Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-m9pkr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-08T11:29:17.221Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Millennial politics of architecture: Myths and nationhood in Budapest

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2018

Emilia Palonen
Emilia Palonen*
Affiliation:
Department of Political and Economic Studies, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland, Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Politics in Hungary since 1989 has been focusing on nation-building. Each government has had a license to articulate what it is to be Hungarian, in the public realm with public funds. While current political debates are heated and focus yet again on defining Hungarian national identity, this article takes a distance from contemporary politics. It studies a situation ten years earlier, when the current government party Fidesz -which took a landslide victory in the 2010 general elections after eight years of socialist-liberal government - was in office for the first time from 1998 to 2002. Exploring the debate from the perspective of architecture, it reveals how Fidesz sought to mark their space and express their sense of nationhood in Budapest around the millennium. Beside publicly sponsored institutions and commemoration, architectural forms became contested as they were used to express nationality. The National Theatre, Millennium Park and House of Terror Museum, each broke with the urban flow in the left-leaning metropolis while representing the Fidesz discourse on Hungary. The article, besides analyzing postcommunist nation-building, reflects on the interconnection between architecture, politics and memory in an urban symbolic landscape. It discusses how myths of nationhood can be represented in the cityscape.

Keywords

architecturememorynationalismpolitical symbolsHungary
Type
Articles
Information
Nationalities Papers , Volume 41 , Issue 4: Special Issue: From Socialist to Post-Socialist Cities Guest Editors: Alexander C. Diener and Joshua Hagen , July 2013 , pp. 536 - 551
Copyright
Copyright © 2013 Association for the Study of Nationalities 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Åman, Anders. 1992. Architecture and Ideology in Eastern Europe during the Stalin Era. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
Azaryahu, Maoz. 1991. Von Wilhelmplatz zu Thälmannplatz - Politische Symbole im öffentlichen Leben der DDR. Gerlingen: Bleicher.Google Scholar
Báan, László. 1997. “Budapest at the Dawn of Democracy 1989-1996.” In Budapest: A History from Its Beginnings to 1998, edited by Gerö, Andras and Póór, János, 277–281. Highland Lakes, NJ: Atlantic Research and Publications.Google Scholar
Benjamin, Walter. 1999. The Arcades Project. Cambridge, MA: Belknap, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bojar, Iván András. 2004. Közben, In the Meantime. Budapest: Oktogon.Google Scholar
Bodnár, Judit. 2001. Fin de Millenáire Budapest; Metamorphoses of Urban Life. Minneapolis: Minnesota University Press.Google Scholar
Boyer, M. Christine 1996. The City of Collective Memory: Its Historical Imagery and Architectural Enterntainments. Cambridge, Ma: MIT.Google Scholar
Burgers, Jack. 2000. “Urban Landscapes on Public Space in the Post-Industrial City.” Journal of Housing and the Built Environment 15 (2): 145–164.Google Scholar
Demszky, Gábor. 2001. Szabadság visszahóditása. Budapest: Uj mandatum.Google Scholar
Findley, Lisa. 2005. Building Change: Architecture, Power and Cultural Agency. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fowler, Brigid. 2004a. “Concentrated Orange: Fidesz and the Remaking of the Hungarian Centre-Right, 1994-2002.” Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics 20 (3): 80–114.Google Scholar
Fowler, Brigid. 2004b. “Nation, State, Europe and National Revival in Hungarian Party Politics: The Case of the Millennial Commemorations.” Europe-Asia Studies 56 (1): 57–83.Google Scholar
Fricz, Tamás. 1997. A népi-urbánus vita tegnap és ma. Budapest: Napvilag.Google Scholar
Gerő, András. 1990. Heroes’ Square Budapest. Budapest: Corvina.Google Scholar
