A socialist city can be identified by its unique structure and form. Typically, this recognition is characterised by the rigid built order, the Soviet mass housing block. As this phenomenon can be found in multiple cities all over the former USSR, it is evident, that the political ideology has manifested itself not only in constrained collectivism, the standardisation of life, but also in its built environment. The ‘living machine has influenced millions of peoples lives and is one of the most significant built urban design plans. Even though the political ideologies varied and can be detected in more detail within the Soviet architecture, the mutual aim was to raise the collective for example by abolishing private ownership of property and land. Although this attempt was to do justice to the rank and file, it also expressed itself in supressed individualism and monotony. Thus, the regnant symbolic order was able to enter peoples way of living on all different levels, it has not been able to penetrate unrestrained, adducing peoples sexuality for example.
This raises the question, if the symptomatic phenomenon of ‘individualism also articulates itself somewhere in the built environment of the Soviet Union? And if so, would it be possible to identify a socialist city by another form, that has been ignored or avoided, as it is defying the order it is embedded in?