THE DRESDNER NEUMARKT SQUARE: AN EXAMPLE
OF CONTEMPORARY POLEMICS AND CULTURAL PHILOSOPHICAL CONCEPTS
Hans Joachim Neidhardt
The
public discussion about building a modern Gewandhaus on the Dresdner
Neumarkt touches upon fundamental questions. Indeed, although today
the historical reconstruction of this history -laden center has been
largely accepted, some architects and architectural critics believe
that now finally also "our modern times" should be given the opportunity
to find expression. From their standpoint, a modern contrast to all
of the resurrected patrician houses from the baroque period must come
forward even if it is in the form of a crosswise lying cube directly
opposite the Frauenkirche. We are urged to have the courage to be provocative.
However,
is this sort of provocation at all sensible in this location and who
wants it? Would it not be more consistent to support, in this truly
small area, the reconstruction of a unified core piece of old Dresden
without any ifs, ands or buts? Isn't it more responsible, more sensitive
and indeed also smarter here to make an exception in favor of modesty
and renounce "contrast" and "provocation"?
This
schizophrenic attitude as well as the city planing, is making out of
the Neumarkt (over whose approaching historical identity so many are
troubling themselves) a kind of hermaphrodite. The concept of rehabilitating
the old cityscape on this single, unique spot should not be put in question.
The reconstructed Neumarkt is a widely understood symbol against the
ever more pervasive cultural globalization, which, in the case of city
architecture, expresses itself as a form of esthetic leveling out. The
proposed modern Gewandhaus is certainly an interesting, high quality
structure. Yet its form has no special relationship to Dresden, and
could be built everywhere in the world. Here the courage to abstain
should be valued more highly than a questionable courage to adopt global
fashion. We prefer to see "modern contrast" with the historic Neumarkt
on the Postplatz Square.
The
criticism regarding the lack of modernity, as well as of the lack of
architectural quality largely falls short because it is frequently based
on an understanding of the problem which is too narrow. What , after
all, are we talking about? The architect, Wolfgang Hänsch, who speaks
disarmingly of a "spiritual problem of the Dresden inhabitants" is thinking
actually in the right direction, but yet does not recognize the broad,
deep rooted relevance of the matter which is being fought out in Dresden
as a representative example, but which goes far beyond this single instance.
It is therefore necessary, to take the question of the "Why" and "How"
of the new construction of this historic location and place it on its
feet, not its head. Only then will the actual task at the Neumarkt be
apparent. And it reveals itself to be a social problem in the first
instance with a thoroughly philosophical background, which has long
since shown itself to be Europe wide in nature and which, in this rapidly
changing world, is putting strong pressure on our understanding of history
and culture.
Flight
from History
The question of the spirit and form of the reconstruction of our cities,
which were destroyed in the war 1939/45, vehemently occupied the Germans
in the 1950s. For differing ideological reasons, it was answered in
both East and West overwhelmingly with a veto [of the old] and a decision
for new building, which implied the demolition of the most severely
damaged historical city centers. In this connection, Theodor Adorno
speaks in his lecture of 6 November 1959 in Wiesbaden on the theme:
"What does renovating the past mean?" of the shrinking consciousness
of historical continuity in Germany, a symptom of that societal tendency
toward the weakening of the "I", and of the "suspicious attitude towards
the loss of history". This German development after the Second World
War corresponds with the observation made in the USA of the lack of
acquaintanceship of Americans with history, and leads to the frightful
picture of humanity without a memory. Adorno sees in it a symptom of
an unstoppable development of the capitalistic trading society for which
history merely means ballast and nothing more. In terms of exchange
value, the dimension of time does not apply to something which is timeless.
Time and remembrance are eliminated as useless irrational leftovers
of an outmoded society. For Germans 1945 means the extinguishing of
time and memory and also the relief-bringing refusal to work out their
history. This was expressed in the reconstruction of our cities - at
least in West Germany - in a flight to the purely functional and unhistorical
modern, which as an architectural style in western architecture, initially
threw out every connection with tradition. Today the shocking lack of
interest in history, especially of the younger generation, is also bound
up with the putting aside, indeed the condemnation of every kind of
tradition by the so-called 1960s movement.
