Changing Urban Landscapes

Eastern European and Post-Soviet Cities Since 1989

AA. VV., Marco Buttino

• Publisher: Viella Libreria Editrice
• Year: 2013
• eBook ISBN: 9788867281213
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: Russian History
• Index: History

The vast territory from Asia to Eastern Europe that was part of or under the influence of the Soviet Union comprised cities, which have undergone profound changes in the last twenty years. The opening of borders combined with the affirmation of market dynamics, privatization and concentration of wealth, and the emergence of nationalist discourses have upset ways of life and value systems leaving deep marks on the urban landscape and organization of living space.These essays take an in-depth look at specific cases – Samarkand, Sarajevo, Berlin, Almaty, and others – to offer a complex picture of the transformations affecting the post-communist city.

Giulia Panicciari

Almaty as a New Kazakh City:
Kazakhisation of Urban Spaces After Independence1*

Like other ex-Soviet republics, Kazakhstan has undergone a process of profound economic, political, and social transformation, which has seen the introduction of a market economy; in addition, as we shall see, to the introduction of a new political discourse focused on legitimisation of a new power system and efforts to build a cohesive society in a context where ethnicity has become a way to translate concepts of citizenship.

The factors influencing the formation of a new society out of the remains of the former Soviet society can be observed in the ex-capital Almaty, a major pole of attraction for the citizens of the republic, for both cultural and economic reasons. Using Almaty as an example, I will show how social issues are at times interpreted as “the rights of the Kazakhs” by a part of the community which re-uses the ambiguous official rhetoric on Kazakh culture as the central, constitutive element of the identity of the new independent state. Such rhetoric is visible in this post-Soviet city, especially in the re-organisation of its monumental patrimony, where Soviet monuments, still central to the collective imagination, have been placed side by side with new symbols representing Kazakhness. I argue that Almaty has no cohesive community, not only because of persistent social and economic inequalities, but because the role of Kazakhness fails to create new civic and universal values.2 The boundaries that develop inside urban space are characterised by a socio-cultural division between those citizens who are Russian-speakers and more integrated in the globalising economic system, and those who are Kazakh speakers and who feel excluded. Consequently, at times social tensions are interpreted as “a Kazakh question” and are discussed by national government institutions in such terms.

Brubaker notes that everyday experience is connected much more with concerns about employment and strategies for self-advancement. Only occasionally are such concerns seen in terms of ethnicity.3 He shows how “[…] state policies, political struggles, organisational practices, social movements, and cultural discourses significantly shape everyday categorisation processes and practices.”4 This insight sheds light on the effects of a post-Soviet discourse in which majorities and minorities are re-positioned and re-imagined.

Since the ratification of the constitution in 1995, we can monitor how the president and the media have promoted an ideal Kazakh nation – often referred to as “the titular nation” – and, at the same time, a Kazakhstani one, where “Kazakhstani” includes all former Soviet citizens (regardless of the ethnic affiliation) who were accorded full citizenship soon after independence.5 Therefore, the question of developing a new independent nation has turned into a question of defining the role of Kazakhs and minorities living in Kazakhstan. By creating new prototypes and myths, the State emphasises the common past of Kazakh and non-Kazakh peoples, placing the legend of the natural peaceful character of the former, whose main quality is their tolerance towards the historical minorities living in Kazakhstan, at the centre of the national discourse, and thus promoting a discourse of inclusive nationalism.6 In doing so, the State legitimises the main role played by Kazakhness as a sort of guarantor of civic values over any other understanding of “citizenship.” My own fieldwork has shown that this discourse is re-interpreted on the local street level in the creation of new sources of confrontation, though not necessarily between Kazakhs and non-Kazakhs. Indeed, in my case study of post-Soviet Almaty, growing social inequalities connected with access to education and employment have led to tensions between those citizens living in the centre and those living in the periphery of the city where the ethnic, linguistic, and cultural background is very different. Assuming that these tensions are primarily social and then reinterpreted in an ethnic language, our primary question is: what effect does the new nationalism have on the urban community at large and on the Kazakhs in particular? Therefore, in surveying the historical background of the post-Soviet, I have structured my paper as follows: firstly, we will consider official discourse on Kazakh/Kazakhstani identity as applied to the constructed memory of the city (architectural and monumental patrimony and re-appropriation of public spaces,) along with the view “from the street,” where inhabitants perceive, use or do not use those spaces. I will then investigate in more depth the social and economic background of the inhabitants sheds more light on their experience of the city. Lastly, I will conclude my analysis with observations on how a new neighbourhood, Shanyrak, situated on the peripher...

Table of contents

• Copertina
• Occhiello
• Frontespizio
• Colophon
• Introduction
• Giulia Panicciari
• Marco Buttino
• Liza Candidi T.C.
• Pietro Cingolani
• Francesco Vietti
• Zaira Tiziana Lofranco
• Contributors
• Quarta di copertina