25 abandoned soviet monuments

http://www.cracktwo.com/2011/04/25-abandoned-soviet-monuments-that-look.html

Topic says it all

feck, just noticed I posted this in the wrong section

Jazzband: http://forum.watmm.com/topic/65721-25-abandoned-yugoslavia-monuments-that-look-like-theyre-from-the-future/

Edit:

  Quote

Posts: 3

HE WAITED 6 YEARS TO POST!!!!!

  On 4/28/2011 at 5:56 PM, zkreso said:

http://www.cracktwo.com/2011/04/25-abandoned-soviet-monuments-that-look.html

 

Topic says it all

 

feck, just noticed I posted this in the wrong section

read the rules

this thread is better

why "soviet" when they're yugoslavian?

  On 4/28/2011 at 8:34 PM, MAXIMUS MISCHIEF said:

this thread is better

  On 4/28/2011 at 8:40 PM, kokoon said:

why "soviet" when they're yugoslavian?

The label "Abandoned Soviet Monuments" sounds better, from my perspective anyway, compared to "Abandoned Yugoslavian Monuments".

I guess the question is, were they actually soviet monuments? Yes they are located in Yugoslavia (Yugoslavian), Belgrade was "liberated" with the help of the Soviet Red Army in 1944.

Four years later Yugoslavia was banished from the international association of socialist states.

So technically, yes they were somewhat "soviet" for at least four years, kinda sort of. After that split there was a strange grey zone, or a "guilty by association" tag.

These sculptures were made in the 60s-70s, so would they still be considered "soviet"?

Yugoslavia has had a sad and sordid history, it was essentially formed from war.

To this day there is still war, as seen by all of the conflict between states and entities within the former territory of Yugoslavia.

However, I am by no means an expert on the topic. I would be interested to hear more discussion on this.

  On 4/28/2011 at 9:25 PM, Malverde said:

  On 4/28/2011 at 8:40 PM, kokoon said:

why "soviet" when they're yugoslavian?

 

The label "Abandoned Soviet Monuments" sounds better, from my perspective anyway, compared to "Abandoned Yugoslavian Monuments".

 

I guess the question is, were they actually soviet monuments? Yes they are located in Yugoslavia (Yugoslavian), Belgrade was "liberated" with the help of the Soviet Red Army in 1944.

 

Four years later Yugoslavia was banished from the international association of socialist states.

 

So technically, yes they were somewhat "soviet" for at least four years, kinda sort of. After that split there was a strange grey zone, or a "guilty by association" tag.

 

These sculptures were made in the 60s-70s, so would they still be considered "soviet"?

 

Yugoslavia has had a sad and sordid history, it was essentially formed from war.

 

To this day there is still war, as seen by all of the conflict between states and entities within the former territory of Yugoslavia.

 

However, I am by no means an expert on the topic. I would be interested to hear more discussion on this.

DROPPING SCIENCES

  On 4/28/2011 at 8:29 PM, jefferoo said:

  On 4/28/2011 at 5:56 PM, zkreso said:

http://www.cracktwo.com/2011/04/25-abandoned-soviet-monuments-that-look.html

 

Topic says it all

 

feck, just noticed I posted this in the wrong section

read the rules

07 member telling a 05 member to read the rules.

  On 4/28/2011 at 9:30 PM, Boxing Day said:

  On 4/28/2011 at 8:29 PM, jefferoo said:

  On 4/28/2011 at 5:56 PM, zkreso said:

http://www.cracktwo.com/2011/04/25-abandoned-soviet-monuments-that-look.html

 

Topic says it all

 

feck, just noticed I posted this in the wrong section

read the rules

 

07 member telling a 09 member to eat a cock.

gantz graffffffffffffff

.

nice post

They could be named American monuments just as much as Soviet lol. Must be the title Soviet, that gets americans to like stuff.

Yugoslavian sculptures.

If I would be a billionaire I would clandestinely put these sort of weird monuments up all over the world in weird places and see the conspiracy nuts flip out.

  On 4/28/2011 at 9:25 PM, Malverde said:

  On 4/28/2011 at 8:40 PM, kokoon said:

why "soviet" when they're yugoslavian?

