Comments on: Kazakhstan, the Soviet: “Stalinkas” and “Khrushchevkas”, Afghanistan and the Red Army Holiday

By: neweurasia.net » “Сталинки” и “Хрущевки”: комментарии

Thu, 28 May 2009 00:38:54 +0000

[...] Снос старых домов и замена их новыми – вопрос трепетный для многих алматинцев. Упоминание Адама Кешера сноса “сталинок” в Алматы, вызвало реакцию не только местных блоггеров в его онлайн-дневнике, но и “забугровых”, когда его пост был переведен на Global Voices Online. [...]

By: John

John — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 15:25:20 +0000

You know, in retrospect maybe the old stalinkas and Khrushchevkas weren’t built so poorly after all — compared to the current construction. Take two of the most recent “pokazukha” buildings in Astana: the Ministry of Transport cigarette lighter (zazhigalka); and the Stalinist ’seven sisters’ style “Triumph of Astana” housing complex.
The zazhigalka, a newly-constructed approximate 30–story buiding which is shaped like a cigarette lighter (hence the name). Since it’s completion it has burned down three (3!) times. Mostly recently in mid-2006 when the fire started on the upper floors, and Kazakhstani firefighters could not put it out because their equipment was able to reach only upto the 9th floor. Locals have taken to calling the circular area at the bottom of the building the “pepel’nitsa” (ashtray) as a joke. I don’t think either burning down three times within it’s only-several years life, or locals making a joke of this highly-photographed and touted building is what the Kazakhstani government had in mind when they built it and started showing it off.
The second is the so-called “Triumph of Astana” building which is built (for some unsane reason, particulary in Kazakhstan of all places) in the Stalinistic style similar to the Moscow seven sisters buildings (Hotel Ukraina, et al.). This place is a monstrosity and way over-priced for any honest Kazakhstani. Alas, even the wealthy who live in the building will have to do without cars, since the underground parking had to be filled in with concrete to keep the building from colapsing. Seems the construction was done so well that huge cracks formed in the upper foundations even before the building could be completed. Rather than tear it down, identify who was responsible and re-build to a normal quality, the powers-that-be decided the best thing to save the building was to fill the underground garage with concrete. So, in essence, the garage no longer exists. I have no idea how many apartments are in this building, but in the typical Soviet tradition the outrageous size of the place is clearing compensating for someone’s insecurity. Unfortunatley, for me the large size of this building and high number of apartments just means that more people are going to die or be injured when this building eventually does collapse onto itself. And I suspect this will occur far sooner than it will to any “eyesore” Stalinka or Khrushchevka. ….even if they still don’t have indoor plumbing.;)

By: John

John — Mon, 26 Feb 2007 11:46:34 +0000

You are of course correct, Mr. Duggins, in principle. I disagree, however, that Tselinograd/Aqmola was a “freaking village” prior to being named the capital. Tselinograd was the center of Krushchev’s virgin lands initiative. It had a population of 180,000 long before it was renamed Astana and became the capital city in 1998. I would hardly call a city of 180K a “village” (notwithstanding the “freaking” part). I can tell you definitely that many of these Stalinka’s in Astana do not, in fact, have indoor plumbing — or at least the residents elect not to use it. This is clear by the number of people waiting to use the outhouses every morning, or those standing on street corners with their empty bottles to carry water back up to their 4th floor flat. In addition to simply being horrible for the residents, it is also dangerous as the water just runs out of the pumps and then immediatly freezes.
Almaty a “very European city”? My friend, as you say, it HAS been awhile since you were home. I wonder what European cities you would compare it to. Dresden? Bucharest? Chisinau? Certainly not Frankfurt, Wiesbaden, Vienna, Brussels, Amsterdam? Until Almaty city management decides to resolve the numerous problems, it is a disservice to compare it to any true European city. These problems include, but are not limited to: horrible air quality due to lack of regulations and people burning garbage; awful traffic and many accidents due to corruption of police and gov’t officials who are unwilling to enforce order on the roads). There are many other issues to deal with before Almaty can be considered much more than a backwater, but some if described, although truthful, would begin to become offensive to readers.
But anyway, Almaty and Astana are beside the point. I personally don’t care how well the wealthy and priviledged live in these major cities (even if you can call it “living” in the Astana weather) — what I want to know is how well they are living 15 kilometers outside these city centers, and I can tell you it is not good for the average Kazakhstani, my friend.

By: David Duggins

David Duggins — Mon, 26 Feb 2007 05:49:11 +0000

I grew up in Kazakhstan and when I got married, I moved into one of these Stalinkas with my wife and her mom. These are beautiful buildings that were VERY well built. They are large and roomy (compared to the newer style buildings that were put up in the 70’s and 80’s. Also, just a side note: Astana was a freaking village before it was renamed to Astana (Kazakh for capital) It originally was called Tselinegrad and then it was renamed to Aqmola (White Grave) Obviously, the housing that was there already would not have been up to par with housing in a larger city. Almaty was the capital….it is a very European city. There is a huge difference in the buildings of the two cities. It has been a while since I have been home, but I do believe that there are Stalinkas in Astana as well….these would have indoor plumbing my friend.

By: John

John — Sat, 24 Feb 2007 16:31:31 +0000

Those old poorly-constructed buildings are just that — old, poorly-constructed building. Which, unfortunately, now will be replaced by new fancy-looking but still poorly-constructed buildings. Kazakhstan should cease any attempt to demolish or rebuild until they are in a position to do it correctly. The capital city, Astana is a shame. It is supposed to be the CAPITAL CITY, yet still most of the housing buildings which are not recently built do not have indoor plumbing and have to go down to street corners for water. This, when the weater gets down to as low as -50 in the winter. These old buildings need be demolished, but replaced by good-quality affordable housing in order to raise the standard-of-living and establish a non-nomadic life for the average citizen and not only those who drive expensive Mercedes with blacked-out windows.

By: Jerry Huffman

Jerry Huffman — Sat, 24 Feb 2007 14:26:24 +0000

I read Adam Kesher’s remarks on historic housing in Kazakhstan with great sadness. Two of the happiest years of my life were spent in the “stans” and I was always touched by the sense of history in the area as well as sincerity of most of the people we met. On my last visit in 2005 it was upsetting to see how much of the history is giving way to shopping malls and other inevitable “progress.” There’s nothing wrong with progress as long as it is not entirely at the expense of preserving your past.