Loss
of historic Architecture as "Phantom Pain"
Never before has a war caused such all-embracing loss of architectural
monuments as did the Second World War. The 'eradication" of entire cities,
especially however their historic centers, was aimed not only at the
population but also at the same time at extinguishing their history
which was analogous to the castration of their self-image as political/ethnic
communities. As can be seen, the consciousness of the losses suffered
disappeared at the latest in the generation of the grandchildren of
the participants. With the modern reconstruction of the historical city
areas, the memory of the old structures was rapidly lost and with it
the remembrance of the material testimony to one's own history and culture,
which Hermann Hesse spoke of as "a great, noble possession" whose destruction,
" robbed the upbringing environment of future generations , and thus
the spiritual world of these descendents, of an irreplaceable educational
and strengthening influence, without which a human being can indeed
lead an impoverished life, but one which is a hundred fold reduced and
cramped. " There can be only one alternative to this: namely, to win
back these city areas and cityscapes in order to again take possession
of them for ourselves and future generations." This is especially evident
in the case of Warsaw, which in 1944 as the capital of the Polish nation,
was leveled by SS units. The reconstruction of it historic old town
and its royal palace was, besides being an enormous achievement of historic
monument preservation, a political act of great existential symbolic
power, which had absolutely nothing to do with maudlin nostalgia. The
Poles knew full well what they were doing. They knew that their nation
and its great modern capital would not be able to live without its centuries
old heritage. And even if this history-weighted new Stare Miasto from
1951-56 is a copy, nevertheless it has long since acquired a patina
and today is a very lively, much loved center of city life. In the meantime,
it has been recognized and designated by UNESCO as a world cultural
heritage location.
Many other cities
in all other parts of Europe affected by the war have, in similar situations,
taken similar decisions. As additional especially concise examples,
one could name: Ypre in Belgium (after the First World War), French
Saint Malo, Danzig, Stettin, Breslau and Marienburg in Poland, but also
Münster and Freiburg in West Germany. The approval of these projects
by the inhabitants was justified.
The Dresdner Neumarkt
- A history laden Place
Dresden's destiny and its problems are comparable. After the radical
destruction of the city in February 1945, the danger arose for a time
that it would be rebuilt as a so-called "major socialist city" with
the loss of it historic fabric sealed for good. Luckily, things turned
out differently. Due to great efforts by courageous personalities, and
not without a number of battles, parts of the famous old town in the
vicinity of the Theater Square and the Brühlsche Terrace could be preserved
and reconstructed. The preservation of the ruins of the Frauenkirche
was a lucky accident as was the refusal to build in its vicinity, namely
the Neumarkt. Here was once the very heart of the community. After the
peaceful revolution and reunification, the unique opportunity was presented
to restore its historic grandeur with the new configuration which has
now been announced. For, indeed, this one half square kilometer of city
area with the famous domed building at its center was once a world renowned
architectural ensemble, stamped with the architectural style of the
18th century and heavy with history. The only sensible way to once again
anchor it in the consciousness of the Dresdeners is also the most daring
i.e. scientifically exact reconstruction. For how else can we convincingly
keep alive the remembrance of the occurrences which this square has
witnessed in the course of centuries, and of all the famous figures
who have lived here or passed time here as visitors? What other place
would remind us in the future of the Prince Elector's chancellor, Nikolaus
Krell, the composer Heinrich Schütz, the painter Adam Friedrich Oeser,
the archeologist Johann Joachim Winckelmann, the senior court orchestra
conductor Johann Gottlieb Naumann, the goldsmith Johann Melchior Dinglinger,
and the Russian prince Putjatin, who all lived in the Neumarkt and of
Arthur Schopenhauer who dwelt in the Schlossstrasse? How splendid that
the Salomonis apothecary shop exists once more which became famous because
of the mineral water discoverer August Struve and his backer Theodor
Fontane. In the former Hoymschen Palace there has existed since 1820
the social and music society known as "Harmonie" where Carl Maria von
Weber and Gottfried Semper came and went. Another center of musical
performances was the festival hall in the Hotel de Saxe. Here as well
as in the Hotel Stadt Rom, the Hotel Stadt Berlin and the British Hotel
prominent visitors to Dresden such as Frederic Chopin, Fyodor Dostoyewski
and Karl Marx found lodging. How could we better conjure up the genius
of these places than by rebuilding the houses and palaces in which this
spirit was housed? No one seriously believes that rebuilding around
the Frauenkirche a "little Rotterdam" would be the appropriate monument
for this wealth of historical associations. The political parties sitting
in the city council as representatives of the citizenry have long since
recognized this and helped the decision makers towards the proper course.
