DOI: 10.3986/Traditio2022510307 CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. TRADITIONES, 51/3, 2022, 143–166
RESPONSIBILITY IN PUBLIC SPACE
REMAKING OF TWO CROATIAN CITIES
NEVENA ŠKRBIĆ ALEMPIJEVIĆ AND TOMISLAV OROZ
The article addresses the transformations of urban public 
space in contemporary Croatia. It tackles the issue of 
responsibility related to city-making processes. It raises the 
question of what and who makes a public space public. The 
analysis is based on ethnographic case studies conducted in 
the European Square in Zagreb and Sea Organs in Zadar. 
Despite their previous marginality, both places function 
as places of gathering but also as spaces whose publicness is 
renegotiated between diverse agents.
Keywords: urban public space, responsibility, Zagreb, Zadar, 
European Square, Sea Organs
V članku so obravnavane spremembe urbanega javnega prostora 
v sodobni Hrvaški. Opozorjeno je na vprašanje odgovornosti v 
procesih ustvarjanja mest: kaj in kdo naredi javni prostor, da 
je dejansko javen. Analiza temelji na etnografskih raziskavah 
primerov – Evropskega trga v Zagrebu in Morskih orgel v 
Zadru. Obe lokaciji kljub poprejšnji obrobnosti delujeta kot 
prostora zbiranja, vendar tudi kot prostora, katerih javnost 
se nenehno poustvarja s pogajanji med različnimi akterji. 
Ključne besede: mestni javni prostor, odgovornost, Zagreb, 
Zadar, Evropski trg, Morske orgle
In this article, we address the transformations and (mis)uses of urban public space in 
Croatia, viewed through the prism of cultural anthropology. Public areas nowadays are 
subject to changes that can be considered global tendencies. These include the processes 
of fragmentation, narrowing, and changing the character of public spaces through 
privatization, commercialization, and touristification, the dissolution of the idea of the 
“common good” through spatial instability and segregation, etc., which are in line with 
the current economic, political and social orders (cf. Hirt, 2012: 14–30). However, some 
of the trends observed in Croatian cities reflect the specific post-socialist context of urban 
life. The establishment of a sovereign state in 1991, the transition from socialism to a 
market economy, from centralized spatial planning strategies directed by the Yugoslav 
state to local urban planning and entrepreneurial initiatives, and the country’s accession 
to the EU in 2013 have all left their mark on contemporary Croatian cityscapes. In these 
contexts, the former center of one of the Yugoslav republics – Zagreb – became the capital 
of the independent state, while a new network of regional centers was created, following 
today’s political and symbolic geography. The transformations mentioned above affecting 
public space in Croatia raise the question of responsibility at various levels, including 
the state and political level and civil responsibility, i.e., the engagement of citizens with 
and for public space. Such an all-encompassing view of responsibility in and for public 
space assumes a specific understanding of city-making as a process triggered by diverse 
social agents, by all the individuals and groups that conceive, use, and activate urban 
144
RESPONSIBILITY IN PUBLIC SPACE: REMAKING OF TWO CROATIAN CITIES
spaces, and not only those at the top of the political and economic hierarchy (Gulin 
Zrnić, Škrbić Alempijević, 2019: 12–13). Such an understanding of what and who makes 
the city reflects the two complementary perspectives to space-making – social production 
and social construction – developed by urban anthropologist Setha Low (1996). The first 
focuses on the architectonic, technological, ideological, and economic mechanisms – fac-
tors imposed “from above” – that lead to the production of the built environment. The 
second is directed to the lived and symbolic dimensions of public space, highlighting how 
spaces are constructed “from below” at the intersection of various human imaginaries, 
memories, narratives, practices, and social interactions (ibid.). According to this twofold 
approach to public space, all the different actors in urban life co-create public space and 
thus bear some responsibility for it; however, their voices are not equally influential in 
the decision-making processes.
We address responsibility as the transformative phenomenon that emerges at 
the interstices of private and public, institutional and experiential, local and global, 
abstract and concrete; it is entangled in the (a)symmetrical power relations that shape 
the (in)visibility of urban places and their relationship to identity-forming processes. 
In articulating the link between responsibility and identity, we have been inspired by 
Doreen Massey’s concept of geographies of responsibility, which highlights the political 
positions not directed solely from one center, and relationships inscribed in urban spaces 
that extend far beyond concrete locations (Massey, 2007). Geographies of responsibility 
are also expanded to include the temporal dimension, extending these relations geo-
graphically and historically. Responsibility opens the questions of political processes, 
social engagement, questions of exclusion, and belonging to urban spaces, but also of 
participating in the creation of urban centers in transformation. The concept emphasizes 
the plurality of positionalities, i.e., tackles “a politics of place which does not deprive 
of meaning those lines of connections, relations, and practices, that construct place” 
(Masey, 2007: 9).
Responsibility also stems from the claims of “the right to the city” made in both the 
academic and activist spheres. They demand that citizens reclaim the city, seen primar-
ily as a commodity, and participate in rebuilding a collective urban life (Lefebvre, 1968; 
Mitchell, 2003). Such tendencies trigger public debates, social actions, and movements 
in contemporary Croatia. In the last decade, there have been several protests in major 
Croatian cities against the privatization, restructuring, and renaming of public spaces. 
The dimensions of responsibility concerning urban public space also raise intriguing and 
analytically relevant points: What makes a public space public? How do different agents 
shape and activate urban space? What kind of interventions and behaviors are allowed in 
public areas, who gets to decide it, and in what ways? Are there limits to the public, open 
and inclusive character of public space, and for whom?
We raised these core questions to discuss the dynamic interrelationships between public 
space, cultural practices, and responsibility. Our research is based on two ethnographic 
145
NEVENA ŠKRBIĆ ALEMPIJEVIĆ AND TOMISLAV OROZ
case studies conducted in two Croatian cities: Zagreb and Zadar.1 The common feature of 
these cases is that both public spaces we analyze are being reconfigured and transformed to 
such an extent that they are considered new within the urban grid. By observing the two 
cases, we gain insight into what it takes to change an outdoor location within the existing 
urban configuration to appear and function as a new public place. We examine urbanistic 
and architectural interventions in such redesigned areas and how they reflect the broader 
economic, political, and social issues that led to their creation. However, we also emphasize 
the specific performances and practices of those who use urban space. We are interested in 
how these emerging new spaces acquire memory and significance for their users and how 
a new urban topography is formulated and brought to life.
The two cities and two public spaces within the cities selected for our comparative 
analysis differ in many aspects. The dominant representation of Zagreb, as the country’s 
largest city and capital, focuses on its centrality in the governmental and institutional sense, 
its status as a business and culture hub that, due to its history and continental position, 
reaches out for Central-European identity strategies. Our research in Zagreb focuses on 
the European Square, a newly constructed and centrally positioned square-in-becoming 
(cf. Gulin Zrnić, Škrbić Alempijević, 2019: 230, 358). This public space functioned as 
an intersection of three streets until recently. In 2013 it was restructured as a square: the 
street juncture was remodeled into a semi-pedestrian area, a business center location, and 
the headquarters of various cultural and political organizations, such as the European 
Commission Representation in Croatia. The space was also turned into a scene of multiple 
public events that brand the square, the city, and the country as a whole as “European,” 
“cosmopolitan,” and “open.” The transformation of this space and redefinition of practices 
raises the issue of responsibility on different levels. It is related to the social production 
of the European Square, i.e., the physical restructuring of space, filling it with adequate 
materiality, objects, institutions, branding strategies, etc. However, it is equally oriented to 
its social construction by focusing on different ways a new square is filled with meanings, 
experiences, and performances by reinventing it as a public space.
