Fragment of post '89 history

The Revolution (or whatever it was in Bucharest in December '89) brought, directly or indirectly, violence to the Institute of Architecture, where the rebellion manifested itself by involving some or others in a resistance that carried the meaning of deconstruction; a deconstruction that was random, without a program (after all, deconstruction was fashionable in architecture at the time!). I had lived through a lot of events in this institution in the more than 30 years since my admission as a student, and yet it was hard to imagine what was to come: landmarks, both good and bad, were crumbling while new ones, but still both good and bad, were trying to assert themselves. It was obvious that we needed a lucid assessment of what was being lost, what was "going away" and, on the other hand, what could be gained; and how could it be gained, in other words, how could it be rebuilt? Any attempt at reconstruction was partly "killed" by "random" violent events (the IMGB workers' march, the mineriada, the students' strike) which, although external to our institution, penetrated inside it, as a consequence of its location in the center of the capital, but also of a spirit of denial, in a way (for better? for worse?) characteristic of our students.