Horror on The Neumarkt?
Thus, recently a critical essay about the current construction was delivered
which was directed both against historical "stage scenery" and failed
modern architecture. With justice it found fault with the contemporarily
configured shopping passage in the Court of Quarter I (QF). Our "horror"
about it nevertheless was held within bounds because it had already
been used up in connection with the unsuccessful, indeed misplaced attempts
at modernism around the Neumarkt with such buildings as Advanta-Riegel
the cheaply made Cosel Palace, the underground garage entrance in front
of the Kurländer Palace, the flight of stairs at the Landhaus, and the
reduced structures on the Altmarkt. After these either banal or miscarried
examples of the latest architecture in this sensitive city center, (the
sight of which is unfortunately not hidden, as it is with Quarter QF,
in an inner courtyard) our level of expectation was rather low. Whether
a modern Gewandhaus would improve the total picture of the Neumarkt
may well be doubted. As regards the reconstructed historic building,
there are, as always, good, halfway tenable, and unacceptable solutions.
The reasons for this are as different as the complexity of the building
task. Since the so-called Charter of Dresden from 1984 regarding the
very nature of historic monuments, there is hardly any doubt even among
experts that, following the destruction of broad areas by the Second
World War, the rebuilding of annihilated structures in a form true to
the originals under specific circumstances is a difficult and serious
construction project - as the above-mentioned examples demonstrate.
Whoever, following the successful archeologically accurate reconstruction
of the Dresden Frauenkirche, still uses the stupid word "Disneyland"
does not know what he is talking about. A reconstruction first becomes
problematic when it is falsified and its location is changed. The degree
to which this occurs increases unavoidably with the passage of time.
The reasons for this are, besides advances in building techniques, above
all new building requirements and legal regulations as well as new use
concepts. The chief cause of the unsatisfying quality of the rebuilt
areas on the Neumarkt is the result of the laws of the free market with
its exclusive focus on rentability and the need to amortize invested
capital. In the Neumarkt, this has expressed itself in the form of a
trend towards cheap building methods and unacceptable limitations on
materials in place of the solid construction of the historic models.
The liberal "Laissez-faire" attitude towards investors who want above
all here to build with an eye to profitability implicitly raises the
danger that they will be indifferent to the interests of the community
with respect to this special place. On the Neumarkt, in any event, it
would have been worth it to proceed with a more decisive imposition
of criteria on the contractors and their architects, most of whom were
prepared to cooperate and discuss matters. Unfortunately, right up to
the present, the city government has failed to grant the force of law
to its meritorious Neumarkt regulations, with the result that the architectural
advisory council and also the city decision makers have remained toothless
tigers. The seriousness and the efficiency of city planning has to be
questioned when it fails to impose strict directives for certain criteria
and construction quality on the most sensitive place in Dresden , and
when its motto is "the city cannot afford to antagonize potential builders
through high quality requirements." (Minister for Construction Fessenmayr).
"It is an unforgivable omission that the planned extension of the Leitbauten
(key buildings) has never been seriously pursued." (Annette Friedrich,
former city planner in Dresden).
One must thus be
even more thankful for that which responsible investors have nevertheless
done on the Neumarkt. Whoever has experienced the miserable steppe between
the Johanneum and the Albertinum has to feel elation at the view from
the Judenhof of the resurrected Frauenkirche and the beautiful curve
of the façade fronts with the Hotel Stadt Berlin, the Hammerschen, the
Weigelschen House and the "Golden Ring".
I think that the
majority of Dresdeners are not anti-modern petit bourgeois for whom
only the "creation of a homey feeling of wellbeing " (quote) is important,
even if they would like to feel at home in their inner city area. They
are absolutely capable of appreciating their historical center as well
as their modern state parliament building, their new congress hall and
their new synagogue. But they have always had the feeling that not everything
is possible at one location. The new Dresden is open to many things,
but the city must show character and image. There, where contemporary
buildings belong, as for example on the Postplatz, daring , a rich imagination
and quality should reign. There, where history should dominate, it should
be carried through with strength and decisiveness. Only in this way
can excitement be created and the desired dialogue come into existence.
