Photo Credit: Ralph Stern

Berlin Studio Winter Semester 2017 Department of Architecture Professor Dipl.-Ing. Ralph Stern, MAA, RA, AIA

Berlin ist eine Stadt, verdammt dazu, ewig zu warden, niemals zu sein” (Berlin is a city condemned forever to becoming and never to being.)”

Karl Scheffler

More than any other city, Berlin has made its mark on the history of the 20th century: The city was the scene of major events and trends in this century - the Modernist movement of the twenties, the First and Second World Wars, National Socialism and the Holocaust, the Cold

War and the collapse of Socialism, Capitalism and revolt - and, at the same time, these events have shaped the city. Berlin, which in the 19th century had been a boomtown without any tradition of its own, absorbed these influences and gave them an expression. In a process

of ‘automatic urbanism’ - recurring destruction, planning and reconstruction -, the city developed into a montage of contradictory ideological fragments. The city has become a text which tells its story and, in doing so, reflects the history of the 20th century. Unlike

other cities, Berlin does not stand out on account of its classical beauty, it is neither a composition which is the result of an ideal plan nor is it the product of organic growth; discontinuities and contradictions, diversity and emptiness characterise the city. Berlin is ugly and, at

the same time, its intensity and its individual character are a source of fascination. (Oswald, Philip, Berlin Stadt Ohne Form)

Of most cities, people have a sort of image in their head. An image of what the city looks like through a collection of icons. Berlin does not have such an image. One cannot go to the central market place or the grand palace to look for its identity. The city is not beautiful,

but presents itself more as a challenge. It pushes its visitors to explore it and ever again it confronts them with new and different perspectives, always postponing the moment when ones gets a rip of it. Berlin is clumsily unfinished. Its appearances do not reveal its

different meanings. (Cupers Meissen – Spaces of Uncertainty)

Stern - Berlin Studio - Winter 2017

 

Berlin Context – Background History Berlin is a city that can truly be regarded as an urban laboratory. A small, provincial city in the eighteenth century, it exploded into an industrial force in the nineteenth century, attracting architects, landscape architects, and city planners that have played an essential role in the development of modern practice and theory about tectonics, spatial organization, and urban development. Located on the Spree River, it served as a nexus for waterway develop-ment; located in central Europe, it became a nexus of railway development fueling rapid growth and industrial expansion.

Such expansion brought with it waves of immigration, together with the cultural enrichment as well as the social tensions often associated with a rapid population growth. Cultural institutions flourished and, after the First World War, Berlin became the center of the important German film industry and attracted protagonists of the avant-garde in the areas of painting, literature, photography, design, architecture, and urban design. Plagued by the hyper-inflation of the Weimar years, all of these experiments came to an end with Hitler’s ascension to power in January of 1933.

During the next twelve years, Berlin was fundamentally transformed in all aspects: politically, culturally, socially, and—finally—physically. The flourishing metropolis of four million had become a landscape of ruins: physically and morally. It was also an occupied city with control being shared (or contested) by the Americans, English, French, and Russians. Cold War tensions escalated, culminating in the formal, physical division of the city between East and West in 1961; a division marked by the construction of the Berlin Wall.

However, within these divisions, remarkable cultures of design once again flourished and were marked by a series of International Building Exhibitions that began in the 1950s and continued through the 1980s and German Reunification in 1989.

Since Reunification, Berlin has again undergone profound transformations: becoming Europe’s largest con-struction site, reasserting its status as Germany’s capitol, attracting a burgeoning music and culture industry, and becoming a global tourist destination. The divisions of the Cold War, of East and West, are less disappearing than overlaid with multiple forms of intervention and investment. Given Berlin’s unique history, these pressures (and opportunities) are creating tensions along economic lines rather than ideological while simultaneously creating an “experience economy” based on simulations of various pasts including, most interestingly, the heady days of squats and the highly permeable terrain characterizing the early post-reunification years. Berlin is, once again, at the forefront of architectural, landscape, urban, and social experimentation.

 Themes and Emphasis The general theme of the Studio will be “Stadt am Wasser” or, “City at the Waterfront”, in this case the river Spree. There will be a range of issues that you will be required to address: history of the site, infrastructure (transportation linkages, waterfront access, green networks, etc.), scalar range (urban, landscape, architectural, interior), appropriate structural and material systems, social issues (gentrification versus social diversity), and cultural integration.

