Markus Kip, Douglas Young, Lisa Drummond: Socialist Modernism at Alexanderplatz

Socialist Modernism at Alexanderplatz

Markus Kip, Douglas Young and Lisa Drummond

Abstract Zusammenfassung This paper makes the case for a “socialist modernism” to Sozialistischer Modernismus am Alexanderplatz understand the development of Alexanderplatz by the regime Diese Arbeit spricht sich für das Konzept des „sozialistischen of the German Democratic Republic in the 1960s. We propose Modernismus“ aus, um die vom Regime der Deutschen Demo- that the socialist era development on Alexanderplatz was kratischen Republik realisierte Entwicklung des Alexanderplat- staged as the realization of the modernist vision. At the same zes in den 1960er-Jahren zu verstehen. Unser Ansatz ist, dass time, the 1960s design of Alexanderplatz also includes distinc- die Entwicklung des Alexanderplatzes während der sozialis­ tive ‘socialist’ features, notably the emphasis on centrality and tischen Ära als Verwirklichung einer modernistischen Vision in- visually dominant tall structures that are in striking contrast szeniert wurde. Gleichzeitig beinhaltet die Gestaltung des to the (Western) high modernist canon. The paper consists of Alexanderplatzes in den 1960er-Jahren markante „sozialis­ two parts: First we consider the GDR conception of urbanism tische“ Merkmale, insbesondere die Hervorhebung von Zentra- and the development of the city centre. Alexanderplatz was in lität und von Höhendominanten, die im auffälligen Kontrast many ways the pinnacle of such conception that built on the zum hochmodernistischen Kanon (des Westens) stehen. Die modernist legacy and imported Soviet ideas of city building. Arbeit besteht aus zwei Teilen: Zunächst betrachten wir das Second, we look at Alexanderplatz through a historical lens. städtebauliche Konzept der DDR und die Entwicklung des We argue that the GDR development built on the experience of Stadtzentrums. Der Alexanderplatz war in vielerlei Hinsicht previous modernist development plans for Alexanderplatz in der Höhepunkt eines solchen Konzepts, das auf dem modernis- the late 1920s. While Alexanderplatz was to demonstrate the tischen Erbe und auf von der Sowjetunion übernommenen unique socialist capacity to realize the promises of modernity, Ideen beim Städtebau basierte. In einem zweiten Teil behan- “Alex,” as the square is colloquially termed, also contrasts with deln wir den Alexanderplatz in historischer Hinsicht. Wir stylizations of the “socialist city” as proposed by Sonia Hirt or argumentieren, dass die Gestaltung durch die DDR auf der Iván Szelényi. Erfahrung vorheriger modernistischer Entwicklungspläne für den Alexanderplatz aus den späten 1920er-Jahren aufbaute. Berlin, Alexanderplatz, German Democratic Republic, city building Während der Alexanderplatz die einzigartige sozialistische Fähigkeit, die Versprechungen der Modernität zu verwirkli- chen, darstellen sollte, hebt sich der „Alex“, wie der Platz im allgemeinen Sprachgebrauch genannt wird, gleichzeitig auch von der Stilisierung der „sozialistischen Stadt“, wie sie von Sonia Hirt und Iván Szelényi vorgeschlagen wurde, ab.