On the other hand, the representation of Zadar is based on more than two thousand 
years of history, which, together with the positive connotations of the Mediterranean, is 
often used in tourism strategies and identity-building processes at the regional and national 
levels. The second case study focused on the Sea Organs, an architectural object on the 
Zadar promenade, considered Zadarr’s new, re-branded symbol. Until 2005, the space 
occupied by the Sea Organs was treated only marginally in tourism promotion as an area 
located mainly on the outskirts of town, serving as a swimming site for locals living nearby. 
However, thanks to the installations of architect Nikola Bašić – the Sea Organ and the 
1 The research in Zagreb was carried out by Nevena Škrbić Alempijević, while Tomislav Oroz led the 
research in Zadar. The research in Zagreb was conducted as part of the project City-making: Space, 
Culture and Identity, funded by the Croatian Science Foundation. The comparative analysis and 
interpretation are the result of a joint effort of the two authors.
146
RESPONSIBILITY IN PUBLIC SPACE: REMAKING OF TWO CROATIAN CITIES
Greeting to the Sun – the seafront has turned into the busiest tourist destination in the old 
town of Zadar. The music produced by the sea waves and the light show of the Greeting to 
the Sun are a point of attraction for numerous visitors. Such changes raise questions about 
socially responsible architecture, the relationship between the city’s historical heritage and 
its current needs, the issues of touristification and commodification, and “proper” and 
“responsible” ways of using the public space.
Methodologically, our ethnographic research conducted over the past four years is 
based on qualitative approaches and is designed as a combination of top-down and bottom-
up approaches. It involves the analysis of institutional spatial redefinitions “from above” 
on the one hand and the multiple uses, experiences, affects, and meanings attached to 
space “from below” on the other. The research was based on interviews with diverse city-
makers: municipal officials, representatives of tourist boards, representatives of national and 
European institutions, organizations and non-governmental organizations, conservation 
experts, architects, urban planners, art historians and artists, event managers, numerous 
city residents, and city visitors. It also included participant observation of performances 
organized on the European Square in Zagreb and on the promenade in Zadar.
We focused on public events and performances, perceived as mechanisms of inclusion 
and exclusion from the public sphere and as arenas where different understandings of respon-
sibility are promoted and negotiated. To explore the (re)making of public spaces – viewed 
as the “crucibles of the expression, resistance, and constant formation and re-formation 
of the social order of the city and the state” (Kapferer, 2007: 69) – means examining the 
relationship between public and private spheres and sets of values, what is profitable and 
symbolically alive, materially present and affectively expressed, as well as all the other 
factors and actors that form a complex web of concrete human practices in urban places.
BECOMING EUROPEAN: SQUARE-MAKING IN ZAGREB2
What levels and modes of responsibility are triggered in strengthening and constructing a 
European identity for Croatian citizens and cities on the occasion of the country’s acces-
sion to the European Union? How are those changes reflected in urban public spaces that 
are redefined and put into practice along the lines of Europeanness? What is the role of 
public events in remaking space, and what responsibilities do their organizers face when 
reimagining the European topography there? Those are the core questions we address while 
analyzing the production of a new square in Zagreb – nowadays named the European 
Square – whose development is inextricably intertwined with how the notion of Europe is 
perceived and filled with meanings in 21st-century Croatia.
2 The topic of space-making that reconfigures the European Square has been thoroughly discussed in 
the book Grad kao susret: Etnografije zagrebačkih trgova (A City as an Encounter: the Ethnography of 
Zagreb Squares), published in the Croatian language (Gulin Zrnić, Škrbić Alempijević, 2019: 230–358).
147
NEVENA ŠKRBIĆ ALEMPIJEVIĆ AND TOMISLAV OROZ
The crossroad was restructured into the European Square on the master plan of the Zagreb center 
from 1923 (Regulatory basis of Zagreb; documentation of the University of Zagreb, Faculty of 
Architecture).
The construction of Ban centar, Zagreb, July 2011 (Portal of the Croatian Cultural Council).
148
RESPONSIBILITY IN PUBLIC SPACE: REMAKING OF TWO CROATIAN CITIES
Our first case study is thus related to a newly constructed square in Croatia’s capital, 
which is only 230 m distant from Zagreb’s main Count Josip Jelačić Square towards the 
northeast and directly connected to it. Legislatively, the space functioned as the intersec-
tion of three streets – Vlaška, Cesarčeva, and Kurelčeva Streets – and not as a square until 
2017. The three streets have formed part of the original urban grid of Zagreb Lower Town, 
whose historical core was defined in the 19th century (cf. Knežević, 2006). 
The square’s northern side is still defined by two-story architecture from the early 
19th century, protected and safeguarded by the national conservation trust as a part of 
the city’s historic zone (Kahle, 2004: 207). The location functioned as a mixed residential 
and commercial area, with small shops of craftsmen and merchants on the ground level. 
The site of this crossroads at the southern entrance to the seat of the Roman Catholic 
Archbishop of Zagreb provided the place with centrality and frequency throughout its 
history. Nevertheless, the junction was rarely used as a place of gathering. The streets were 
used primarily as passageways toward the main square, Zagreb Cathedral, and the city’s 
biggest open-air market, the Dolac. What characterized the space dynamics is passing by, 
walking up and down these streets. The space functioned as a getaway to specific loca-
tions and rarely as a destination for people’s movements. Such spatial tactics proved vital 
in restructuring that urban zone and affected the organization of open-air public events. 
Another common practice that intensified in the second half of the 20th century was 
driving through and parking in that location; the streets functioned as important traffic 
lines to reach the strict city center, supply the market with goods, etc. Judging by the nar-
ratives of our interviewees, during socialism, the space was treated as a crowded parking 
lot, experienced as a temporary and unavoidable stopover before entering the city proper.
The space experienced a significant redefinition and a new traffic regulation in 2013, 
in the frame of the so-called small-scale communal action coordinated by the municipality. 
Today, the location where the three streets meet forms a small semi-pedestrian zone with 
newly planted trees, specially designed benches, and street lights. The critical marker in its 
transformation is the construction of the business building Ban centar. 
This edifice, built according to a 2007 project, is a combination of private and public 
investment, erected at the previous location of an open parking lot. The building comprises 
luxury apartments and business spaces. The area in front of the building was redesigned 
only after the building opened. For this reason, many of our interviewees see the trans-
formation of the open public space in front of the building as the renovation of the Ban 
centar courtyard. In their narratives, the public space is being restructured only to make 
those who can afford to live or have an office there feel comfortable and at home. When 
marketing the building and the surrounding space, the investors foreground the city’s 
European identity. A quote from the investors’ website states it is “accommodation of the 
highest international standards in the heart of a dynamic European city.”3 
3 http://www.ban-centar.hr/projekt# (July 2017).
