Revija ab je revija za teorijo, kritiko in zgodovino arhitekture, poleg tega pa tudi instrument civilne strokovne družbe za izražanje in dokumentiranje stališč in akcij.

Teme pričujoče številke so analiza in kritika nezadovoljivih razmer na področju urbanizma in arhitekture v Sloveniji, še posebno v Ljubljani, in pa predstavitev nekaterih vizij, idej in predlogov, ki ponujajo rešitve za ljubljanske prostorske probleme. Glavni problem lahko hitro ugotovimo – to je predvsem nepovezanost in neusklajenost različnih dejavnikov in ravni ukvarjanja s prostorom. Imamo obsežno zakonodajo ter državni in občinski aparat, ki pa niti ne zastavlja pravih problemov niti jih ne rešuje. Ob tem je naša nacionalna značilnost, da raje izigravamo pravila, za katera smo se dogovorili oz. smo jih postavili za skupno dobro, kot pa da bi jih upoštevali. To je najbrž povezano s pomanjkanjem demokratične državne tradicije in duhovne širine. Naslednji problem je neoperativnost. Začeti projekti se ustavljajo in zatikajo, ustvarjalna energija se izgublja v prazno. Dolgotrajni in dragi postopki, od zakonodaje prek priprave in sprejemanja odločitev do realizacij, so neučinkoviti in njihovi rezultati so pičli.

Tudi javna podoba arhitekture je v krizi. Za običajnega človeka arhitektura ni zanimiva tema. Premalo je kvalitetne javne razprave. Na televiziji velja, da so oddaje o arhitekturi smrt za gledanost. V območje zanimanja javnosti jo pripelje šele škandal; teh nam v zadnjem času prav gotovo ne primanjkuje. Je pa to, izvorno sicer vprašljivo zanimanje javnosti in medijev, ki smo mu priča, hkrati tudi priložnost, da strokovnjaki izostrimo, preverimo in izpovemo svoj pogled ter predlagamo rešitve za aktualne probleme poklica in prostora. V tej luči imajo tudi nekatere afere lahko pozitivne učinke.

Javna vloga arhitekture

Arhitektura ima pomembno vlogo javne besede. Ali je možen, ali je morda celo zaželen suspenz pravnih norm, da bi prišli do rezultatov po bližnjici? Arhitekti se moramo vprašati o realni ceni in dolgoročnih posledicah takih deviacij. Ne smemo pristajati na lažno dilemo – ali napredek s kršenjem pravnih norm ali sploh nobenega napredka.

Noben projekt ni v zadnjih letih zbudil večjega zanimanja in močnejših emocij kot projekt za novi Kolizej v Ljubljani. Afera Kolizej je simptom deviantne prakse, ko se pod pretvezo arhitekture kot pozitivna ideja prodaja nekaj drugega. V pomanjkanju svežine in letargiji razvoja mesta Ljubljana, ki traja že več kot dve desetletji, vidi investitor priložnost, da z demagogijo, ki jo podpira spretno delo z javnostjo, doseže preboj v kreiranju javnega mnenja in prek tega izsili politične odločitve v svoj prid. Doživeli smo medijsko obravnavo, pa tudi širok odziv civilne strokovne družbe. Pomen razprave o Kolizeju je izreden. Ne le, ker gre za precedens, zaščiteno kulturno dediščino in pomembno mestno lokacijo, pač pa zaradi vprašanj, ki so se odprla – o zgodovini in identiteti Ljubljane, kulturi in politiki, javnem in zasebnem, metodah kapitala, civilni družbi itd.

Vprašanj pa je več kot odgovorov. Stanje, ki dobiva značilnosti verske vojne, vodi k ekstremnim stališčem; na eni strani k prek vsake mere napihnjenemu programu in prek vsake norme arogantno zastavljenemu postopku in na drugi strani, kot reakcija, k vkopavanju na stališču popolne zaščite in rekonstrukcije. Drugih možnosti ni videti, čeprav jih je stroka, in v njenem imenu Društvo arhitektov Ljubljane, ponujala od samega začetka, ko je v javnost prišla novica o pripravah na vabljeni natečaj.

