practice can bring lasting change to the relationship of value, profit and the common good in the city.

Todo por la praxis – a new relationship between use and production. © Todo por la praxis.

1 See for instance: Martina Löw, Raumsoziologie, Frankfurt / M 2001.

2 On Lefebvre’s concept of space, see: Henri Lefebvre, The Production of Space, Oxford 1991 (French 1974).

3 See here also: Angelika Fitz, Performative Materialism, Vienna 2003, pp. 11–12.

“We-Traders. Swapping Crisis for City” is initiated by the Goethe-Institutes in Southwest Europe and curated by Angelika Fitz and Rose Epple. The project connects artists, designers and activists as well as many other citizens who are currently taking the initiative to re-appropriate urban space. We call them “We-Traders” in the sense that they redefine the relation between value, profit and public good. From October 2013 to November 2014 interactive forums, workshops and exhibitions in Lisbon, Madrid, Toulouse and Turin as well as open calls on the web invite you to join the We-Traders platform. www.goethe.de / wetraders

THE CITY AS COLLECTIVE PERFORMANCE

O Espelho – The Mirror. © O Espelho

WELTSTADT EXCURSUS: PERFORMATIVE URBANISM IN DAKAR AND SOUTHWEST EUROPE

Alioune Diagne. © Goethe-Institut Dakar

Eva Regnier

The scenery could not have been more realistic: the homes of the banlieue, colorful busses stuttering by, children playing in the sand. This intersection between artistic actions and reality is unusual in Senegal, especially so in the suburbs where art is rarely public. ER

Migration from rural to urban areas is a global trend. In Senegal nearly half of its 13 million inhabitants are now living in cities. Satellite cities are created and banlieues (suburbs) are sprawling. These banlieues, often forgotten by the outside world, are urban-worlds onto themselves, each with their own inherent logic, of which very little is known.

Against this background, the Senegalese dancer and choreographer Alioune Diagne created the dance piece Banlieue. It tells of the lives of people living in the banlieues, their survival, their hopes and their aspirations. Albeit having had great success at Danse l’Afrique Danse!, a choreographers’ meeting held in 2012 in Johannesburg as well as in various performances in typical theater settings, Alioune Diagne soon decided that this alone was not sufficient. As he himself had grown up in Diaminar, a suburb of Saint-Louis, he had the dire wish to perform Banlieue on the streets of the banlieues, a living environment that he still strongly identified with.

Consequently, he and his company decided to do an outdoor-adaptation, named Banlieue en Banlieues; in cooperation with the Goethe-Institut Senegal and as part of its project Le Dernier Village (The Last Village) it was performed in the suburbs of Dakar, Saint-Louis, Louga, Sedhiou, Kaolack and Ziguinchor. Banlieue en Banlieues evokes powerful and touching images of despair, celebration and revolt in the lives of people living in survival mode. The performance oscillates between humorous frivolity and seriousness and makes the thoughts, fears and hopes of the people living in the banlieue tangible.

The scenery could not have been more realistic: the homes of the banlieue, colorful busses stuttering by, children playing in the sand. This intersection between artistic actions and reality is unusual in Senegal, especially in the suburbs where art is rarely brought to the population. Passers-by stopped and were suddenly the audiences

of a dance piece. Alioune Diagne reached out to his audiences directly and created a discourse. He wants to call on the people to become aware of their personal influence and to make use of it. He wants to wake them from a lethargy spread by the feeling of being forgotten on the margins of ‘normal’ society. Through the live performances, the artists got in immediate touch with the protagonists of their piece, demonstrating them the possibility of change and encouraging personal initiative. Banlieue en Banlieues thus is, in essence, artistic engagement and social discourse in a unique urban environment where art and reality intersect at the same moment. Or, to put it into the words of Christopher Dell, Diagne’s improvisation, expressed in its evolved form as a dance piece, could be seen as offering a coping strategy for people’s actual ways of living in the suburbs.

