Master dissertation by Marie-Julie Willaert

This master dissertation offers a critical reinterpretation of the historiographical treatment of Brussels’ transformation into the European capital. While the 1958 World’s Fair served as a catalyst for the vision of ‘a world for a better life of mankind’ and marked the start of the construction the  new capital, it also signaled a fundamental shift in the building industry. In line with the American-inspired urban planning ideal, large parts of the Brussels urban fabric were cleared to make way for modernist towers and large-scale automobile infrastructure. This radical nature of urban development has contributed to a narrow and static image of the city in historiography. Since the late sixties, Brussels had predominantly been interpreted, and criticized, solely through political, planological and social activist lenses. The latter remained largely confined to narratives that sought to give voice to the residents displaced by rampant demolition. The notion of ‘Brusselisation’ soon emerged as a symbolic shorthand for the growing critique on the chaotic and destructive nature of urban planning during the period between the sixties and eighties. However, little attention has been paid to the reductionist character of this definition and its corresponding historical framing. The actors traditionally considered in this process are thus limited to residents, architects, urban planners, and policymakers. This thesis therefore foregrounds an often overlooked actor: the construction worker. By centering this perspective, it becomes possible to unsettle the conventional narrative surrounding Brussels’ post-war development. Through a bottom-up approach, an alternative reading of the Brussels building site emerges as a ‘chantier invisible’ - a meaningful lens that not only enables a visualisation of daily reality on-site, but also allows us to trace the long-term effects of this period on contemporary construction practices.

Drawing inspiration from authors such as Christine Wall, Linda Clarke, Nicolas Jounin, Jacob Paskins and Adrian Forty, oral history is employed as a critical and innovative research strategy. However, oral history is not treated as a stand-alone tool, but rather in dialogue with archival research and visual material, resulting in a methodologically broad and integrated approach. This methodological blend culminates in a three-part structure, in which construction practice itself becomes a historical lens. The first section explores how the process of Brusselisation left its mark on the technological evolution of construction methods. The second foregrounds the neglected role of labour migration: a systematically organised and mobilised workforce that proved essential to the materialisation of the capital. Finally, these two thematic threads are brought together through analysis of safety on the construction site, and how this case has left a lasting imprint on the lived reality of the building site today.

To this day, it remains unclear how the upscaling of the city was mirrored on the level of the construction site. Was this architectural upscaling technically and organizationally prepared? In what ways did the process shape the day-to-day reality on site? What traces of this transformation remain embedded in current construction culture? Was the Brussels planning machine merely a bureaucratic construct, or also an operational force on the ground?