Impact of the Physical on the Emotional

Impact of the Physical on the Emotional

by Sarah Wilson

A look at the physical and emotional effect produced by the Reichstag building and dome in Berlin, Germany before and after its reconstruction

Reichstag, after renovation in 1992

Berlin is well known not only for the major historical events that transpired there in the 20^th century, but also for the resulting effects on the architecture of the city. Following the rise and fall of the Third Reich and later the Berlin Wall, there was a very palpable transition in the style of architecture in both East and West Berlin. This transition can be found in not only new construction, but reconstruction and renovation, namely, the Reichstag building. Built in 1894 following the neoclassical style by Frankfurt architect Paul Wallot, this hall was and still is the meeting place for members of the republic (now the parliament) to conduct government business. As a symbol of the German republic, the Reichstag was an imposingly large work fronted by an enormous Greek temple front, bound by four towers, and topped with a colossal dome. It is this vastness, this sheer size, which manipulates the emotion of passersby. The physical presence the Reichstag commands leads to its capability to command attention and respect. Emotional effect is a highly important element to architecture of any location, and this Berlin building wielded such an effect as to become an object of importance to the Germans in its original construction the 20^th century and in its reconstruction today. 

Reichstag, August 1932, before fires

The Reichstag was heavily damaged by arson in 1933 and later by Russian shelling in the 1960s. The burning of the Reichstag in 1933 was considered a symbol of Adolf Hitler’s rise to power, and he himself described the fire as “a beacon from heaven. ‘You are now witnessing the beginning of a great epoch in German history…This fire is the beginning’” ("Rise of Adolf Hitler" 1996). Hitler never used the Reichstag as a place from which to conduct his revolution, and it is in fact speculated that his own men conducted the arson so that he may blame it on the Communists and gain further power. The physical symbol remained, however, and even it its damaged state, the building likely had an ominous presence in Berlin to those not in the Nazi party. For such an enormous and seemingly indestructible building to be burned thus, it served as a reminder of Hitler’s dominance over the republic that preceded him. 

Interior of Reichstag's glass dome

In 1992, architect Sir Norman Foster won by competition the opportunity to renovate the Reichstag, which had already been refurbished to an extant in the 1980s. It was a difficult task for Foster to not only renovate the building and what it symbolized, but also to remain true to its history. "A lot of events have passed over that building and left their imprint on the fabric," says Sir Norman Foster. "I think it has more integrity to reveal and accept the history, making it tangibly visible for present and future generations." ("Reichstag: A turbulent history " 1999) Foster found the Reichstag’s surviving nineteenth century interiors, complete with Soviet soldiers’ graffiti, already hidden under plaster. Foster preserved these original walls and also reinstated the original courtyards. The greatest change of all was the dome, in which Foster traded the masonry for transparent glass. From within ramps running up and along the inside of the dome, the public can look down at their government officials at work and out at the city of Berlin. The clarity and openness of the dome was a symbolic departure from the oppression of the Third Reich; in its place, the glass dome becomes the new beacon of a brighter future. After the renovation’s completion in 1999, the Reichstag had become a different building and inspired a different set of emotions. Though the strength of the Reichstag’s masonry, columns, and towers remains, the glass dome shines with hope, opportunity, and change.

Sources:  

The History Place, "The Rise of Adolf Hitler." Last modified 1996. Accessed August 31, 2012. http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/burns.htm. 

"The Reichstag: A turbulent history ." BBC News. (1999). http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/322967.stm (accessed August 31, 2012).

Labels and What a Flag Can Do

By: Denver Sells

It is interesting to view architecture as a label instead of a building style.  I know that statement seems contradictory for an architect but I believe that in certain cases this is true.  For instance, looking at the works and proposed ideas of Albert Speer for the glorification of the Nazi regime, our immediate judgment is that of distaste.   We were raised on the label that the Nazis were bad, and everything that they did was a dark stain on the world, and yes most of it was.  Looking at the works of Speer, our first instinctive reaction is “oh that’s Nazi related, we don’t want to like it.”  However, when you look past the swastika flags and the eagles of supremacy, we start to see similarities and we find ourselves taking back our first thoughts and almost being ashamed to have jumped to that kind of conclusion that fast.  Instead, we start to notice the parallels with something that also inspires national pride just like those buildings used to.  It becomes apparent that we’ve seen this powerful, supreme and whitely clean idea before.

When I toured Washington DC and then was asked what I liked most about it, I commented on the cleanliness, the impressiveness and the sense of inspiration the buildings give for national pride.  When you compare this with the Nazi regime buildings and ideas of Albert Speer you find an eerie similarity and get the sense that this was not by accident. So what is it?

Again, it comes to labels.  Since the Greeks and Romans, we have been analyzing this “classical” idea and type of architecture. Since then, this idea of a grand, clean, white and powerful building as a symbol for that nation has cyclically perpetuated itself through the years.  Washington DC and Berlin (under Speer) have this in common: the Neo-Classical movement.  This common thread of the similar style is what makes these two, completely different labels, the same style.  Don’t’ get me wrong though in no way am I comparing Nazism to our Democratic United States of America, but I am however just pointing out the similarities that our history and education has taught us to disassociate from each other as quickly as possible.  Take for instance the Reichstag and Capitol building.  Both exemplify the Vitruvian principles of repetition.  Each have a large dome, and both have heavy stone facades. As well, in regards to their large promenades and grounds surrounding and leading up to them, again we see similarities.  This all stems from one concurrent style, but yet it keeps two different titles and labels in our minds.  This naive way of looking at these buildings and how “different” they are makes us step back and realize something more about ourselves and the culture we grew up with.  It is amazing how the color of the flag waving on a building can change our perception of that building.  Its not a good trait, but its something that we need to be conscious about as we move forward.