Kapitány, Ágnés, and Kapitány, Gábor. 1999. Magyarság-szibólumok. Budapest: Európai Folklór Központ, Teleki László Alapítvány.Google Scholar
Laclau, Ernesto. 1990. New Reflections on the Revolutions of Our Time. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Levinson, Sanford. 1998. Written in Stone: Public Monuments in Changing Societies. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Locsmándi, Gábor. 2002. “Séta a Parkban.” Új Magyar Építőművészet 1: 21.Google Scholar
Molnár, Virág. 2002. “Tulips and Prefabrication: Hungarian Architects in the Bind of State Socialist Modernization in the 1970s.” Paper presented at the OACES Postgraduate Conference, St. Antony's College, Oxford, May 24–26.Google Scholar
Molnár, Virág. 2005. “Cultural Politics and Modernist Architecture: The Tulip Debate in Postwar Hungary.” American Sociological Review February 70 (1): 111–135.Google Scholar
Norval, Aletta J. 2000. “Trajectories of Future Research in Discourse Theory.” In Discourse Theory and Political analysis, edited by David Howarth, Aletta J. Norval and Stavrakakis, Yannis, 219–236. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Nyyssönen, Heino. 1999. The Presence of the Past in Politics: ‘1956’ after 1956 in Hungary. Jyväskylä: SoPhi.Google Scholar
Orbán, Viktor. 2001a. “Corvin-lánc átadás a Parlamentben [The Passing of the Corvin Flame in the Parliament].” Budapest. Accessed February 27, 2013. http://2001-2006.orbanviktor.hu/hir.php?aktmenu=3_3&id=829 Google Scholar
Orbán, Viktor. 2001b. “A ‘Világraszóló magyarok” címűkiállítás szakmai megnyitó [Opening of the Exhibition Hungarians Making the World].” Nagyszabású millenniumi kiállítás nyílt a Millenárison, az egykori Ganz-telep helyén. Accessed February 27, 2013. http://2001-2006.orbanviktor.hu/hir.php?aktmenu=3_3&id=865 Google Scholar
Orbán, Viktor. 2002. “A miniszterelnök gondolatai a Nemzeti Színházról [The PM's Thoughts on the National Theatre].” Accessed February 27, 2013. http://2001-2006.orbanviktor.hu/hir.php?aktmenu=3_2&id=1039 Google Scholar
Palonen, Emilia. 2005. “Articulating the Frontier in Hungarian Politics: Budapest Mayor Demszky on 15 March.” Central European Political Science Review 20: 140–165.Google Scholar
Palonen, Emilia. 2006. “City-images in Contemporary Budapest: The Mayor's Nostalgia for the 19th Century Capital and Metropolis.” In Reflections; Junior Fellow's Conference Series IX, edited by Eoin O'Carroll. IWM: Vienna. Accessed March 3, 2013. http://archiv.iwm.at/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=397&Itemid=276 Google Scholar
Palonen, Emilia. 2008a. “Budapest City-image and Discourses from the 19th Century to the Present.” In Im Herzen Europas, Nationale Identitäten und Erinnerungskulturen, edited by Detlef Alternburg, Lothar Ehrlich, and John, Jürgen, 277–284. Köln: Böhlau.Google Scholar
Palonen, Emilia. 2008b. “The City-text in Post-communist Budapest: Street names, Memorials, and the Politics of Commemoration.” Geojournal 73 (3): 219–230.Google Scholar
Palonen, Emilia. 2009. “Political Polarisation and Populism in Contemporary Hungary.” Parliamentary Affairs 62 (2): 318–334.Google Scholar
Patonai, Dénes. 2002. “Millenáris közpark.” Új Magyar Építőművészet 1: 22–23.Google Scholar
Rév, Ilona. 2001. “Az elveszett Nemzeti.” Népszabadság, May 9, p. 16.Google Scholar
Schöpflin, George. 2000. Nations, Identity, Power; The New Politics of Europe. London: Hurst.Google Scholar
Schöpflin, George. 1997. “The Functions of Myths and a Taxonomy of Myths.” In Myths & Nationhood, edited by Schöpflin, Geoffrey and Hosking, Geoffrey, 19–35. London: Hurst.Google Scholar
Schöpflin, George. 2002. “New-Old Hungary: A Contested Transformation.” RFE/RL East European Perspectives 10 (4).Google Scholar
Szegedy-Maszák, Mihaly. 2001. Literary Canons: National and International. Budapest: Akademiai.Google Scholar
Vadász, György és munkatársai. 2000. Új Magyar Építőművészet. Budapest: Két Nemzeti Színház terv.Google Scholar
Wesselényi-Garay, Andor. 2002. “Installáit titok: Álmok Álmodói - Világrajszóló Magyarok.” Új Magyar Építőművészet 1: 24–27.Google Scholar