Kakšen program in aktivnosti bi lahko dobil Kolizej, da bi postal javni objekt, primeren za 21. stoletje? Ali je mogoče obstoječe na sodoben in uporaben način vključiti v novo celoto, ki bo ustrezala prvi zahtevi? Ali je obstoječe lahko izhodišče za nastanek novega? Ali gre predvsem za dragoceno zazidljivo parcelo ali pa za neprecenljiv arhitekturni spomenik? Kako naj se realizira program, ki zagotavlja javni interes, v pogojih pomanjkanja sredstev (in kompetenc) javnega sektorja?

Podobna vprašanja veljajo v Ljubljani tudi za Tobačno tovarno, PCL, Rog, Šumi, Mladinsko knjigo, džamijo in še za mnoge lokacije in objekte v mestu.

Tudi akcije vrednotenja in obrambe arhitekturne dediščine, ki smo jih kot civilna strokovna družba izpeljali v zadnjem času, so povezane z anomalijami. Branimo arhitekturno dediščino 20. stoletja, predsem tisto iz druge polovice, ki je najbolj ogrožena. Akcije smo si zamislili zato, ker to dediščino izgubljamo, pa hkrati poslušamo, da se ne da nič storiti. V pričujoči številki pričenja svojo pot tematski sklop Docomomo v uredniških rokah dr. Nataše Koselj, ki se ukvarja s problematiko moderne arhitekturne dediščine tudi na mednarodni ravni.

Vloga arhitektov

Arhitekti, arhitektke se pri nas danes, verjetno pa to velja tudi za druga okolja in čase, borimo za definicijo naše vloge in prostora, in to tako v okviru kulture, gospodarstva, politike in družbe kot celote kot tudi v konkretnem prostoru, v mestu. Nenazadnje je tudi poklic arhitekta razcepljen – med sanje in realnost, med poslanstvo in posel. Da mora biti delo arhitekta usmerjeno v strokovno skrb za javno dobro, je že zelo stara ugotovitev, ki je tudi mednarodno priznana in jo spodbujajo evropski predpisi in standardi. Situacija v Sloveniji in še posebno v Ljubljani pa ni taka, kot bi si želeli. Strokovni potenciali urbanizma in arhitekture so neizkoriščeni. Akumulirano znanje, izkušnje in vedenje ostajajo izolirani v ozkih strokovnih krogih in niti ne prodrejo v javnost niti ne najdejo poti do uresničitve. Stroko velikokrat poskušajo uporabiti na formalni ravni kot kritje za politične ali ekonomske interese, in to tako posamezni investitorji kot tudi država in mesto. Iz tega izhajajo tudi nekatera nesoglasja, ki včasih tudi za daljši čas blokirajo odnose med različnimi akterji, kar velikokrat postane tudi personalni vzrok za nerazumevanje in letargijo. To stanje bi bilo nujno preseči.

Arhitektura in urbanizem bi morala spet postati prestižna kulturna in javna tema. Naši napori morajo biti namenjeni temu, da bi ju poznalo in razumelo čim več ljudi, da bi se odprla in izboljšala komunikacija med stroko in javnostjo. Tako bosta arhitektura in urbanizem znova pridobila izgubljeni status in pomen kot ustvarjalni del sodobne družbe in kulture.

Strokovne organizacije, kot sta novo ustanovljena Zbornica za arhitekturo in prostor in pa predvsem Društvo arhitektov Ljubljane, so v zadnjih letih izpeljale vrsto akcij, od katerih so nekatere omenjene tudi v tej številki. Pojavljajo se nove in sveže iniciative, kot je spletni portal Trajekt, pobude za sodelovanje civilne strokovne družbe pri skrbi za prostor, pri oblikovanju vizije mesta, pripravi zakonodaje, oblikovanju zakona o arhitekturi. Za ta namen smo pred kratkim ustanovili urbanistična sveta za Ljubljano in Maribor, ki se bosta ukvarjala s stanjem, problemi in vizijo urbanizma in arhitekture v novih družbenih razmerah.