149
NEVENA ŠKRBIĆ ALEMPIJEVIĆ AND TOMISLAV OROZ
One of the reasons for emphasizing the European dimension of the space is that the 
building houses, among others, the European Commission Representation in Croatia and 
the European Parliament Information Office. That factor leads to a specific visual identity 
of the space. European Union and Croatian flags are constantly hoisted in the square, and 
posters and billboards fill the space with EU slogans like “united in diversity,” “peace, 
democracy, solidarity,” etc. At certain public events organized in front of the offices of the 
Commission Representation, the flags of other European countries are also hoisted in the 
square. Such l The high-level EU institutions’ location also influences the square’s social 
dynamics. For instance, people planning a more extended stay in another EU country, 
especially those interested in education and training abroad, go there to find information 
about the programs. In their narratives and practices, the building and the space in front 
of it function as the House of Europe, a point where one enters and becomes aware of a 
broader European context. In other cases, the building is perceived as the Fort of Europe, 
to which some groups and individuals attach the attribute of coldness and ignorance of the 
European administration. That becomes evident during protests and gatherings organized 
on this square, which question specific EU policies and send messages to EU leaders. This 
was especially the case in 2015, during the period referred to in media discourse as the 
European migrant crisis, when numerous groups of activists organized public events in 
front of the EU institutions in Zagreb to demand migrants’ rights and plead for the safe 
passage of refugees to Europe.
The square got its recognizable look with the installation of the “EU Star,” defined by 
its author as “a mark” of Croatia’s 2013 accession to the European Union. The square and 
the monument were designed by the renowned Croatian architect Branko Silađin, a member 
Passersby on the European Square, January 2016 (photo by Nevena Škrbić Alempijević).
150
RESPONSIBILITY IN PUBLIC SPACE: REMAKING OF TWO CROATIAN CITIES
of the team that renovated Zagreb’s main square in 1987. On the day Croatia became a 
member of the EU, it was opened to the public in its new shape. It reflects the efforts of the 
city and the whole country to renegotiate its post-socialist identity and build its imagery on 
the European legacy. This is also true for the protected 19th-century architectural heritage, 
which is nowadays described as proof of the city’s belonging to Central Europe rather than 
the Balkans. The same goes for the futuristic form of Ban centar, which is advertised as a 
striving European present and future togetherness. The square-making does not go without 
controversies as it was renovated without standard contract award procedures. Many urban 
planning and design professionals, NGOs, and activist groups raise the question about 
responsibility and transparency in remaking the site and appeal that the voices of citizens 
and experts should have been heard in the process. Many critiques are directed toward the 
monument, and people often describe it as a pedestal for a proper memorial rather than a 
monument itself. Therefore, it becomes a platform for specific interventions that turn the 
cube into a pedestal of another artwork, dice, or a surface on which the citizens are invited 
to stick their comments on the square and urban policies. 
Diverse social agents, especially event organizers, treated this space as a square and 
called it informally European Square, even though it was still officially defined as a street 
intersection.4 In March 2017, the municipality decided to follow the trend and declared it a 
square, more concretely, European Square. The City Council decided to “name the square 
in the memory of the lawful admission of the Republic of Croatia as the 28th member of 
the European Union” (Odbor za imenovanje naselja, ulica i trgova, 2027). On the 60th 
anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Rome, which is celebrated as the birthday of 
the European Union, the Mayor of Zagreb, Milan Bandić, in the presence of ambassadors 
and other representatives of EU countries, placed the new plaque on the square. It should 
mark the geographical and political affiliation but also intertwine the image of the Croatian 
capital with the idea and ideal of Europe.
Although the space has undergone significant restructuring and renaming, many 
of our interview partners, mainly the citizens of Zagreb, have stressed that it still does 
not quite meet the criteria that define the square. For them, the location is a “square in 
the making.” It is a part of the route of numerous passers-by, city residents, and tourists, 
many of whom head for the city center via the newly established stop for tourist busses 
near European Square. Although the square now offers places to sit and take a break, meet 
and circle on the plateau, it is still used primarily as a transitory point towards another 
location. Besides emphasizing the European identity of the city and the Croatian state, 
the city authorities and policymakers, the national and EU institutions, and the Tourist 
board want to turn the square into an attractive place to stop and meet and not just pass 
by. They call for diverse public events in this space, from car shows to poetry evenings. 
4 Even Google Maps had marked this place as European Square before it was declared a square by the 
city administration.
151
NEVENA ŠKRBIĆ ALEMPIJEVIĆ AND TOMISLAV OROZ
Their organizers use the European dimension of the square as a branding strategy. We will 
point to three different types of performances to outline the relationship between space-
making and responsibility issues: public events organized by the European Commission 
Representation; manifestations organized by the Zagreb Tourist Board; and finally, the 
performances centered around artistic interventions that question and contest the dominant 
narrative produced in this public space.
“European,” “cosmopolitan,” “open,” and “urban” are the keywords used to describe 
the European Square, and the events are intended as a means to highlight these compo-
nents. In this sense, they act as tools contributing to the formation of “European heritage 
and European belonging” (cf. Horolets, 2003; Bouchard, 2016: 25–31). This tendency is 
particularly evident in the events organized by the European Commission Representation 
in Croatia. One of the reasons they chose the European Square as the venue for their 
events was mainly logistical because it was easiest for them to place their activities in 
front of their offices. As the representative of this institution explained, they consider the 
square an external extension of their workplace, a carefully redesigned and representative 
platform where they exhibit their work. Their goal is to recreate the space through public 
events that reflect the agenda of the European Commission. They organize public events 
on the square, from cultural manifestations, celebrations of significant anniversaries, fairs, 
workshops, and concerts, to parades and sporting events. The cultural manifestation that 
is the focus of their attention is the celebration of Europe Day on May 9, the anniversary 
of the Schuman Declaration from 1950. In the frame of this event, the square becomes an 
“EU Star” on the European Square, Zagreb, July 2018 (photo by Vesna Uglješić).
152
RESPONSIBILITY IN PUBLIC SPACE: REMAKING OF TWO CROATIAN CITIES
arena where the European heritage is constructed and displayed. It is filled with booths 
representing each EU member country, where visitors can get information about mobility 
programs, the country’s cultural offer, and tourist destinations. Although each country 
presenter has their time slot on the central stage, the constant presence of all country rep-
resentatives in the background of their program brings European togetherness to life. The 
event thus functions as a context in which the organizers materialize the slogan “Unity in 
Diversity” through a selection of traditional and contemporary cultural elements (“Tasting 
Europe” being one of the common strategies). Other motifs and types of performances 
they highlight include music (both classical and contemporary), popular games, arts, crafts, 
folklore (especially folk costumes and dances), etc. Through such public events, the imagery 
of Europe and the symbols of Croatia’s belonging to the EU are embedded and embodied 
in the newly constructed European Square. 
