As human beings, we continually strive to defy the passage of time, whether it be for aesthetic reasons or functional purposes. We invest in personal care, consume vitamins, and apply serums to combat the inevitable effects of aging on our bodies. However, when it comes to the places we inhabit, the spaces where we conduct our daily activities, we often overlook the impact of war and conflict on architecture. Whether due to natural decay or human-induced destruction, it is essential to consider how such factors shape our built environment and how we can rehabilitate these spaces that play a significant role in our lives.
Architecture are affected by everything; climate, economy, culture, from the normal everyday life and the rising and downfalls of history. When cities are destroyed in wars, people experience traumatic events, loss, and grief, which require time to heal. However, there is also an urgent need to swiftly rebuild and restore the community in order to compensate for these losses. The “contrast” lies in how these contrasting processes intertwine and influence each other. The initial approach primarily focused on restoring the destroyed structures to their pre-war state. This perspective was rooted in romanticism, with people yearning for their old and “normal” lives, considering the war as a mere interruption in their routine. Consequently, exact replicas of classical architecture were constructed, but they no longer met the evolving needs and lifestyles of the communities.
The second approach drew inspiration from pre-war architectural principles but aimed to avoid imitation. The buildings created under this approach were characterized by balance, monumentality, and order, while refraining from unnecessary ornamentation or excessive decoration. In contrast, the third approach involved a complete disregard for damaged and destroyed structures, opting instead to build anew. The urgency to rebuild cities quickly due to homelessness, displacement, and the destruction of essential services led to the emergence of various architectural styles that rejected the past. These styles sought to embody a new future, encompassing the evidence of damage, technological advancements, and the need for expressive forms.
In addition to the physical destruction caused by war, urban planning is also significantly disrupted. The systematic and strategic targeting of certain areas often results in the displacement of populations, further exacerbating the challenges faced by planners in rebuilding cities. Mass migration and the resettlement of communities add complexity to the already daunting task of reconstructing a functioning urban landscape. Moreover, the social fabric of these affected areas is torn apart. Communities are uprooted, and their collective memories tied to specific places are shattered. The disruption of social connections, neighborhood dynamics, and the loss of familiar landmarks can have long-term psychological effects on individuals and communities.
Throughout history and around the globe, calls to stop wars have focused on the value of people’s lives. In recent decades, there has been a lot of attention paid to protecting cultural heritage. However, there has been little consideration for the value of public places and people’s memories of these spaces. Buildings – such as residential and commercial structures, schools and hospitals – are often destroyed in the chaos of conflict, leaving behind psychological trauma that can last for generations. This infrastructure, unique or not, represents people’s history, culture and social fabric. The process of rebuilding and rehabilitating architecture and urban spaces after war or conflict is a multifaceted challenge. It requires a comprehensive understanding of the pre-existing cultural and historical context, coupled with an assessment of the needs and aspirations of the affected communities.
Architects, urban planners, and policymakers must work together to develop strategies that balance the preservation of cultural heritage with the demands of modern urban living. The reconstruction process provides an opportunity to not only restore physical structures but also to revitalize communities and foster social cohesion. Throughout history, we have witnessed remarkable examples of rehabilitation and renewal in cities affected by war and conflict. The post-World War II reconstruction of European cities, such as Warsaw, Rotterdam, and Berlin, stands as a testament to human resilience and determination. These cities were transformed from ruins to thriving urban centers, showcasing the triumph of architecture and urban planning over the ravages of war. In more recent times, cities like Sarajevo and Beirut have faced the immense challenge of rebuilding after devastating conflicts. Despite the arduous nature of the task, these cities have made significant progress in reclaiming their cultural heritage and creating vibrant spaces for their residents.
Time may be unkind to architecture, particularly when war and conflict come into play. The impact of such events on our built environment is far-reaching, affecting both the physical structures and the social fabric of our cities. However, by acknowledging the destructive power of war and conflict and investing in thoughtful urban planning and rehabilitation efforts, we can heal the wounds inflicted upon our architectural heritage. The reconstruction and revitalization of war-torn cities not only serve as symbols of hope and resilience but also contribute to the preservation of cultural identity and the promotion of social cohesion. By honoring the past while embracing the future, we can ensure that our cities remain enduring testaments to the triumph of humanity over adversity.
Citation :
- Bloomberg. (n.d.). “Ukraine’s Cultural Heritage Caught in the Crossfire of War.” Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2022-ukraine-culture-russia-war-map-building-preservation/
- Arch2O. (n.d.). “Destructivism: How Does War Affect Architecture?” Retrieved from https://www.arch2o.com/destructivism-how-does-war-affect-architecture/
- Biddulph, R., & Howell, R. (2022, February 25). “Wars in cities: three rules for protecting the built environment during conflict.” The Conversation. Retrieved from [URL]
- Laakkonen, S. (2020). “Urban resilience and warfare: How did the Second World War affect the urban environment?” City and Environment Interactions, 5, 100035. ISSN 2590-2520
- Wahba, S., & Masic, J. (2022, December 22). “To Rebuild Cities After War, Look to the Past.” Ideas. Retrieved from https://www.wired.co.uk/article/culture-war-repair-politics