Emphasis will be placed on a comprehensive approach to, and understanding of, built intervention in historically and culturally significant urban areas. A scalar range in design from the urban to detail is expected, as is the ability to develop a “program” appropriate for the site. Much of the information and instruction provided during the Berlin Field Trip will serve as a basis for project analysis and development. Spree Context – Background History The river Spree has historically served as a lifeline for Berlin: barges brought supplies and building materials from the surrounding region, pleasure boots traveled the Spree and the broader waterways of the Havel, a system of canals and locks were developed in the nineteenth century to facilitate the construction of vast areas of Berlin Kreuzberg and elsewhere.

During the Cold War, the Spree, once the unifying element of the city, became a line of division: demarcating the Eastern Sector of the city from the Western Sectors. The area in which we will be working, Berlin Kreuzberg, was under American control on the west and Soviet control on the east. As such, both edges of the river became heavily patrolled “borderlands” that therefore fell into general disuse and disrepair with old industrial buildings often

Stern - Berlin Studio - Winter 2017

 

becoming “ruins” that few were interested in. Post-reunification brought with it an interest in such buildings, by ravers and squatters: many of the most active techno-clubs occupied various buildings along the Spree and a number of the most prominent “squats” also took hold on long-abandoned buildings.

The scenario since the year 2000 has changed once again. River frontage has an obvious appeal for high-end development and, as if a more obvious marker needed to be set, the DAZ (Deutsches Architekturzentrum), the German Architectural Center, renovated and moved into a large industrial building complex. For a while, adjacent sites remained largely abandoned and the haunt of graffiti artists, transitory “trailer parks” occupied by left-wing “Autonomen”, and other low intensity uses. Inevitably, however, this has changed and the development of the so-called “Media Spree” concept for high-end investment was put forward. It met with a great deal of resistance and debate with regard to public access to waterfront areas, as well as cultural and social diversity. Buildings such as the “Eisfabrik” were occupied, or re-occupied, by squatters and became, in many regards, “sites of resistance” to high-end development.

Abstract / Thematic Framework The sites that we have suggested are all located in “contested terrain”. What had once been the border between east and west may now be conserved a “borderland” between the privileged and the disenfranchised. It will be your task to intervene in this extremely sensitive debate in a manner that is appropriate for urban and architectural development at the same time it recognizes and mediates a broad range of socio-economic conditions.

What isn’t an option are small-scale interventions. As you will see, a number of the sites are occupied by very small-scale, low-tech interventions (including tipis); for any long-term stability to the sites, such interventions are provisional at best. Therefore, the project this semester is about achieving a relevant scalar intervention and the notion of “scale” can itself be used as a thematic framework for interrogating the various physical, social, and cultural forces at play on these complex sites. Pedagogical Objectives First and foremost, you will learn to work in teams in which you will need to cooperate, synthesize and integrate a series of perspectives on the issues at hand. As such, this serves to simulate more accurately the comprehensive working environment of professional designers. Beyond this, you will also have an opportunity to develop an individual project within the broader framework provided by the teamwork. These projects should reflect your own area of disciplinary skill and expertise.

Beyond this, and as mentioned above, the issue of scale is important. It is recognized that many of you will be working at a scale you are not familiar with; the Berlin Field Trip will serve to provide a myriad of examples as to scalar variation and complexity. In addition to scale, you will learn to make choices and decisions about appropriate sites (therefore a range of site possibilities in the same general area), you will learn to make programing choices, and you will learn how to schematically organize larger projects. You will learn to work with alternatives. Most of all, you will learn how to work quickly and succinctly; perhaps you might think of this as a design competition in which a clear concept and succinct articulation are of greater value than a long period of gestation: we have a great deal to accomplish within a short period of time and you will learn how to apportion this time in a manner that will lead to successful results.

Note from the Department Head (08.19.2016): “We will have two studios divided into fall and winter term studios due to circumstantial reasons: although the studios are autonomous and independent, the Studio Presentation

must be clear about it, the sequence followed between those studios must be clear to the students too, and a

minimum coordination for presentation is required.”