The second institution that uses the square as a venue for public events is the Zagreb 
Tourist Board. When designing events, the Tourist Board also uses the European dimen-
sion of the square as a source of inspiration and a brand strategy. As their representative has 
explained, they use the fact that the European element has already been emphasized in the 
space to give the public events a unique touch compared to other manifestations organized in 
Zagreb. The Advent in Zagreb is the event that has the most significant reach in this regard; 
it is a manifestation that begins four weeks before Christmas and lasts until the first half of 
January. Thanks to this event, Zagreb has been awarded the best Christmas destination in 
Europe for several years. This has attracted thousands of tourists to the Croatian capital, 
but locals are just as interested in participating in the event. Advent includes a variety of 
programs: street performances, artistic interventions, concerts, workshops and presenta-
tions, Christmas fair, walking tours, etc. It is held a whole day until late evening in several 
locations in the city center, one of them being the European Square. Each of these scenes 
offers a different story of Advent and addresses a diverse audience. The organizers of the 
event in the square, employees of Svibanj projekt company, focus on the younger genera-
tion, on “young urban people,” on those who, as they stated, “think globally, who feel at 
home in the world.” The European dimension is again very pronounced. Music programs 
are performed by bands and DJs from different European countries with free admission. 
Embassies and culture centers from EU countries are invited to present their Christmas 
traditions on stage.
European Square again shows itself as European and cosmopolitan during the Advent 
performances. Thanks to promotional strategies and activities of the Tourist Board, the 
square is full of visitors and has turned into an event venue (cf. Smith, 2016). The event 
makes people stay in the square for a while, thus changing their spatial tactics and the 
dynamics of the square. On the other hand, Advent raises debates about the quality of life 
in the city center turned into a tourism destination, the abuse of protected natural and 
cultural areas, and the like. This time, the issue of responsibility is directed to those who 
should control touristification trends and public property privatization.
153
NEVENA ŠKRBIĆ ALEMPIJEVIĆ AND TOMISLAV OROZ
The question of which symbols of identity, memories, and practices should be associ-
ated with European Square is not without controversy. Some public events organized on the 
square point to the debates and media discussions that have accompanied the remodeling of 
the square and criticize its new design. They also look at the idea of Europe created in this 
place from a different angle. This is the case with the UrbanFestival, an event organized by 
a platform of local and international artists and cultural workers. It includes performances, 
a series of interventions in public spaces, and a workshop program. The entire 2013 edition 
Europe Day on the European Square, May 2017 (photo by Iva Grubiša).
The sketch of the non-realized intervention Holy People on the European Square, Zagreb, 2014 
(Davor Konjikušić’s photo collection).
154
RESPONSIBILITY IN PUBLIC SPACE: REMAKING OF TWO CROATIAN CITIES
of the UrbanFestival was dedicated to European Square in response to the construction 
work that took place that year (Hanaček, Kutleša, 2015). During the event, organizers 
and performers introduced elements that do not usually belong in the square to change 
the everyday routines and make people think about what and who is allowed to be in the 
square. Some performers brought pebbles to recreate more natural surroundings; others 
placed chairs on the square and opened discussion groups where everyone could participate. 
As the initiator of the whole platform explained, their goal was to make people “stop, think 
and act” to make the issue of public space a point of general discussion. The intervention 
that attracted the most attention in the media was the one that did not take place at all, 
although it was planned as one of the temporary spatial interventions of the UrbanFestival. 
One of the artists, Davor Konjikušić, wanted to exhibit the photographed faces of 
asylum seekers on the European Square in front of the European Commission Representation 
building because he felt that migrants’ issues belonged there. He used the biometric photo 
pattern but allowed facial expressions to reveal their personalities. However, the city admin-
istration refused to issue permission for this installation, stating that “the space is reserved 
for other types of city events” (Konjikušić, 2015: 49). In this way, the festival organizers’ 
attempt to make the immigrants and asylum seekers symbolically present in the centrally 
located public space failed. The case of the UrbanFestival raises the question of the limits 
of the square as a public good, of inclusion and exclusion from the public sphere. 
SEA ORGANS AND GREETING TO THE SUN ALONG 
THE MEDITERRANEAN PROMENADE
The second part of our comparative research discusses the challenges of public space in its 
post-socialist context by examining new architectural inventions that have reshaped the 
historical core of the Dalmatian town of Zadar. The millennial old urban setting of Zadar 
makes questions of responsibility particularly intriguing and relevant to cultural analysis. 
When addressing the concept of responsibility in the case of Zadar, one goes beyond mere 
urbanistic reinventions or challenges in (re)defining the generic idea of responsibility. From 
the ethnographic perspective, when one deals with the concept of responsibility as a relational 
phenomenon, political, social, and cultural issues arise that are relevant to understanding 
the multi-layered fabric of urban life. Moreover, the understanding of responsibility, to 
whom it is addressed, and how it correlates with the practice of everyday life seems even 
more puzzling when confronted with the effects of mass tourism. Therefore, to re-think 
urbanity and responsibility, one needs to be aware of how the debate about responsibility 
is culturally organized (Appadurai, 1981: 212). 
The questions of communal and economic sustainability of the spatially limited urban 
nucleus of Zadar, the anxiety stirred by the loss of the specific urban way of life, the one 
that is associated with immediacy and familiarity among a rapidly decreasing number of 
155
NEVENA ŠKRBIĆ ALEMPIJEVIĆ AND TOMISLAV OROZ
residents, longing for the time before the mass tourism, pose essential questions in the 
bottom-up understanding of what makes ‘publicness’ of the public urban space of Zadar. 
On the other hand, local political strategies for tourism development promote the idea of 
belonging to the Mediterranean when it comes to the public urban space of Zadar. The 
Mediterranean, popularly associated with the conviviality and easy-going lifestyle usually 
attributed to the people of the Mediterranean, represents the benchmark in tourism mar-
keting strategies. In such complex circumstances, urban public spaces become “crucially 
important in understanding the social, political, and cultural forces engaged in the crea-
tion and change of the orders governing contemporary social life” (Kapferer, 2007: 69). 
Therefore, the imagination of places like Zadar is being constituted at the “criss-crossings 
in the wider power-geometries which constitutes themselves and ‘the global’” (Massey, 
2007: 11). The situation in which the local urban culture is overwhelmed by the tourists 
eager to partake in local urban life makes the question of responsibility and accessibility 
of public space in Zadar highly challenging and troublesome. 
Statistics show that in recent years the process of gentrification combined with the 
laissez-faire philosophy of the booming market of online rental services has led to the 
depopulation of the historic center of Zadar. Today, Zadar figures as desirable scenogra-
phy for tourists looking to hashtag their experiences quickly. In the age of global mobility 
and cheap flights, social media, and tourist ‘discoveries’ of all kinds, the usual portrayal 
of Zadar, which until recently was based on historical landmarks such as the 9th century 
Church of St. Donat, has been overshadowed by ‘viral’ explosion of photos, videos, and 
references of the Sea Organs in general. Zadar Sea Organs, an architectural acoustic instal-
lation accompanied by the nearby light installation The Greeting to the Sun, is one of the 
most prominent examples of how new urban spaces-in-becoming alter the ordinary daily 
rhythm of town and change towns’ representation. 
We sought to understand the relationship between historical heritage and contemporary 
urban installations and how and by whom they are used. Our ethnographic approach to 
understanding the dynamic changes that the post-socialist Adriatic town has undergone 
was inspired by several questions that are becoming increasingly evident in public discourse. 
These questions concern the concept of public space and the problems of responsibility and 
sustainability; they are raised by the increasing number of tourists and the need to preserve 
the historical heritage and the way of life that was emblematic of Zadar. The answers to 
these questions can hardly be agreed upon or solved, but the way the questions are raised 
shows they are also relevant for cultural analysis. At the core of this growing number of 
questions is the issue of urban and public spaces, i.e., of their publicness (for whom, to 
which extent, and who gets excluded); at the same time, the rapid popularity of the Sea 
Organ and Greeting to the Sun triggers their articulation. 