Berlin, Alexanderplatz, Deutsche Demokratische Republik, Städtebau

13 Europa Regional 22, 2014 (2015) 1-2

Introduction that were poised for demolition based on Science and Anthropology at Yale Univer- This paper on Alexanderplatz, the area in a (still-existing and only partially imple- sity (refer to 2008; 2000) East Berlin reshaped in the 1960s as a mented) masterplan from 1993.2 Such propose. Second, we look at Alexander- Hirt Scott central point in the ‘Haupstadt der DDR,’ announcements were received with con- platz through a historical lens. We argue intends to contribute to the conceptuali- troversial discussions about the value of that the GDR development built on the zation of architecture and planning in so- preserving buildings as part of the experience of previous modernist de- cialist regimes. We make the case for a DDR-Moderne.3 One key to this debate velopment plans for Alexanderplatz in “socialist modernism” to understand the then is the question of what exactly DDR- the late 1920s. While building on the development of Alexanderplatz underta- Moderne­ or Ostmoderne is and how to as- same promises as the early modernist ken by the regime of the German De- sess its representation in particular buil- plans, the GDR plans staged the Alexan- mocratic Republic1 (GDR). We argue that dings or assemblages. Remarkably, in the derplatz development as a demonstrati- high modernist ideas shaped the appro- on of the unique socialist capacity to re- ach and design, but Alexanderplatz also buildings being modernist. In this paper alize these promises. GDR there was no official talk of such then, we offer some theoretical backg- In the literature on socialist and regime. Our analysis suggests that Al- round for the consideration of the Al- post-socialist urbanism, some authors entails features specific to the socialist exanderplatz offers peculiar insights into exanderplatz development of the GDR as comment on the relationship between so- the GDR’s complicated relationship with an expression of modernist planning and cialism and modernism. As the introduc- modernist ideas. Particular strands of architecture. Rather than talking about tion to this special issue of Europa Regi- modernist and socialist thinking fused to DDR- or Ostmoderne to qualify its distin- onal indicates, debates around this rela- produce this urban assemblage. Genera- ctiveness in the register of styles, we sug- tionship usually consider historically lizations of “socialist urbanism” ( gest the notion of “socialist modernism” 2008; 1996) or “modernism” to account for the political aspiration of Hirt specific forms of socialism, i.e. socialist with the Athens Charter as its paradigm these development efforts and the trans- - Szelényi regimes of the sphere of Soviet influence, ( 1946) fall short of accoun- national similarities with other projects ticular “high modernist” ideas that emer- and specific forms of modernism, in par ting satisfactorily for how Alexanderplatz in “socialist” countries. ged in the late 1920s and came to fruiti- Le Corbusier was fashioned. Our reading of the To make our case for “socialist moder- on in the 1950s to 1970s. (High) moder- GDR-version of Alexanderplatz suggests nism” at Alexanderplatz, we present two nist ideas are widely considered to be a that the socialist era development was analyses: First, we consider the GDR con- common ground shared by both sides of staged as the realization of the modernist ception of urbanism and the develop- vision. At the same time, we also high- ment of the city centre of Berlin in the to accommodate various political cont- the Iron Curtain, a form flexible enough light distinctive features of the ‘socialist’ context of planning and architectural the- ents ( 1995; 2013; Alexanderplatz, notably the emphasis on ory at the time. Alexanderplatz was in 2000). and (this is- Bodenschatz Kossel centrality and visually dominant tall many ways the pinnacle of GDR urba- sue) engage authors who take socialist Scott Kip Sgibnev structures that are in striking contrast to nism. We argue that the “socialist” plan- regimes as the most consistent adherents the (Western) high modernist canon. ning approach in fact was heavily indeb- to high modernist approaches (refer to A reconstruction of the “socialist mo- ted to the modernist legacy. While the op- 2008). In this vein, (1991, dernism” at Alexanderplatz appears to be position between “socialist” and p. 38) views socialism as “modernity’s Hirt Bauman timely as calls to reassess and preserve “modernist” planning that was construed most devout, vigorous and gallant cham- the “Modernism of the East” (“Ostmo­ pion”. Such arguments, however, are ba- derne”, refer to and sed on a narrow conception of moder- officially in the GDR is oversimplified, so 2004; 2012; 2008) “modernist” urbanism that authors such nism4 that misses out on the rich and Butter Hartung too is the conflation of “socialist” with or “GDR-modernism” (“DDR-Moderne”, re- as Sonia , associate professor for Ur- contradictory history of modernist Escherich T. Flierl fer to 2011; and - ban Affairs and Planning at Virgina Poly- thought and practice. In this paper, we Hirt 2006; and technic Institute and State University, and engage some of this historical complexi- Danesch Thöner Mül 2005) have become louder in recent ye- James C. , professor of Political ty as relevant to an analysis of the relati- ler Aschenbeck Niedenthal ars. In 2013, the head of the building de- onship between modernism and socia- Scott partment in Berlin (Senatsbaudirektorin­ ), 2 Berliner Zeitung 11.4.2013 “Basically, the plan cannot lism. In the following, Alexanderplatz re- be implemented” [“Im Grunde ist der Plan nicht Regula Lüscher, advocated for landmar- umsetzbar”], Interview with Regula Lüscher. fers to the square itself not the king GDR buildings at Alexanderplatz 3 Such discussions happened in online forums of administrative district which is much lar- various daily Berlin newspapers (Tagesspiegel, Berliner Zeitung, Berliner Morgenpost), but also in ger, although at times we consider also 1 The German Democratic Republic came into being in national papers (FAZ, focus etc.) as well as in expert 1949 and came to a symbolic end with the opening of forums, such as the “Deutsche Architektur Forum” the Berlin Wall in 1989. The country was formally http://www.deutsches-architektur-forum.de/forum/ 4 The conception of socialism is also narrow in these absorbed by the German Federal Republic (West showthread.php?t=11165 (accessed online March 18, accounts and worthy of critique, but is not the focus of Germany) in 1990. 2015) this study.