 

The label "Abandoned Soviet Monuments" sounds better, from my perspective anyway, compared to "Abandoned Yugoslavian Monuments".

sounds better? then why not call it "Cellar door monuments"? or maybe "Morning dew on Manhattan"?

  On 4/28/2011 at 9:25 PM, Malverde said:

I guess the question is, were they actually soviet monuments? Yes they are located in Yugoslavia (Yugoslavian), Belgrade was "liberated" with the help of the Soviet Red Army in 1944.

from the OP website:

  Quote

These structures were commissioned by former Yugoslavian president Josip Broz Tito

also, i googled all of the listed artists that designed the sculptures and all of them were either Serbian, Croatian, Macedonian... all of them are Yugoslavian.

so i can't see any reason to call them "soviet". i have nothing against the soviet, but calling these anything other than Yugoslavian is an error.

  On 4/28/2011 at 9:25 PM, Malverde said:

Four years later Yugoslavia was banished from the international association of socialist states.

 

So technically, yes they were somewhat "soviet" for at least four years, kinda sort of. After that split there was a strange grey zone, or a "guilty by association" tag.

"Soviet"

  On 4/28/2011 at 9:25 PM, Malverde said:

These sculptures were made in the 60s-70s, so would they still be considered "soviet"?

no.

  On 4/28/2011 at 9:25 PM, Malverde said:

Yugoslavia has had a sad and sordid history, it was essentially formed from war.

 

To this day there is still war, as seen by all of the conflict between states and entities within the former territory of Yugoslavia.

25 abandoned yugoslavian monuments

  On 4/28/2011 at 9:25 PM, Malverde said:

However, I am by no means an expert on the topic. I would be interested to hear more discussion on this.

what is there to discuss? somebody misread the accompanying text and titled a blog post wrongly. no biggie, i'm just pointing out the error.

there are many sad events in yugoslavian history and there are many miserable people in these countries.

having lived in Yugoslavian federation for some 11 years before Slovenia parted, i can only say good things about those times.

anyways, awesome monuments, i wish there were more.

im confused. Now these are 3 threads about concrete structures that have been abandoned, as well as the idm voting thread. Somebody start a poll over which thread you like the most?

I see.

  On 4/28/2011 at 9:25 PM, Malverde said:

 

Yugoslavia has had a sad and sordid history, it was essentially formed from war.

 

To this day there is still war, as seen by all of the conflict between states and entities within the former territory of Yugoslavia.

 

However, I am by no means an expert on the topic. I would be interested to hear more discussion on this.

erm, it's a lot more complex than that, for many years all the various groups and tribes lived happily under the unified state, serb and croat a like, orthodox and catholic respectively.

you should read black lamb grey falcon. That will tell you about yugoslavia. in 1000+ pages.

Look guys, Yugoslavia didn't have a sad and sordid history. That was its last years maybe, but before that it was a country that was a model for a great part of the world.

Peoples of Yugoslavia were always warm and even though they had csome inner conflicts (like us, Slovenians have a unending feud with Croatians over some nonsense) we kept it at good humor and remained proud of what was created.

Also, Tito was probably a greater man, that achieved more in his lifetime than most USA presidents did...

The rampant nationalism on the Balkan is endearing.

  On 4/29/2011 at 12:10 PM, kokoon said:

  On 4/28/2011 at 9:25 PM, Malverde said:

  On 4/28/2011 at 8:40 PM, kokoon said:

why "soviet" when they're yugoslavian?

 

The label "Abandoned Soviet Monuments" sounds better, from my perspective anyway, compared to "Abandoned Yugoslavian Monuments".

sounds better? then why not call it "Cellar door monuments"? or maybe "Morning dew on Manhattan"?

 

  On 4/28/2011 at 9:25 PM, Malverde said:

I guess the question is, were they actually soviet monuments? Yes they are located in Yugoslavia (Yugoslavian), Belgrade was "liberated" with the help of the Soviet Red Army in 1944.

from the OP website:

  Quote

These structures were commissioned by former Yugoslavian president Josip Broz Tito

also, i googled all of the listed artists that designed the sculptures and all of them were either Serbian, Croatian, Macedonian... all of them are Yugoslavian.

so i can't see any reason to call them "soviet". i have nothing against the soviet, but calling these anything other than Yugoslavian is an error.

