Urbs - Magyar várostörténeti évkönyv 5. (Budapest, 2010)

Recenziók

Abstracts

GYÖRGYI BARTA

Two interpretations of the socialist city concept

The author puts forward the opinion that new towns built during the socialist era do not qualify as “socialist towns”. Despite their many distinctions from other towns in terms of society, economy, architecture and form, they cannot be ascribed any particularly socialist content. This is not to call into doubt the achievements of the new towns, which constitute some of the highest achievements of socialism, even though poverty undoubtedly left its stamp on their qualitative parameters.

Even though the term “socialist” cannot be applied to the new towns specifically, the general system of society which developed under socialism, being fundamentally different from that of capitalism, distinctively transformed the economy, social affairs, and indeed towns. The system-specific socialist factors defined by János Komái - the exclusive power of the Communist Party, the dominance of state ownership and the bureaucratic coordination of social relations - undoubtedly gave rise to the “socialist town”, which means that all towns of that period could be called socialist.

The first part of this paper covers the criteria of socio-economic and spatial structure by which the new industrial towns are customarily characterised as “socialist”. The second part examines Hungarian towns on the basis of the system-specific factors of socialism. The examples used throughout are mainly Hungarian.

JÁNOS LADÁNYI

Was their a socialist model of urbanisation?

The first part of the paper presents two mutually contradictory views on the development and operation of the “socialist” model of urbanisation. One sees the level of economic development as the fundamental determinant of pace and nature of urbanisation, and the capitalist or socialist mode of production

URBS. MAGYAR VÁROSTÖRTÉNETI ÉVKÖNYV V. 2010. 509-525. p.