The "Gesellschaft
Historischer Neumarkt" (Society for the historic Neumarkt)
Given the fact that the (governmental) historic monument protection
office has largely held itself aloof from the discourse about the high
level which should be required of construction on the Neumarkt, and
the city government does not trust itself to do anything, the tenacious
warnings and demands of the Neumarkt Society regarding conscientious
dealings with the historic predecessors and their high quality transplantation
are of especially important status. Ten years ago that small initiative
group coalesced within the Dresden Historic Society and in 1999 it reconstituted
itself as the Neumarkt Society. The goals which it espoused at that
time when only the Frauenkirche construction site dominated the otherwise
unreconstructed area, have long since be realized. Today, as before,
the Society is dedicated to a view of the Neumarkt in which, out of
the former quarters and streets, there should newly arise once again
structures decorated with oriel windows, as well as culturally significant
lead buildings, but also buildings in the present day architectural
vernacular. (Gunter Just, former Minister for Construction). The Society
now has over 600 enrolled members and unnumbered sympathizers throughout
the world. When, in 2002, a plebiscite sponsored by the Society for
the historic Neumarkt and a legally binding building code resulted in
an overwhelming 63,000 favorable votes, it was declared invalid because
of certain formulations in the documents and was ignored. However, the
Frankfurt journalist, Dankwart Guratzsch, called the Dresdeners and
their city, thanks to the "unshakeable farsighted thinkers in the Neumarkt
Society, a model and the avant garde advance guard for all of Germany",
the "young movement" for the rehabilitation of the historic Neumarkt
and he described the plebiscite as one of the most unusual ever. When
the German-American world citizen and Nobel Prize winner, Günter Blobel
describes the Dresden initiative as revolutionary, he refers to the
courage to break through those conventions which in the last 60 to 80
years, have reigned as an uncompromising dogma and credo favoring an
anti-historical, contemporary city core concept in city planning, especially
in Germany.
City Planning,
Monument Protection and Changing Values
Many cities which
in the 1950s and 60s of the past century cleared away their heavily
damaged historic centers and then allowed them to be replaced with new
structures in the contemporary style of the times, today regret their
decisions. The "Modern" of those times has long since become unmodern
and unsightly, because it wears out quickly and has a short half life.
The reasons for this failure lie not only in the emotional coldness
which exudes from absolutely cube-like edifices. They are also unable
to reconstitute "the complexity of city structure which has evolved
over centuries. Clearly, the vocabulary of modern architecture is simply
insufficient for this" (Architect Dieter Schölzel). In contrast, tradition
has again become authoritative and the model," because it has a better
and more experienced understanding of how to meet the needs of human
beings, than does the hubris of ivory tower visionaries." (Friedrich
Dieckmann). For some years now a change in thinking is in progress throughout
Germany. The tendency of globalization towards uniformity is being opposed
by regional idiosyncrasy. The city of today wants once again to be unmistakable.
However, the material witnesses to its history are indispensable for
this purpose. "Constructions of urban Identity" is the title of a contemporary
research project. In the meantime, the need to resurrect lost cityscapes
has reached cities like Potsdam, Braunschweig, Mainz and even the skyscraper
city of Frankfort am Main. Its lady mayor, Petra Roth, supported by
all political parties in the city council and by the major business
associations, has placed herself at the head of a citizens' initiative,
consisting mostly of young people, for the rebuilding of lost half-timbered
houses and the Palace of Thurn and Taxis. The call for a modern center
in contemporary taste at any price is an idea from yesterday! Recently,
at a meeting of the faculty for art history of the Technical University
of Dresden, the demand was made that the Office of Historic Monument
Protection also pay attention to this general rethinking. More and more
often materialistic fetishcism, which was justifiably theoretically
founded over one hundred years ago by learned men like Dehio, Riegl
and Dvorak, is being called into question.
Today there is a
broad dispute among experts going on over the question of what really
represents the identity of a building monument and whether its essence
amounts to nothing more than its materiality. The Polish monument conservator
Andrzej Tomaszewski, in his essay about " Intellectual and Material
Worth of Cultural Monuments" names many examples of another sort from
the dogmatized European concept. His conclusion for us is this: If the
preconditions for broad ranging identical reproduction of a cultural
monument in the same location are present, moral, cultural and social
reasons can justify its reconstruction. However, the decision about
it must be made at the political level. So it happened in Warsaw and
likewise in Dresden. I am sure that the Neumarkt, just like the Stare
Miasto of the Polish capital, will go down in history as an important
urban achievement of the late 20th and early 21st centuries.
zurück
zu News
|