14 Markus Kip, Douglas Young, Lisa Drummond: Socialist Modernism at Alexanderplatz

spaces in the immediate surroundings of in connecting the government centre fected qualities of daily life. The regime the square. with the rest of the city, including the effectively set up high standards against prestigious and newly-built Stalinallee. which “the people” were to measure the Alexanderplatz: A socialist Finished in 1969, in time for the 20th an- achievements of the GDR. In the subse- exemplar niversary of the German Democratic Re- quent measuring, one could say, the GDR - public, Alexanderplatz was constructed was found wanting and resultant dissa- - “as a model for other GDR cities and as an tisfaction brought down the political eli- In view of its official representation, Al plar” ( 2008). At the Third - te with the Berlin Wall in 1989. Nevert- exanderplatz figured as a “socialist exem Congress of the Socialist Unity Party [“So- cialist society” ( 2008, p. heless, in trying to understand the GDR Weszkalnys expression of a specific form of future so zialistische Einheitspartei – SED”] in 253). Claire (2007, p. 289) ma- version of modernism, we argue, the so- Weszkalnys 1950, the decision was made to rebuild kes a similar assessment when she states cial ideals of modernity must be conside- Colomb the city centre including Alexanderplatz.5 that Alexanderplatz was “planned to sym- red an important aspect beside issues of style and function.

GDR conception of urbanism Urban redevelopments in socialist coun- tries such as the GDR show many simila- rities with high modernist visions, but

the GDR regime disavowed modernism also some distinctive features. Officially, as a bourgeois cultural phenomenon (re- fer to 2000). Modernism often offered a foil against which the re- Tscheschner gime’s efforts to build a socialist city were contrasted, as if they were an enti- rely different endeavour. At the same time, GDR projects shared many ambi- tions with high modernism as under- stood in the capitalist West. On both si- des, the pretension was to resolve econo- mic misery and alienation, and to Photograph 1: Alexanderplatz embrace the modern promise of growth, Source: Bundesarchiv, Bild 183-H1002-0001-016 development, and improved quality of Photographer: Horst Sturm, October 2nd, 1969 life. The actual development of Alexander- bolically display [sic] the spirit of socia- The contrast between “socialist” and platz was the result of a long and contor- lism”. And Paul (2009, p. 92) speaks “modernist” conceptions of planning ch- ted debate lasting for over a decade about of Alexanderplatz as the “stage of the so- Sigel the creation of a central building in the - - anged significantly between 1945 and the centre ( a). Whereas initially tion of the redevelopment with socialism cillating between antagonism and dia- cialist city”. While much of this identifica finalization of Alexanderplatz in 1969, os this building was to function as the height happened at a rhetorical level, at the le- lectical suspension. The development of Flierl 1998 dominant for the city centre, the eventu- vel of architecture, planning and symbo- al decision realized this central building lism, as we show below, the GDR emplo- ways the means by which at a particular Alexanderplatz reflects in significant - yed the register of modernism in their moment, the socialist regime sought to plemented by the positioning of a new fashioning of “Alex”, as the square is col- distinguish itself against modernist con- as the (flat) Palace of the Republic com tall building, the television tower, right loquially termed. ceptions that were associated with the next to Alexanderplatz. This decision cer- By taking up the promise of modernity capitalist West. in the development of Alexanderplatz, the square within the overall development of political regime sought to present the so- war years in the Soviet Occupation Zone tainly increased the significance of the Describing the context of the first post- the city centre, playing an important part cialist approach to city building as supe- (SOZ) and the GDR, one of the GDR-archi- rior to capitalist approaches that were tects of Alexanderplatz, Dorothea Tsche- 5 The heavy war destruction of inner-city areas had schner, claims that the modernist Charter facilitated the large-scale planning for a new centre of the socialist state that was to extend roughly from A crucial aspect in this endeavour was of Athens “must be considered a common Brandenburg Gate along Unter den Linden across the seen to have failed to fulfill that promise. River Spree into Alexanderplatz. the social emphasis of modernity, its per- ideal of German postwar architects”