To understand the entanglements that the installation of Sea Organs and Greeting 
to the Sun trigger in public discourse, it is essential to reflect on the history of Zadar 
Promenade and how the residents perceive the town. Although Zadar was established in 
156
RESPONSIBILITY IN PUBLIC SPACE: REMAKING OF TWO CROATIAN CITIES
ancient times, it underwent a radical urban transformation in the second half of the 19th 
century. The current shape of the promenade along the western part of Zadar’s historic 
nucleus resulted from the thorough urban transformation that began in the second half 
of the 19th century and continued in the 20th century. The first step in this urbanistic 
facelift began in 1874, when medieval city walls facing the islands of Ugljan and Pašman 
were demolished, following similar urbanistic tendencies observed in other European cities 
of the time (Petricioli, 1958: 70). By the end of the 19th century, the Austro-Hungarian 
central government coordinated major urban renovations along the coastline and initiated 
the construction of residential and public buildings, mainly in the neoclassical architectural 
style. This ‘opening’ of the medieval town to the water and neighboring islands (Zanki, 
2013: [s.p.]) was reflected not only in the visual identity and urban structure of Zadar 
but also in the way the residents of the historical center used it. Familiar scenes of squares 
within city walls, crowded by pedestrians depicted on postcards and photographs, were 
replaced by the scenes with which most modern tourists can identify. The newly formed 
promenade, or Riva5 as residents call it, became a marker of the new urban identity, a place 
to stroll and socialize with the seasonal rhythm. Kalelarga6 Street, located near the ruins 
of the ancient Roman forum, was active in winter, thus keeping pedestrians away from 
the waves and cold winds from the sea. Riva became a hotspot in summer when strollers 
enjoyed a cool breeze. This seasonal dynamic of Zadar became a marker of the town’s 
identity, pointing to the ambivalence and fragmented rhythm of the urban experience. 
The crowded squares in the historic center and narrow streets contrasted with the vast, 
open horizon that extended from the newly created waterfront. In the following century, 
Zadar continued to dwell on this seasonal ambivalence, that over time became a hallmark 
of urban identity. 
The reshaping of Zadar’s urban space continued during the turbulent 20th century. 
One of the most dramatic events that changed the cityscape occurred in 1944 when the 
town was destroyed in a bombing raid, and more than 70% of the buildings were in ruins 
or completely demolished. In the 1950s, Zadar became a construction site; architects such 
as Božidar Rašica and Neven Šegvić were given the opportunity to redefine the sensitive 
urban structure of Zadar, including the promenade. After the disintegration of Yugoslavia 
in the 1990s, Zadar was again exposed to destruction. This “constant change as a typical 
leitmotif of the urban context of Zadar” (cf. Jukić, Vukić, 2015: 316) was accompanied by 
political, demographic, class, economic, social, and cultural transformations. Therefore, 
rather than preserving historic sites, destruction often enabled reconstruction and trans-
formation of old urban structures for new functions and needs. However, this challenging 
task of adapting new urban projects to historically significant sites (such as the remains 
5 Riva, Italian word meaning coast. The word riva is used in microtoponimy of coastal areas, usually 
to describe a coastal urban promenade. 
6 From the Italian kala, street, and larga wide, meaning “a wide street.” Kalelarga in Zadar is the main 
street in the historical center, in the same direction as the decumanus maximus from ancient times. 
157
NEVENA ŠKRBIĆ ALEMPIJEVIĆ AND TOMISLAV OROZ
Strollers and tourists on the Sea Organs, Zadar, September 2022 (photo by Tomislav Oroz).
Guided tourist group on the Sea Organs, Zadar, September 2022 (photo by Tomislav Oroz).
158
RESPONSIBILITY IN PUBLIC SPACE: REMAKING OF TWO CROATIAN CITIES
of the Roman Forum or the medieval church of St. Donatus) was not problematic in the 
case of Zadar. The interweaving of “old” and “new” was a characteristic symbol of the (re)
building of Zadar. This dynamic relationship simultaneously led to a need for transfor-
mations, as well as conservation and safeguarding. Archeological stone remains from the 
Roman period were often used in the building of medieval churches, including the church 
of the towns’ patron St. Donatus. Something similar happened when the medieval walls 
were demolished after WWI, making possible what architect Nikola Bašić refers to as a 
“‘marvelous and spontaneous mosaic structure”’ (Bašić, 2011: 21) characteristic of Zadar’s 
architectural heritage. 
In 2005, one of the most intensive interventions in the urban space of Zadar was 
the interpolation of Sea Organs and Greeting to the Sun light installation in the north-
western part of the promenade. The author of these contemporary urban art installations 
was architect Nikola Bašić, who identified this specific part of the Riva as static and 
marginal, a kind of “grey area” making the “paradox of the periphery in the city center” 
(Mattioni, 2011: 6). Bašić wanted to create a kind of “spatial dramatization”7 that opposes 
this “claustrophobically blocked” (Vukić, 2011: 12) and “inanimate and neglected space” 
(Mattioni, 2011: 6). To avoid the “tiring character of Riva and its monotonous linearity,”8 
Sea Organs were installed. They consist of white marble stairs that gradually slope down 
to the sea and tubes placed beneath the stairs. In combination with waves, water, and air, 
the tubes produce sounds as a “fourth dimension of space,” making Sea Organs a “music 
scale, materialized in space” (Zanki, 2013: [s.p.]). 
According to Nikola Bašić, the idea was to provoke an interaction with urban space 
that would allow meditative and spontaneous social rituals to come into play with the sur-
rounding urban and natural environment. The “Urban spirituality”9 that Bašić stimulated 
by the sound of the Sea Organs, where one could get in touch with nature, created a place 
of encounter and conviviality for locals and tourists. This phenomenon was amplified in 
2008 when the nearby light installation Greeting to the Sun accompanied the Sun Sea 
Organs. The decades-old Alfred Hitchcock’s reference to the sunset in Zadar as the most 
beautiful in the world inspired Bašić, who envisioned a light installation that mimicked 
the solar system. The central object, 22 meters in diameter, consists of glass panels that 
absorb sun rays and convert them into electricity. At night, the energy is used to put a light 
show along with smaller circular panels in the shape of solar system planets. Unlike the 
Sea Organs, which, according to Bašić, inspire meditation and promote social interaction 
on the Riva as a typically Mediterranean gathering place, the Greeting to the Sun light 
installation was intended to trigger spontaneous and ludic behavior, “bringing you into 
7 Based on the interview with Nikola Bašić in 2009. The copy of the transcript of the interview is avail-
able in the archive of the Department of Ethnology and Anthropology, University of Zadar. 
8 Interview with Nikola Bašić in 2009. See previous footnote.
9 Interview with Nikola Bašić in 2009. See footnote 7.
159
NEVENA ŠKRBIĆ ALEMPIJEVIĆ AND TOMISLAV OROZ
an immaterial environment, with a sensation of swimming on the soil moving under your 
feet” (Bašić, 2011: 32). According to Bašić, the notion of play, central to the Mediterranean, 
comes to the forefront for people in the setting of Greeting to the Sun. “I wanted to affirm 
the phenomenon of play as an incitement for social communication, an initiative for urban 
culture, and a stimulus for a kind of urban hedonism” (ibid.). 