The duration of the play is 50 minutes but the effects last. What remains are an awareness of a world that feels better understood than before and the conviction that changes in our own spheres of influence are always possible. Through taking his performance directly into the urban realm, the urban reality of a growing number of Senegalese, Alioune Diagne was able to enfold the dialectics of space – on the one hand a medium of societal relationships and on the other hand a product which, in return, can directly have an impact on society. He depicted the audience’s role as subjects in the specific realm of the suburbs, enabled them to engage in an onlooker’s perspective, and thereby inspired them to see new realms for marginal positions within society.

The Senegalese dancer and choreographer Alioune Diagne received his professional training in Senegal, Burkina Faso, Mali and France and works internationally. In 2008 he founded the dance company “Diagn’Art” in Saint-Louis, Senegal. In the

same year he started the international festival “Duo Solo Danse”, the only annual festival for contemporary dance in Senegal and its neighbouring countries. In his Centre Chorégraphique “Le Château” in Saint-Louis, he organises workshops and trainings and offers artist-in-residence space for national and international choreographers and dancers.

Eva Regnier was already actively interested in the linkages between business administration and artistic forms during her studies. After graduation she worked in a number of theater productions as an assistant director and supervised cultural projects. She completed internships in cultural consultation and at the Goethe-Institut Tel Aviv. Most recently, her path had taken her to the Goethe-Institut Senegal, where she has been working as project assistant for the project “Das letzte Dorf” (i.e. the last village) since January, 2013.

BANLIEUE EN BANLIEUES

CREDITSWeltstadt Editors: Matthias Böttger, Angelika Fitz, Tim Rieniets (until 2013)

Editors: Tim Rieniets, Leona Lynen

Weltstadt Project Manager: Andrea Zell (Goethe-Institut), Michael Marten (BMUB)

Graphic Design: Studio Matthias Görlich (Jan Aulbach, Matthias Görlich, Charalampos Lazos)

Translation: Edith Watts, Jelena Kostić-Tomović, James May

Copy Editing: Leona Lynen, Tim Rieniets, Ivan Kucina

Printing: Brandenburgische Universitätsdruckerei und Verlagsgesellschaft Potsdam mbH

Special thanks to: Matthias Müller-Wieferig, Nikola Markovic, Milena Beric, Elena Herzen, Ivan Kucina, Dejan Vasović, Dejan Ubović, Angelika Fitz, Katja Assmann, Dušan Dinčić, Nemanja Perišić- Petovar, Nemanja Petrović and Tanjug media agency, Susie Vasović-Bohse, Zorica Milisavljević, Milica, Lalić, Elena Herzen, Rosanne Baltzer, Sandra Filipovski, Saša Vlahović and Edi Kostić

V.i.S.d.D.P. Dr. Müller-Wieferig, Goethe-Institut Belgrad

Copyright: The layout, graphics and other contents of this publication are protected by copyright law. All rights reserved.

2nd edition, 2014

Urban Incubator: Belgrade – a project of excellence 2013 of the Goethe-Institut Belgrad.

It is supported by: BHSF Architects, Zürich; Pro Helvetia Foundation, ETH Zürich, Swiss Embassy in Serbia, PERI d.o.o. Serbia, Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development of the Federal Republic of Germany, Cultural Center Grad (KC Grad), Dom Omladine Belgrade; Belgrade Municipality of Savski Venac, City of Belgrad, ZHdK Zürcher Hochschule der Künste

Media partners in Serbia: B92, Blic, 24sata, Politika

THE PROJECT WELTSTADT – WHO CREATES THE CITY? IS A JOINT INITIATIVE OF THE GOETHE-INSTITUT AND THE GERMAN FEDERAL MINISTRY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, NATURE CONSERVATION, BUILDING AND NUCLEAR SAFETY (BMUB). CURATED BY MATTHIAS BÖTTGER, ANGELIKA FITZ AND UNTIL 2013 TIM RIENIETS. WWW.GOETHE.DE / WELTSTADT

Media partner:Partner: