Berlin can be considered as a unique city whose history includes vicissitudes of the 20th century. The flourishing at the early 20th century, the war at mid-century and the revival in the late 20th century, are all displayed in its city pattern. After the fall of the Berlin Wall, the city welcomed an upsurge in economical and architectural construction. This brought about new developing for the city and it proposed new objectives. As a famous historical city, it has to bear the role that history assigned to it. As the capital of Germany, it contains the responsibility and mission in contemporary time. Complicated as these, in the newly-built, renovated and restored projects in the past 20 years, they all indicated the German people’s concern and choice about history, current situation and future.
1, The guideline of “critical reconstruction”
Before the Second World War, the urban form of Berlin was a typical spontaneously-developed form which dated from the Medieval Ages and then evolved into modern city with squares, axis and geometric blocks. Such closed blocks with inner courtyards became a unique characteristic of the texture of Berlin. [1]
The war caused devastating damage to Berlin. Nearly 70% of buildings and the blocks were destroyed. The post-war reconstruction developed in two completely independent systems: In West Berlin, many avant-garde architects regarded Berlin as a test bed to realize their modernistic urban design concepts. As a result, wide roads, high-rise office buildings and modern landscape were built during this time, forming a typical representative mode in reconstruction of Western Berlin. In East Berlin, the step of Modernism was developing comparatively slow. Influenced by conservative thoughts, many buildings were designed in the classical style. However, Modernism Architecture still played an important role in East Berlin.
This situation lasted for more than 20 years until many city planners began to realize the shortcomings of modernism. In the 1980s, a new mode of development, by Josef Paul Kleinhus, known as “critical reconstruction” is proposed to change the situation. This principle was enacted as design criteria for IBA in 1987, aiming to define the “central role of the city” and “invent the contemporary equivalent”. The goals included a return to traditional urbanism, with building size limited to one block, and building codes that encourage development that mimics pre-war Berlin.[2] Development schemes that preserve or restore pre-war street patterns were preferred. Stone and ceramic exteriors were favored over steel and glass. The height of cornices was 22 meters and the height of roof was no more than 30 meters. [3]This design theory was a response to the many failed urban redesign projects in both sides of Berlin during the Cold War; rather than attempt to design a completely new city, proponents of critical reconstruction want to return to the functionality of the pre-war city. It wanted to sew the deep rift of modern and traditional buildings, in order to restore the complete urban structure of Berlin. This principle severely influenced the rebuilding of the space which had disappeared.
Pariser Platz, which started to built in 1990, was a representative example following that guideline. The platz was supposed to recall the appearance of the previous form of the square in terms of the height, volume, the relationship between buildings, and the platz space enclosed by them. whether the three-storey composition in Das Palais, or grey granite base in French Embassy, the courtyard layout in DZ Bank, or the glazing elevation of Academy of Art Berlin, we can all see the architects’ compromise to the principle of “critical reconstruction”.
2, Rebuild the failed city center
50 years ago, the construction of the Berlin Wall divided the city into two parts. A void space with a 100 meter wide width thought the city center and destroyed the original urban fabric. The Berlin Wall cut off 192 streets, 32 railways and 3 high-ways.[4] The original city center was reduced to a wasteland. The Potsdamer Platz, Parase Platz and the new federal zone are all along the Berlin Wall. As a result, in the reconstruction process, the challenge is to integrate the two parts, not only in terms of physical level, which was the current city situation formed by different thoughts and condition, but also in terms of mental level, which is to reunite the culture and recognized of different groups of people, which has become the prominent mission for Berlin.
The reconstruction started with Potsdamer Platz and Leipziger Platz. The Potsdamer Platz was the busiest transportation center in Europe. With the construction of the Berlin Wall in the 1960s, along the intra-city frontier, Potsdamer Platz now found itself physically divided in two. What had once been a busy intersection had become totally desolate. In the design competition for the redevelopment of Potsdamer Platz, Hilmer & Sattler won the first prize. Their project recalled the octagonal square shape which used to occur in Leipziger Platz. And it used an enclosed layout, trying to create a familiar atmosphere with the courtyard. The whole site was divided into one small block unit, which was 50*50m, in order to meet the requirements of functional flexibility. The height of the buildings was no more than 35m, and there were no high-rise buildings.[5] This concept embodied the criteria of “Critical Reconstruction”. It tried to absorb the essence of the ancient features of Berlin while making it into the symbol of new Berlin.
The reconstruction of Potsdamer –Leipziger Platz had political and commercial significance to the city: First, this area is located on the boundary of east and west, by making these areas into a transportation junction, the movement of people promoted the integration of the two parts, just like a button. Additionally, because of the important position in history, the reconstruction not only represented the beginning of a revival, but also the symbol of unification of East and West Berlin. Furthermore, the Potsdamer Platz became the commercial center of the city, thus absorbing investment capital from all over the world. By making these areas into a multi-functional urban complex, and transportation junction, it promoted the communication between the east and west parts of Berlin, contributing to the integration of the two.
Not far from Potzdamer Platz, is Lehrter Bahnhof, which is a real transportation center of Berlin. It connects both the railways inside the city and outside city. As of 2006, the station was used by InterCityExpress, InterCity, RegionalExpress, Regional Bahn and S-Bahn trains. The upper part of the station, with the east-west tracks, is part of the Berlin Stadtbahn, with trains leading to locations like Hanover or Cologne. The subterranean station, which lies in the north-south Tiergarten tunnel, offers long distance services to Hamburg, Leipzig or Munich. The station is presently served only by the U55 shuttle (opened August 2009), which is connected to the rest of the U-Bahn network inside the city.[6] At the same time, it has a more public function, which makes it a commercial center rather than a simple station. There are many commercial functions such as newsstand, Cafe, gift shop, supermarket, and restaurant. It welcomes anybody to get into it, not only the passengers. And the opening hours are quite different from other places, most of them are allowed to reopen on the weekends and holidays. (According to the law, many retail spaces in other places are only allowed to open in a certain period of time). By this method, it promotes a personal exchange inside and outside Berlin thus promoting the integration of East and West Berlin.
These changes to the city center are changing Berlin’s structure too. The Potsdamer Platz and Leipziger Platz became the new cultural and economic center for the city. In addition, they formed a new city development axis. One is from Potsdamer Platz to the Lehrter Bahnhof, going by Reichstag buildings, the other one is from Unter den Linden to Alexander platz. The two axes intersect at Brandenburg Gate, forming a “T” type city axis. Undoubtedly, this axis promotes the development of the neighborhood.
3, Compromise to politics and economy
From the later development of Potsdanmer Platz, things began to change. The government divided the site into four parts and sold them to four companies, two of which were Sony and Daimler-Benz, who both developed these districts into an urban complex. Although the functions were quite similar to each other, the design concepts were dramatically different. The Sony Center was very modern look while the Daimler-Benz center was comparatively low key. The reason for this was Sony company didn’t think the “critical reconstruction” criteria were in accordance with their high-tech brand image. [7]Such influence by corporations was inevitable. In Renzo Piano’s overall planning, other than the inclusion of high-rise buildings, he still followed the guideline of Hilmer’s project.
When the reconstruction fever of Potsdamer Platz has not yet receded, Alexander Platz, its significance of political and economic began to get attention. At first, in the initial proposal of re-development, Alexander Platz was defined as the commercial center. This was very ironic because Alexander Platz used to be the political center of East Berlin. Perhaps because of the political reasons, and the government decided to completely erase the history of East Berlin, They then allowed the competition in full accordance with the requirements of the developer, which was a modern square with high-rise buildings.
In the winning project by Hans Kollhof, only two buildings of early modernism (by Pete Behrens) were retained. They overlooked all the history in Eastern Berlin, and it was an entire overthrow of the original district. [8]Kollhof’s design theory was an image of American city planning thoughts. In the northern edge of the Alexander platz, on both sides of Berlin, 57th Avenue, there are air tight skyscrapers lining the street. In terms of architectural style, these high-rise buildings’ facades were quite similar to Rockefeller Center. The attitude towards the Alexander Platz induced a debate about the impact of political and commercial issues to the reconstruction of the city. Are they going to deny all the history in Eastern Berlin? The results of Alexander Platz competition caused controversy to the public. Although the objection of government officials and local residents delayed the construction plan, the project was completed in 2000.
In fact, the Alexander Platz is not the first instance that caused such controversy. At the beginning of German reunification, the Berlin government dismantled the former Foreign Ministry building of Eastern Berlin. It is located in Berlin's city center, an elegant decent modern building. Such a building could serve the federal government. However, they were not willing to use the production of Eastern Berlin. They prefer new construction or exterior of the building with a 19th-century look. East Germany's Foreign Ministry building in 1995 were removed. The reason was that the height of the building is higher than the surrounding buildings, thus undermining the overall sense of that historical sites. This site was then replaced by a modern internal office building with a 19th’s century facade.
Coincidentally, at the Spreeinsel, the cradle of history in Berilin, the Palast der Republic which was built by Eastern Berilin, was experiencing the same thing. In the Schloss Platz, there used to be Stadtschloss, which was built in 1443. After being removed by of Eastern German government, the Palast der Republik was built for Parliament. In the 1970s, the buildings suffered the problem of asbestos pollution, and the government removed all the buildings in the platz, then the future of Palast der Republik provoked heated debate. [9]Some believe that Palast der Republik needed to be removed and the old Stadtschloss should be reconstructed, in order to revoke the sense of history, Some people hoped to maintain the old building, some people hoped that the place could be rebuild into a public place. In the next ten years, this project was facing great argument and criticism, and the being interrupted by the opposition of its citizens. In 2002, the government finally voted to reconstruct of Palast der Republik, to recover its original appearance.[10] Therefore, although the Palast der Republik carries a special period of memory and history and it was an important symbolic recognition of their identity, the government still continued to dismantle it.
In fact, not only the federal government possessed a negative attitude towards the architecture and city planning in Eastern Germany, some architects from Western German believed that these buildings need to be removed. They think that many of their projects were against the criteria of “critical reconstruction”. But at the same time, from the aspect of the historical preservation, buildings from different times all need to be maintained because they are a witness to their origin, development, and conclusion. In addition, “critical reconstruction” is an ambiguious concept. Taking Foreign Ministry as an example, the official excuse of removing this building is: it is higher than its neighborhood, and then a classical look buildings was built to replace that. It seems like imitating classical principle is critical reconstruction. What is certain is that these architects advocated the removal of typical Eastern Germany is that political factors played an important role: remove traces of the socialist East Germany. As can be seen from these example, the “critical reconstruction” adherenced by the government is not fairly executed to each project. Was it fair criteria? In some cases (eg, when assessing the former East Germany's construction products), it become the reason to eliminate the East Germany buildings. This proposed an important question to people, that is, should we preserve the history selectively, or preserve the history completely? We believe that any aims to erase a certain period of its existence which we do not want it to have been existed, will created more void in the history, because no one can fix and repeat history.
On the other hand, we can see that German government has a prudent attitude towards the reconstruction project. The competition of Alexander Platz started in 1993, and it was finally legislated to built in 2000. The debate of Palast der Republik lasted even longer, which dates back to 1990, and the debate was so severe that it even induced a conference in 2000.[11] A group of architects, politicians and scholars participated to discuss the future of Palast der Republik. Even with this forum, many East German buildins still can not escape the destiny of being demolished. This reflects that in Germany, the political power of Federal Germany always prevails.
4, Image of Government
Design of the new federal zone is highly political, and thus the process from design to construction was strictly controlled by the federal government. Before the competition began, the Berlin government had a clear requirements for this area, it should not only integrate this district into the city's existing structure as much as possible, and the new structure will split up the space which has separated for decades, but also symbolize the freedom and democracy in Germany. Axel Schultes’ design eventually won the first prize. In this project, buildings are designed forming a belt shape which connecting the east and west Berlin. [12]It makes it easy to think about a bridge, or a band, hence the name Band des Bundes. It clearly demonstrates the significance of the reunification of Germany. "Bridge" is the spirit of the German government reflected in the physical space, symbolizing that after the unity of East and West Germany, the government tried to set up connection between the former East Germany and West Germany, and the connection between government and its citizens.
In Schultes’ design, the Reichstag buildings had a very remarkable position. Since 1992, the German government has prepared a series of public design competition intended to rebuilding it, and wanted it to become a political symbol of the new Germany. Foster finally won the prize because of outstanding democracy concept. Do not rebuild the dome of the classical pattern, so that the body of the buildings remain low key. And create the a large-scale lawn as the public place in front of the old building. After introducing the semi-elliptical dome in Calatrava’s project, people can take the escalator to get the highest point highest, and look down the government. And all in the urban landscape of Berlin at the foot of the building. The Reichstag buildings symbolize the political transparency, as Eb Diepgen, the Mayor of Berlin, responsed “The present challenge also entails finding proportions of a naturally human scale urban space which can bestow identity on a city torn in half for so long, provide a sense of trust and grant a feeling of well-being of this remains to be accomplished within this decade and not in some distant Utopia.” [13]
Conclusion
In the history of Berlin, the Berlin Wall set a barrier to the east and west part of Berlin for a long time. In the contemporary reconstruction project, the government tried to recover the old structure of the city, in order to diminish the gap between the two parts. In these process, the government of Berlin showed great respect to the history, but because of the political environment, many of the projects compromised to the politics. And at the same time, the government tried to convey a message to its citizen and even the whole world, that is, Berlin nowadays has become a transparent, democratic and humanistic city.
Note
[1] McCollum, Ian. “West Germany and East Berlin. ” Architects' journal v. 125, Jan. 3, 1957 p. 9
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_reconstruction
[3] Frank Roost. “Berlin’s Critical Reconstruction: Benefits and shortcomings of the Effort to Regain Traditional Urban Qualities”. Time and Architecture, v. 77, 2004
[4] http://www.wall-berlin.org
[5] Alan Balfour. “Heinz Hilmer and Christoph Sattler: Potsdamerplatz”. In World Cities Berlin, Great Britain by Academy Editions, 1995, p231
[6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Hauptbahnhof
[7] Alan Balfour, “Berlin Desired.” In World Cities Berlin, Great Britain by Academy Editions, 1995, p67
[8] Frank Roost, “Berlin’s Critical Reconstruction: Benefits and shortcomings of the Effort to Regain Traditional Urban Qualities”, Time and Architecture, v. 77, 2004, p57
[9]http://www.schoolvoorjournalistiek.com/europe/?p=2289
[10] Hans, Stimmann. “Vom Plan Zum Bauwerk: Bauten in der Berliner Innenstadt nach”, translated by Ying Chen, Press: Verlagshaus Braun 2000, P20-21
[11]http://www.schoolvoorjournalistiek.com/europe/?p=2289
[12] Alan, Balfour. “Axel Schultes with Charlotte Frank: Spreebogen” In World Cities Berlin. Press: Great Britain by Academy Editions, 1995,p313
[13]http://www.alanbalfour.com/books/berlin/chapter7/
Bibliography
Frank Roost. “Berlin’s Critical Reconstruction: Benefits and shortcomings of the Effort to Regain Traditional Urban Qualities”. Time and Architecture, v. 77, 2004
Schmaling, Sebastian. “The critical reconstruction of Berlin. ” Harvard design magazine, n.23, 2005 Fall-2006 Winter, p.24-30
McCollum, Ian. “West Germany and East Berlin.” Architects' journal v. 125, Jan. 3, 1957 p. 9-11
Schnell, Angelika. “Enduring (post)modernism: rebuilding Berlin.” Town planning review, v. 29, 1959, p. 207-226.
Buttlar, Adrian von. “Berlin's castle versus palace: a proper past for Germany's future?” Journal of historic preservation history, theory, and criticism. v.4, n.1, 2007 Summer, p.12-29
“Building Berlin 2002.” A + U: architecture and urbanism 2002 Sept., n.9 (384), entire issue (150 p.)
Kienzle, Lorenz. “Delight Potsdamer Platz.” Architectural review, v. 205 issue 1223, 1999, p. 82.
Alan Balfour. World Cities Berlin, Great Britain by Academy Editions, 1995