The Sea Organs and the Greeting to the Sun soon became symbols of Zadar, even 
though at the time of their construction no one could have imagined that these new sym-
bols, which were being built in the historical center, could eclipse the then landmark of 
Zadar – the Church of St. Donatus. As soon as tourists began to visit Zadar for the Sea 
Organs and the Greeting to the Sun, the economic aspect became obvious and justified 
the architectural intervention as part of the re-making of the town. Critics from a wide 
range of disciplines grappled with Bašić’s urban installation – from accusations of being 
kitschy and unoriginal (cf. Mlikota, 2008/2009: 307–308) to those who enthusiastically 
recognized it as part of Zadar’s urban identity, on par with monuments of historical sig-
nificance (Mattioni, 2011: 7). Nevertheless, the official acknowledgment came in 2006, 
when Nikola Bašić was awarded the European prize for the design of public urban spaces 
(Premio Europeo del Espacio Público Urbano awarded by Barcelona Center for Contemporary 
Culture). In 2008 he participated in the Venice Biennale (ibid.). 
Night air photo of the Greeting to the Sun light installation with the Sea Organs, Zadar (photo by 
Stipe Surać; Bašić Stelutti, Mattioni, 2011: 94).
160
RESPONSIBILITY IN PUBLIC SPACE: REMAKING OF TWO CROATIAN CITIES
But beyond the more or less official production of space imagined and institutionally 
distributed from the top of the social hierarchy, the question remains whether these ideas 
are rooted in practice. To what extent do specific cultural practices of locals and tourists 
correlate or circumvent the intentions of architects, urban planners, city administration, 
or notable trends in tourism? Does the Sea Organs with The Greeting to the Sun function 
as a public space open to locals and tourists or as a zone of separation? Is the overcrowded 
Riva with Sea Organs and The Greeting to the Sun a place where local and global come 
into interplay or a generator of new centers of sociality relieved of overcrowded tourist buzz? 
Is the process of city re-making only a one-way process, or is it an open-ended activity that 
allows different social agents to participate in the creation of meanings? 
In the case of both urban installations, one cannot answer these questions without 
considering the importance of the historical context and the transformative character of 
Riva. However, suppose one grasps the space as a blank canvas, a mere scenography with 
people as passive consumers – in that case, there is a risk that the framework for cultural 
analysis becomes oversimplified and theoretically superficial. Arjun Appadurai’s warning 
that history produces geographies where imagination is a fundamental human activity 
shows us that locality, even at the city scale, is the result of social agency (Appadurai, 2010: 
9). Despite the differing perception of the Sea Organs or the Greeting to the Sun, their 
integration into the ambivalent and dynamic social urban space of Zadar shows that they 
affect those who engage with them. The seductive acoustic spectacle stirred by Sea Organs 
opens this part of Riva to diverse social actors and triggers spatial experiences beyond the 
usual architectural intentions of the urban space. Relations established between social 
actors and the spatial and acoustic environment contribute to the making of the urban 
space of Zadar. According to Abigail Wood, these visual and auditory elements “participate 
in a broader sensory, aesthetic, and political realm that extends beyond their immediate 
spatial boundaries, reiterating the importance and presence of the full sensorium in the 
urban experience” (Wood, 2013: 293). Whether this part of Riva functions as a playground 
or resting place for travelers who want to take a photo or enter a meditative state or as a 
good swimming spot for locals living nearby, this urban space in-making stirs emotions 
and initiates practices in an unstructured way.10 Despite the safe distancing of locals still 
cautious about their ‘rightful’ place in the urban fabric of Zadar, the transformation from 
“periphery in the city center” (Mattioni, 2011: 6) to a vibrant and potent urban hotspot 
is not only the result of institutionally orchestrated re-making of urban space. Daily ritu-
als and practices defy its monumentality and various attempts to define it in a structured 
10 The scenes of tourists meditatively enjoying their spare of Mediterranean sun on the steps of the Sea 
Organ or enjoying light performance after sunset sparked the buzz of secularization of this urban 
space. Even the archbishop anticipated this trend when he noted the absence of a Christian heritage 
in the complex. As Josip Zanki points out, the religious and ritual aspect of enjoying Sea Organs 
show that this place was emancipated from the strict social norms and ideological guidelines (Zanki, 
2013: [s.p.]). 
161
NEVENA ŠKRBIĆ ALEMPIJEVIĆ AND TOMISLAV OROZ
way. An attempt to resist the notion of ‘public’ appeared in 2008 when the city council 
passed the law prohibiting swimming in Sea Organs. Both installations were defined as 
an “architectural unit,” and even renowned architects like Branko Silađin described them 
as “important urban monuments to life on the Adriatic” (Silađin, 2011: 44). For people 
living near Sea Organs, the perception and usage of the space were very much conditioned 
by their daily routines and swimming breaks, despite the occasional discussions for the 
formal ban. Although the decision is still valid and those who swim near Sea Organs could 
be punished with high fines, the decision is being ignored, allowing residents to use the 
public space as before. In recent years, the high cost of maintaining the glass panels, which 
must be replaced from time to time, has often been an argument for charging visitors for 
admission. However, the implications of this kind of musealization and justification of 
public space, which was snatched away from everyday life, were often at odds with daily 
use, with the intentions of architect Bašić,11 and with the general understanding of what 
the “public” stands for. Therefore, the collision between the bottom-up practices and top-
down strategies shows that these processes, even though formally in opposition, function 
as mutually interrelated as they charge the public discussion of what makes urban public 
space while positioning it “at the centre of dialectic tension” (Mela, 2014: 6).
Weddings that take place on Sea Organs, urban rituals such as high school students 
jumping into the sea after graduation, or the recently invented traditions of throwing panties 
into the sea beneath Sea Organs (instead of coins) (cf. Bašić Stelluti, Mattioni 2011: 103), 
not only point out to diverse practices that often defy official intentions of local authorities, 
but also show that Sea Organ and Greeting to the Sun function as topoi of urban identity. 
According to sociological research presented in the book The Zadar Riva as an Urban Space, 
Riva figures not only as “the most important spot of urbanity” but also as a “fundamental 
generator of urban identity” (Tomić-Koludrović et al., 2014: 9). The results of the study 
show that Riva is one of the most important places in the city center, and its ambivalence 
is demonstrated by the fact that it serves as an escape from the urban bustle and as “an 
important generator of sense of community” (ibid.: 89). Riva’s attractiveness lies in its 
particular ambient features with the open seafront combined with peace and tranquility. 
Sea Organs and Greeting to the Sun are considered the most exciting and attractive places 
on Riva, inviting gathering and socializing (ibid.: 107). 
This constant friction between the private and the public, combined with the ambiva-
lent nature of Riva, shows that Sea Organs and Greeting to the Sun represent an interactive 
public space where different actors (people, nature, urban space) come to participate in the 
ambient dramatization of the urban fabric of Zadar. Whether one wants to drink beer and 
watch the sunset, enjoy the sound of the waves, swim, dance, or close one’s eyes, the end-
less activities that take place in this small space of Zadar redefine the notion of the public 
11 According to the interview with Nikola Bašić, the “publicness” of Sea Organs and Greeting to the 
Sun is particulary relevant in the post-socialist Croatian society marked by transition when, accord-
ing to Bašić, space like this “belongs to all citizens and as such is a place of capital importance.”
