Reconstruction of Sevastopol: An Inevitable Disaster?

Reconstruction of Sevastopol, following the Nazi’s attack on this vital naval city, started the Soviet’s regime of rebuilding the country’s architecture and infrastructure. The Soviet Union created the Committee on Architectural Affairs; I think this is a testament to the State’s commitment to rebuild cities with the State’s ideal in mind. The Soviet Union wanted these new building to be dedicated to the great heroes such as Marx and Lenin. Streets and squares were renamed in an attempt to return to historical roots. As the article, “To Agitate and to Render Service: Replanning the Hero-City Sevastopol” says, “name changes suggested political shifts.”

A problem with housing emerged as the city of Sevastopol was rebuilt. Although promised adequate housing, overcrowded and infectious residences were overwhelming. The money of the State had gone to other projects and resources to fix these housing dilemmas were in short supply. People began taking matters into their own hands; workers began building housing illegally, without approval of the State. With poor, overcrowded housing came poor hygiene, causing a spike in disease. These health problems could not be fixed due to the lack of equipment such as x-ray to diagnose patients.

Could these health problems have been avoided or with overcrowded, non-regulated housing, was it inevitable?

2 thoughts on “Reconstruction of Sevastopol: An Inevitable Disaster?

  1. If the city was so vital, then why did the state decide to spend money elsewhere? Were they only concerned with rebuilding the naval part of the city and then moving on? I believe some of these problems could have been avoided if the state had planned things out a bit better. I feel like you could have gone into a bit of more detail with the housing and the health issues a bit more. What kind of diseases popped up in the city?

  2. Disease is always inevitable, it is merely exacerbated by living conditions in which the bacteria and germs are in an environment which serves as a catalyst for their spreading. Could many infections have been prevented as a result of proper housing including on or above par sanitation? Absolutely. Food should be mentioned here as a variable for disease prevention as well. Lack of nourishment leads to weakening of the immune system, leaving inhabitants more prone to infection.
    Not to sound harsh, but I thought your summary and discussion questions could have had more substance and been more thought provoking.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *