Search

The paper focuses on a small segment of everyday life under socialism – illegal construction in the area of Ljubljana and its rural surroundings. Through this example, it attempts to show the functioning of a socialist society and the discrepancy between state rules, i.e. housing policy, and people’s plans to achieve their particular interests within the socialist ideal of appropriate housing for everybody. Starting from the mid-1950s, urban planners were tasked with creating spatial and housing plans, first for Ljubljana and then gradually also for surrounding rural areas. Although the improvement of housing conditions was one of the Yugoslav social development priorities, it soon became apparent that the housing policy generated inequalities in access to state-built housing. Building an individual house on their own proved to be the only option of housing solution for many. This practice intensified in the second half of the 1960s. At the same time, we can observe an increase of illegal construction. In the early 1970s, the problem was already so significant that it often drew interest of the local authorities. They were concerned especially with lack of adequate infrastructure for these settlements, non-payment of utility charges by the inhabitants, as well as social problems in some of these settlements. In addition, unregulated growth of settlements often occurred on land reserved by the authorities for the construction of other infrastructure. The reasons for illegal construction were ranging from lengthy procedures and high costs for obtaining a building permit, lack of formal spatial planning that would enable legally permissible construction, to lower prices and quicker acquisition of privately owned land in non-building areas and areas unregulated by spatial plans. Some of the illegal construction can be linked to social problems, nonetheless, this type of construction also had its advantages, mainly demonstrated in lower construction costs and greater freedom in choosing the method and type of construction. The practice was also widespread in the construction of holiday cottages. Local authorities were aware of the multifaceted situation, but exercised ineffective control. They took down only a small part of illegal construction and tried to legalize the rest.

The article focuses on the first period of revolutionary violence and uses sources reviewed thus far to show that the revolutionary side in Ljubljana and its immediate surroundings carried out attacks, kidnappings and assassinations targeting around 200 people between July 1941 and the end of October 1942 until the emergence of the counter-revolutionary side’s armed units; as many as around 170 of those people were killed. The vast majority of them were civilians or non-military persons, but there were also some victims from the revolutionaries’ own ranks – these were Partisan deserters or “unreliable persons”. The article contains an up-to-date list of the names of the victims from this period.

The period after the Second World War interfered with the administrative organisation of municipalities with the socialist political and economic framework. The introduction of the workers’ self-government system also influenced the organisation of state and local government. Ljubljana has received seven administrative divisions in four decades. The introduction of the communal system in June 1955 blurred the borders between the city and the countryside, so Ljubljana was initially divided into nine municipalities, and since 1964 it had been divided into five municipalities (Center, Bežigrad, Šiška, Moste - Polje, Vič - Rudnik) until the introduction of a new system of local self-government in independent Slovenia in 1995. The City Council (1964 City Council of Ljubljana, 1969 City Assembly of Ljubljana) was established in 1955 to resolve common local issues at the city level, and the Council of the Ljubljana Region was established at the inter-municipal level. In the forty-year period, the communal system had proven itself to be administratively deficient, as it performed tasks within the competence of state authorities more than it dealt with the needs of the local population.

The article deals with the administrative development of the area of the former Municipality of Ljubljana Vič - Rudnik. The implementation of the communal system in 1955 led to larger changes in the organisation and range of municipalities. Their number began decreasing, and city areas began connecting with rural areas. This is illustrated by the Municipality of Ljubljana Rudnik. The process of merging continued until 1961, when the large Municipality of Ljubljana Vič Rudnik was formed as well. One of the more significant reasons for merging Vič and Rudnik into one municipality was the authorities’ goal of achieving a more uniform economic development of city areas and rural areas. The article also shows the economic foundations of the former municipalities of Ljubljana Vič and Ljubljana Rudnik as well as the consequences the administrative merging had on the development of the area.

In the period after the Second World War, Ljubljana experienced numerous administrative, political and territorial changes. In the period from 1945 to 1955, Ljubljana received as many as seven administrative and territorial changes. Immediately after the war, the city had the position of a district, which was divided into seven urban districts, which were further divided into 35 quarters; already in the same year in June 1945, it was divided into ten town districts, then from February 1948 into four urban districts and three localities, from March 1949 into four urban districts and one locality, in October of the same year into five urban districts, and in April 1952 Ljubljana was divided into the capital city of Ljubljana and the municipalities of Polje and Šentvid with the new law on the administrative division of the then republic.

The article deals with the administrative arrangement of Ljubljana and the gradual formation of five urban municipalities during the period of socialism. Ljubljana experienced the most administrative changes between 1952 and 1963. The introduction of the communal system strongly influenced the development of Ljubljana. Five municipalities gradually formed in its territory: Bežigrad, Center, Moste - Polje, Šiška and Vič - Rudnik. Since Ljubljana was administratively divided into several municipalities, its development was decentralized despite the establishment of a city council with rights in the development of the city as a whole. More or less extensive rural areas joined the new municipalities. Connecting with rural areas was the result of the political decision to eliminate social and class differences as well as the differences between the city and the countryside.

The article presents a depiction and comparison of the development of revolutionary violence, or, more specifically, a timeline of the number of victims during the Second World War in the areas of the Gorenjska region, the city of Ljubljana, and the Notranjska region.

Through the analytical approach of studying official and perception-related discourse on bell ringing I accentuate the complexity of aspects that the sound of church bell presents in contemporary society. I point out the misleading officially defined level of noise nuisance and reveal how, when and why bell ringing is perceived as a positive or negative part of the acoustic environment. The study argues for a holistic approach to the noise nuisance issues, still much underestimated in the official discourse, that co-create our everyday soundscape.

Naming and renaming of streets and other public spaces is an area of research interest of several social sciences; street names (odonyms), particularly official street names, are seen as symbols in urban space which cater for various politics of identity and memory. This paper compares odonomastic landscapes (urban onomastic landscapes) of Ljubljana and Belgrade, more precisely their segments which commemorate Slovenia and Slovenians in Belgrade, and on the other side Serbia and Serbian persons in Ljubljana. The focus of discussion is street (re)naming in capitals of Serbia and Slovenia from the 19th century till present (encompassing the periods of the long nineteenth century, interbellum Yugoslavia, World War Two, socialist Yugoslavia, and present independent states). Streets and squares named after members of these two nations, and after terms and toponyms from these two countries (which are a part of the urban nomenclature of the two capitals), indirectly point out to types of symbolic connections established between Serbia and Slovenia in the last hundred years or more.

Copyright of Bulletin of the Institute of Ethnography of the Serbian Academy of Sciences & Arts / Glasnik Etnografskog Instituta SANU is the property of Institute of Ethnography, SASA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)