Vloga vizij

Mestno življenje ima kompleksno koreografijo. Neprestano se presnavlja. Je zbir procesov, razumemo ga lahko kot prostor, v katerem potekajo vektorialni tokovi, ki se prilagajajo v samoorganizirajočem se sistemu različnih impulzov in inputov. Sodobna mesta nimajo in ne morejo imeti centraliziranega odločanja. So fizične sledi delovanja socialnega vzorca v času. Zato je nadrejeni plan vedno treba jemati s pridržkom. Po drugi strani pa je prav zato mesto odprto za konkretne akcije. Kompleksnost, mnogokrat pa tudi konfliktnost in protislovnost interesov, tokov in silnic v mestu pa ne pomeni, da ni treba usmerjati, da vizije niso potrebne. Ravno nasprotno. Dobra uprava, aktiven župan, županja lahko v sodelovanju s strokovnimi in civilnimi iniciativami daje takt in spodbudo za take spremembe.

Tudi revija ab spodbuja in se pridružuje tem iniciativam. Jedro pričujoče številke je tematski sklop Vizije so – zgoščen pregled predlogov, ki obstajajo v strokovni sferi, v strategiji mesta Ljubljana pa jih ni. V kratkem bomo v organizaciji DAL pripravili tudi razstavo in okroglo mizo o tej tematiki. V nadaljevanju so predstavljene analize podobnih problemov v Evropi in primer uspešnega projekta iz Frankfurta, ki je nastal v partnerstvu med zasebnim in javnim sektorjem.

Strokovna revija je seveda, vsaj na prvi pogled, manj pomembna, kot je neprestano oglašanje v javnosti in množičnih medijih. Gledano v daljšem časovnem obdobju pa se to spremeni.

Arhitektura potrebuje strokovni in teoretski temelj, pa tudi arhiv, ki zagotavlja, da ne pozabljamo, da se izkušnje prenašajo med generacijami, in da bodo imeli prihodnji raziskovalci na voljo verodostojne vire.

Miha Dešman

ab Magazine is, besides being a magazine for the theory, critique and history of architecture, also an instrument of civil society of professionals for expressing and documenting standpoints and actions.

The featured topic of this issue is the analysis and the critique of the unsatisfactory situation as regards urbanism and architecture in Slovenia, particularly in Ljubljana, as well as the presentation of certain visions, ideas and suggestions for solving the spatial problems in Ljubljana. There is little doubt that the main problem lies mainly with the lack of contact and co-ordination between the various factors and levels dealing with space. There is extensive legislature and both state and municipal bureaucracy, which, however, do not deal with the right issues and fail to address them. On top of that, there is the Slovene propensity to circumvent the regulations set for everybody's benefit rather than abiding by them. This is most likely due to the lack of democratic tradition and spiritual breadth. Then, there is the inoperativeness: initiated projects are being hindered and stalled, creative energy goes to waste. Overbearing and expensive procedures, ranging from legislature over preparation and decision-making to realisation, are ineffective and their results minimal.

The public image of architecture also entered a crisis. The average person isn't interested in architecture. There is not enough pertinent public debate. A TV programme about architecture is a real rating-killer. It takes a scandal to bring architecture back in the public eye.

There has been no shortage of scandals lately.

The current interest of the media and the public, albeit dubious in its origin, is an opportunity for experts to focus, verify and present our position, and suggest solutions for the current problems of both profession and space. Scandals, too, can bring about a change for the better.

Architecture carries an important public role. Is the disregard for legal norms possible, even desirable if this means that the results may come quicker? As architects, we need to consider the long-term consequences of such deviations. We need to reject the false dilemma of progress with disregard for legal norms, or else no progress at all.