162
RESPONSIBILITY IN PUBLIC SPACE: REMAKING OF TWO CROATIAN CITIES
sphere by resisting any attempt to structure the use of urban space. It is also important to 
remember that the Sea Organs and the Greeting to the Sun, although located on the edge 
of the historical center, function as central points in contemporary urban topography.12 
Cultural practices instigated by sound and light effects of this urban installation show 
that the centrality of this seemingly marginal space is being re-negotiated in the process 
of re-making of urban identity. 
CONCLUSION
The two case studies we have dealt with in this text reflect two distinctive types of public 
spaces: one is a square, and the other is a waterfront. By definition, they differ in their 
relationship with the landscape, the mechanisms by which urban imagery is inscribed in 
them, and the behaviors considered proper and expected in their vicinity. However, what 
they have in common are their representative character, branding potential, and publicness: 
both are regarded as metonyms of city buzz and urban lifestyles, spots where the cities show 
their polished and appealing faces both to locals and visitors. The post-socialist context in 
which these two public spaces function makes questions of responsibility relevant in under-
standing the notions of their publicness. However, considering the diverse actors included 
in the production of their publicness, continuous transformation as the dominant motif 
of our two case studies indicates that city-making processes do not function as a one-way 
strategy. Both cases show that bottom-up approaches and policies dispersed from the top of 
the social hierarchy intertwine, overlap, and sometimes oppose each other. The European 
or Mediterranean character of the two cities, so often evoked in the official representa-
tions, shows that their significance does not derive only from declarative naming. Instead, 
practices and experiences in this, up until recently, marginal pedestrian spaces make their 
identity and urban profile. Therefore, their urbanity stems not only from the top-down 
strategies or bottom-up initiatives, nor from their aesthetics or urban settings, but rather 
from the interplay which reflects the dialectics between the individual and collective social 
actors that make places inclusive or exclusive (Mela, 2014: 7). 
In the case of the European Square, a busy downtown crossroads has been transformed 
into a square. However, it gains its character of the square only when people use it as a space 
for gathering, socializing, and participating in a public event, not just for passing by. The 
12 Administratively, Zadar also consists of various islands one can see from the Sea Organs. Although 
physically separated from the historical center, administratively they function as part of the urban 
space. Apart from the island of Ugljan and to some extent the island of Pašman, whose residents 
participate in urban life daily (jobs on the mainland), islands such as Molat, Olib, Silba, Sestrunj, 
and others function administratively as part of the town. Therefore, the marginal position of the 
Sea Organs and Greeting to the Sun is only partially truth, while daily practices, on the other hand 
confirm, their centrality. 
163
NEVENA ŠKRBIĆ ALEMPIJEVIĆ AND TOMISLAV OROZ
square obtained its European etiquette through the location of European institutions, its 
visual identity, and its naming strategy. But it is only through everyday use and practices 
aimed at marking and celebrating the European identity of the city and the state that the 
European dimension of the space is activated, challenged, and given life. The publicness 
of this square-in-becoming derives from the dense network of social relations triggered by 
cultural practices instigated by the square’s centrality. 
Whether it is festivals, protests, tourists visiting the square, everyday activities, or virtual 
platforms, the square’s publicness is constituted through various tactics that oppose, overlap, 
and correlate with the institutionally desired use of the square. In Sea Organs and Greeting 
to the Sun, the centuries-old urban space of Zadar, with Riva as its cultural and identity 
feature, was transformed into a conceptually playful and sometimes even ambivalent space. 
Strolling along the promenade with Sea Organs at its end provoked social interaction and 
collective experience, transforming passive walkers into active creators of meanings. The 
sense of urban identity awakened by Sea Organs and the nearby Greeting to the Sun light 
installation redefined the notion of publicness through constantly renegotiating collective 
and individual, marginal and central, institutional and practical. Both places we have been 
talking about, with their distinctive urban characteristics and transformative nature, are 
presented as ambivalent: as places of inclusion and coming together despite their spatial 
marginality, but also as public spaces whose publicness is renegotiated between different 
actors and contexts. 
REFERENCES
Appadurai, Arjun. 1981. The past as a Scarce Resource. Man N.S. 16 (2): 201–219. DOI: https://doi.
org/10.2307/2801395.
Appadurai, Arjun. 2010. How Histories Make Geographies: Circulation and Context in a Global Perspective. 
Transcultural Studies 1: 4–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11588/ts.2010.1.6129.
Bašić, Nikola. 2011. Urban Retorts. In Zadar: Morske orgulje & Pozdrav Suncu = Sea Organ and Greeting 
to the Sun, eds. Barbara Bašić Stelluti and Vladimir Mattioni, 17–41. Zadar: Marinaprojekt.
Bašić Stelluti, Barbara, and Vladimir Mattioni, eds. 2011. Zadar: Morske orgulje & Pozdrav Suncu = Sea 
Organ and Greeting to the Sun. Zadar: Marinaprojekt. 
Bouchard, Gérard. 2016. Europe in Search of Europeans: The Road of Identity and Myth. Paris: Notre Europe 
– Jacques Delors Institute.
Čorak, Željka. 2011. The Place where the Endless meets the Definitive. In Zadar: Morske orgulje & Pozdrav 
Suncu = Sea Organ and Greeting to the Sun, eds. Barbara Bašić Stelluti and Vladimir Mattioni, 
46–47. Zadar: Marinaprojekt.
Gulin Zrnić, Valentina, and Nevena Škrbić Alempijević. 2019. Grad kao susret: Etnografije zagrebačkih 
trgova. Zagreb: Hrvatsko etnološko društvo – Institut za etnologiju i folkloristiku.
Hanaček, Ivana, and Ana Kutleša, eds. 2015. Urban Festival 13: Natrag na trg! Umjetnost u javnom prostoru: 
prakse i refleksije. Zagreb: [BLOK].
164
RESPONSIBILITY IN PUBLIC SPACE: REMAKING OF TWO CROATIAN CITIES
Hirt, Sonia A. 2012. Iron Curtains: Gates, Suburbs and Privatization of Space in the Post-socialist City. 
Chichester: Wiley – Blackwell.
Horolets, Anna. 2003. Conceptualising Europe Through Metaphors: A Way to Identity Formation? Polish 
Sociological Review 31: 61–80.
Jukić, Tihomir, and Feđa Vukić. 2015. Development Perspective of Zadar: Historic Nuclei, Modern City 
and Sustainable Tourism. Prostor 23 (2): 314–323.
Kahle, Darko. 2004. Građevinski propisi grada Zagreba u razdoblju od 1850. do 1918. godine. Prostor 12 
(2): 203–215. 
Kapferer, Judith. 2007. Constructing a Public Sphere: Materiality and Ideology. Social Analysis 51 (1): 68–85. 
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3167/sa.2007.510106.
Knežević, Snješka. 2006. Donji grad. In Zagrebački leksikon: Vol. 1, eds. Josip Bilić and Hrvoje Ivanković, 
167–175. Zagreb: Leksikografski zavod Miroslav Krleža. 