 

  On 4/28/2011 at 9:25 PM, Malverde said:

Four years later Yugoslavia was banished from the international association of socialist states.

 

So technically, yes they were somewhat "soviet" for at least four years, kinda sort of. After that split there was a strange grey zone, or a "guilty by association" tag.

"Soviet"

 

 

  On 4/28/2011 at 9:25 PM, Malverde said:

However, I am by no means an expert on the topic. I would be interested to hear more discussion on this.

what is there to discuss? somebody misread the accompanying text and titled a blog post wrongly. no biggie, i'm just pointing out the error.

there are many sad events in yugoslavian history and there are many miserable people in these countries.

having lived in Yugoslavian federation for some 11 years before Slovenia parted, i can only say good things about those times.

 

anyways, awesome monuments, i wish there were more.

I think you've misunderstood my reasoning behind saying that. Could Yugoslavia have gained independence in WWII without assistance from the Soviet powers?

"Belgrade, the capital of Yugoslavia, was liberated with the help of the Soviet Red Army in October 1944"

This was the relationship I failed to articulate properly.

"These structures were commissioned by former Yugoslavian president Josip Broz Tito in the 1960s and 70s to commemorate sites where WWII battles took place (like Tjentište, Kozara and Kadinjača), or where concentration camps stood (like Jasenovac and Niš). They were designed by different sculptors (Dušan Džamonja, Vojin Bakić, Miodrag Živković, Jordan and Iskra Grabul, to name a few) and architects (Bogdan Bogdanović, Gradimir Medaković...), conveying powerful visual impact to show the confidence and strength of the Socialist Republic"

As stated above, the reasoning behind the construction of these monuments, was in direct relationship to the Soviet Red Army, which helped to aid the Yugoslav Partisans in WWII, to achieve independence from fascist control.

This is the connection I was making. The death tool would have been much higher for the Yugoslav Partisans if there had not been Soviet military support. So it really is not an absurd stretch, from my perspective, to say this.

The Soviet Red Army was HUGE, and looking over the battles were they had supported the Yugoslav Partisans, you can see all of the divisions/brigades.

So even though these were built in the 60s-70s, the concept for them being built, "to commemorate sites where WWII battles took place" , was in direct relation to the Soviets.

I am not trying to paint Yugoslav Partisans in a bad light, or talk badly about Yugoslavia or Eastern Europe ideology, I'm just stating fact.

  On 4/29/2011 at 2:16 PM, dr lopez said:

  On 4/28/2011 at 9:25 PM, Malverde said:

 

Yugoslavia has had a sad and sordid history, it was essentially formed from war.

 

To this day there is still war, as seen by all of the conflict between states and entities within the former territory of Yugoslavia.

 

However, I am by no means an expert on the topic. I would be interested to hear more discussion on this.

erm, it's a lot more complex than that, for many years all the various groups and tribes lived happily under the unified state, serb and croat a like, orthodox and catholic respectively.

 

you should read black lamb grey falcon. That will tell you about yugoslavia. in 1000+ pages.

Yes it is a lot more complex than that. However, I don't have hours to spend typing that history on here. I'll check out that book though, thank you.

  On 4/29/2011 at 4:35 PM, gaarg said:

Look guys, Yugoslavia didn't have a sad and sordid history. That was its last years maybe, but before that it was a country that was a model for a great part of the world.

 

Peoples of Yugoslavia were always warm and even though they had csome inner conflicts (like us, Slovenians have a unending feud with Croatians over some nonsense) we kept it at good humor and remained proud of what was created.

 

Also, Tito was probably a greater man, that achieved more in his lifetime than most USA presidents did...

Yes, people generally from Eastern Europe are friendly and warm, and have a high percentage immensely talented artists. I'm not putting down anybody. I'm not trying to polarize anything or paint former soviets or eastern europeans in a bad light.

This is not about the USA, it is about how brilliant Yugoslavian artists created something amazing. To commemorate a positive and historical anti-nazi liberation, which could not have been as successful as it had, without the support of Soviets.

Yugoslavian monuments or Soviet monuments, either way, IDM as all get up.

outdoor sculptures abandoned! More on this shocking story after this break.

Soviet or not. This thread is still uber-jazzband