In recent years, no project has gained as much notoriety than the project for the new Kolizej in Ljubljana. The Kolizej scandal is a symptom of the deviant practices when architecture is only a pretext to give ulterior motives a sympathetic face. In the atmosphere of stagnation and lethargy, characteristic of Ljubljana's development during the last two decades, the investor sees the opportunity to influence the public opinion by means of skilful PR in order to win the political support for the project. There has been an extensive media treatment of the issue, as well as a strong reaction from civil society of professionals. The significance of the Kolizej debate cannot be overstated. Not only because this is a precedent case, protected cultural heritage and an important urban location, but also because of the questions that have opened subsequently, such as:

• Ljubljana's history and identity;
• the relationship between culture and politics;
• the relationship between the public and the private;
• the ways of the capital
• civil society.

The questions outnumber the answers. The situation, reminiscent of a holy war, leads to extreme standpoints. On the on hand, there is the incredibly bloated programme and the inconceivably arrogant procedure, and on the other, as a reaction, the standpoint in favour of total protection and reconstruction. These are presented as the only alternatives, even though there were several others that, in the name of the experts, Architects' Society of Ljubljana has put forward as soon as the public was first informed of the upcoming invitation to tender.

What programme and activities should Kolizej feature for it to turn into a public building relevant for the 21st century? Can the existing structure be included into the new complex in a modern and useful manner to fulfil the above requirement? Can the existing be a starting point for the creation of the new? Is this essentially an attractive construction plot or an invaluable cultural monument? How is the programme to be realised in accordance with public interest with the dire lack of funds...and the competence of officials?

Kolizej isn't the only such location in Ljubljana - similar questions are being raised about the Tobacna tobacco factory, the new railway/bus station, the Rog factory, the Šumi building, the Mladinska knjiga building, the mosque, and several other locations and buildings in the city.

The actions taken by our civil society of professionals lately with the purpose of evaluation and protection cultural heritage are, too, linked to anomalies. We are protecting the architectural heritage of the 20th century, especially that of the latter half of the century that is most in need of protection. We conceived these actions because our heritage is being lost while we're being told that there is nothing to be done about it. This issue begins a new thematic feature called "Docomomo" with Dr. Nataša Koselj as its editor, dealing with the problems of modern architectural heritage, both on domestic and international levels.

Expert associations, such as the newly-formed Chamber of Architecture and Spatial Planning of Slovenia and particularly the Architects' Society of Ljubljana have in the past years carried out a number of actions, some of which are mentioned in this issue. At the same time, new and fresh initiatives are emerging, such as the Trajekt web portal, as well as initiatives for civil society of professionals to take part in protecting the space, forming the city's vision, and preparing relevant legislature, including the Architectural Act. For this purpose, two urbanism councils have been formed recently in Slovenia's two biggest cities, Ljubljana and Maribor, which will deal with the state, the problems, and the vision of urbanism and architecture in as regards the new social circumstances.

Urban life has a complex choreography. It's in the state of constant transformation. It's an assembly of processes, one can see it as a space where vectorial currents adapt to one another in a self-organising system of various impulses and inputs. Modern cities don't and can't feature any kind of centralised decision-making. They're physical traces of the effect of a social pattern in time. This is why a dictated plan should always be met with some reservation. For the same reason, however, the city is always open for concrete actions. The complexity of current and forces in the city, which is often accompanied by antagonism and the conflict of interests, does not mean that no direction is needed, or that visions aren't necessary. Quite the opposite, in fact; good city authorities or an active mayor may, with support from professional and civil initiatives, provide for good pace and support for such changes.

ab Magazine encourages and takes part in these initiatives. In the core of this issue, there a number of article under the common heading "There are Visions", serving as a condensed review of proposals from the professional sphere that are not included in the City of Ljubljana's strategy. Organised by Architects' Society of Ljubljana, there will be an exhibition and a round table discussion shortly, addressing the above fact. Other features include analyses of similar problems across Europe and an a presentation of the successful Frankfurt project where the private and public sectors struck a fruitful partnership.

A specialised magazine doesn't seem to be as important - at first glance, at least - as the constant raising of questions in public and mass media. In the long run, however, it's obvious that architecture needs a professional and theoretical foundation, as well as an archive to prevent us from forgetting that there must be a transfer of experience through generations and to provide future researchers with credible sources.

Miha Dešman