Konjikušić, Davor. 2015. Trg Europe: Slijepa pjega. In UrbanFestival 13: Natrag na trg! Umjetnost u javnom 
prostoru: prakse i refleksije, eds. Ivana Hanaček and Ana Kutleša, 48–51. Zagreb: [BLOK].
Lefebvre, Henri. 1968. Le Droit à la ville. Paris: Anthropos.
Low, Setha. 1996. Spatializing Culture: The Social Production and Social Construction of Public Space in Costa 
Rica. American Ethnologist 23 (4): 861–879. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/ae.1996.23.4.02a00100.
Massey, Doreen. 2004. Geographies of Responsibility. Geografiska Annaler 86 B (1): 5–18. DOI: https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.0435-3684.2004.00150.x.
Mattioni, Vladimir. 2011. Foreword. In Zadar: Morske orgulje & Pozdrav Suncu = Sea Organ and Greeting 
to the Sun, eds. Barbara Bašić Stelluti and Vladimir Mattioni, 4–10. Zadar: Marinaprojekt.
Mela, Alfredo. 2014. Urban Public Space between Fragmentation, Control and Conflict. City, Territory 
and Architecture 1 (15): 1–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40410-014-0015-0.
Mitchell, Don. 2003. The Right to the City: Social Justice and the Fight for Public Space. New York and 
London: The Guilford Press.
Mlikota, Antonija. 2008/2009. Na razmeđi arhitekture i skulpture: Morske orgulje i Pozdrav Suncu. Annali 
GAA 28–29: 307–321. 
Odbor za imenovanje naselja, ulica i trgova. 2017. Imenovanje trga. Zagreb: Gradska skupština Grada 
Zagreba – Grad Zagreb, January 23. http://web.zagreb.hr/Sjednice/2013/sjednice_skupstine_2013.
nsf/0/65E2A4D6B7CE5615C12580C0004674CB/$FILE/Prijedlog%20za%20imenovanje%20
Europskog%20trga.pdf, access: November 2019.
Perković, Ante. 2008. Orgulje: Nikola Bašić mi je odnio klupu. Zlato i srebro: Časopis za kulturu zavičaja 
grada Zadra i Zadarske regije 1 (1): 19.
Petricioli, Ivo. 1958. Dva tisućljeća zadarskog urbanizma. URBS: Urbanizam, arhitektura, izgradnja, 
graditeljsko nasljeđe 9: 65–71. 
Silađin, Branko. 2011. Out There: Architecture Beyond Building in Zadar. In Zadar: Morske orgulje & 
Pozdrav Suncu = Sea Organ and Greeting to the Sun, eds. Barbara Bašić Stelluti and Vladimir 
Mattioni, 44. Zadar: Marinaprojekt.
Smith, Andrew. 2016. Events in the City: Using Public Spaces as Event Venues. London – New York: Routledge.
Tomić-Koludrović, Inga, Željka Tonković, and Željka Zdravković. 2014. Zadarska riva kao prostor urbanosti. 
Zadar: Sveučilište u Zadru. 
165
NEVENA ŠKRBIĆ ALEMPIJEVIĆ AND TOMISLAV OROZ
Vukić, Feđa. 2011. Natural Mystic Urbana. In Zadar: Morske orgulje & Pozdrav Suncu = Sea Organ and 
Greeting to the Sun, eds. Barbara Bašić Stelluti and Vladimir Mattioni, 12–13. Zadar: Marinaprojekt.
Wood, Abigail. 2013. Urban Soundscapes: Hearing and Seeing Jerusalem. In The Routledge Companion to 
Music and Visual Culture, eds. Tim Shepard and Ann Leonard, 286–293. London and New York: 
Routledge. 
Zanki, Josip. 2013. Promjene identiteta grada. Zarez: Dvotjednik za društvena i kulturna zbivanja, 440: [s.p.]. 
ODGOVORNOST V JAVNEM PROSTORU: 
PRENOVA DVEH HRVAŠKIH MEST
V članku so obravnavane transformacije in (zlo)rabe urbanega javnega prostora v sodobni 
Hrvaški. Avtorja opozarjata na vprašanje odgovornosti, povezano s procesi ustvarjanja mesta, 
vključno z oblastjo in civilno odgovornostjo, s sodelovanjem meščanov v javnem prostoru in 
za javni prostor. Vprašanje je, kaj in kdo naredi javni prostor, da je dejansko javen, in kako. 
Analiza temeljni na etnografskih raziskavah primerov v Zagrebu in Zadru. Raziskava v 
Zagrebu je osredinjena na Evropski trg, novo oblikovani in središčni trg v nastajanju. Zadarski 
primer so Morske orgle, arhitekturni objekt na promenadi, ki je del novega znamčenja mesta. 
Spremembe v teh mestnih krajinah postavljajo vprašanja o družbeno odgovorni arhitekturi, 
razmerju med zgodovinsko dediščino mesta in njegovimi sodobnimi potrebami, o zadregah s 
turistično preplavljenostjo in poblagovljenjem, kakor tudi o odgovornih načinih rabe javnega 
mestnega prostora. 
V obeh primerih se je raziskava osredinila na javne dogodke in prakse kot mehanizme 
vključevanja in izključevanja javnosti in na prostor kot prizorišče, kjer se ponujajo in spoprijemajo 
različni koncepti odgovornosti. Pokazala je, da se procesi in politike od zgoraj, tj. z vrha družbene 
hierarhije, prepletajo, prekrivajo in si včasih tudi nasprotujejo. Evropski ali sredozemski značaj 
mest, na katera tako pogosto opozarjajo uradne predstavitve, kaže, da njun pomen ne izvira le iz 
deklarativnega poimenovanja – njuno identiteto in urbanost bolj ustvarjajo prakse in izkušnje 
v teh donedavna obrobnih prostorih za pešce. 
V primeru Evropskega trga je bilo prometno križišče v središču mesta spremenjeno v trg; ta 
pa pridobi javni značaj le, ko ga ljudje uporabljajo za zbiranje, druženje, udeležbo na javnih 
dogodkih ipd. Z Morskimi orglami je bil stoletja star zadarski mestni prostor spremenjen v 
koneptualno igriv in včasih ambivalenten prostor. Sprehajališče s Pozdravom soncem na robu 
je spodbudilo živahno družbeno interakcijo in in skupnostno izlušnjo, turiste je spremenilo v 
aktivne ustvarjalce pomenov. Občutje mestne identitete, ki so ga zaznamovale Morske orgle, je 
redefiniralo smisel javnega v procesih nenehnega pogajanja med skupnostnim in individualnim, 
obrobnim in središčnim, institucionalnim in praktičnim.
166
RESPONSIBILITY IN PUBLIC SPACE: REMAKING OF TWO CROATIAN CITIES
Oba kraja z značilnimi urbanimi potezami in transformativno močjo je mogoče označiti 
z ambivalenco: kot kraja vključevanja in zbiranja kljub poprejšnji obrobnosti, a tudi kot javna 
prostora, katerih javnost se tke med različnimi akterji in konteksti.
Prof. Dr. Nevena Škrbić Alempijević, University of Zagreb, Department of Ethnology and Cultural 
Anthropology, Zagreb, Croatia, nskrbic@ffzg.hr
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Tomislav Oroz, University of Zadar, Department of Ethnology and Anthropology, 
Zadar, Croatia, toroz@unizd.hr