15 Europa Regional 22, 2014 (2015) 1-2

( 2000, p. 259). In a clima- were to be functionally related and loca- architects hopes of realizing their visions te of relative space for cultural experi- ted as close to one another as possible. In in the context of the GDR, as he explains: Tscheschner a similar manner to the Athens Charter “If nothing else, [planners’ and ar- planning efforts in the SOZ and GDR over- precepts, the inner city was to be thinned chitects’] engagement was based on mentation, the first reconstruction and tly engaged modernist ideas and debates, out (also as a strategy to reduce poverty), the hope that under conditions of so- such as Hans Scharoun’s “Collective Plan” yet Scharoun’s conception of the “city cialist ownership of land and of the [“Kollektivplan”], prepared by a group of landscape” [“Stadtlandschaft”] rejected means of production in construction, planners under his direction in 1946. It strict geometric orders of axiality and pa- it would be possible to bring about formed the basis of the 1949 “General Re- rallelism and propagated a freer scatte- this unity of planning [“Städtebau”] construction Plan” for Berlin [“General­ ring of structures in an open landscape. and architecture, of architecture and aufbauplan”] that envisioned a decentra- planning in the context of a complex lized and low-rise city, a linear town the GDR, Otto Grotewohl, took it upon task, that many architects had always Nevertheless, the first Prime Minister of along the River Spree. An entirely new himself to explain the Generalaufbauplan dreamt of since Le Corbusier” ( using excerpts from the Athens Charter 1998b, p. 63).9 Flierl previous concentric organization of ( 1993, p. 51). traffic grid of highways was to replace the streets in the city. The focused attention Overtly engaging and experimenting B. points out that this unity was Hain of this plan was on dwellings organized with modernist ideas was a rather short- made possible by subjecting both plan- Flierl in cooperatives taking the form of green lived urban experiment that lasted until ning and architecture to construction en- “urban villages” [“Stadtdorf”] of 4-5,000 about 1951, when Soviet decrees instruc- gineering “Bauwesen”] as a branch of people. Only a few modernist housing de- ted architects and planners to implement economic planning in the GDR. Over time, [ velopments following this plan were im- a particular kind of “socialist realist” ur- this subordination created increasing plemented at that time. One of the best- banism throughout socialist Central and frustration among architects and plan- known, the “Residential-cell Fried­ Eastern Europe. In addition, Simone ners who had to follow bureaucratic sti- richshain” [“Wohnzelle Friedrichshain”], (1993) suspects that the ongoing compe- pulations and saw their creative and ar- Hain was only partially realized. Its original tition for dominance between Social De- tistic engagements – another modernist conception rejected Cartesian ordering mocrats and Communists within the So- pretense – radically curtailed ( principles and any architectural supre- cialist Unity Party [“Sozialistische­ Einheit- 1998b, pp. 54-59). Flierl macy, and was based on loosely-scattered spartei – SED”] partially explains this single housing ( 1993, p. 51).6 shift. The involvement of many Social De- Planning: The 16 Principles as an The Collective Plan of 1946 can be read mocrats in the General Reconstruction alternative to the Athens Charter? Hain as a counterpoint to the grandiosity of Plan was a thorn in the side of many In connection with the Reconstruction Speer’s plans for Germania (as Berlin re- Communist leaders who thus sought So- Law, the national government also pas- fashioned by the Nazi regime was to be viet help to strengthen their position. As sed the “Principles of Urban Develop- renamed). To Scharoun and other post- a way of distinguishing themselves in this ment” [“Grundsätze des Städtebaus”] in war architects and planners “modesty contestation, the Communists emphasi- 1950 which came to be known as the “16 became the order of the day” ( zed “supra-communal forms of associati- Principles”. The GDR planning for Alexan- 2000, p. 224). While modest in some re- on”7 ( 1993, p. 53) against “urban derplatz can be considered a paradig- Kieren spects, the Collective Plan would have so villages” espoused by the Social De- matic embodiment of some of these prin- Hain radically altered the urban structure of mocrats.8 Alexanderplatz was to become ciples and their intention to institute a Berlin that “[t]o actually build this revo- a key embodiment of this new urbanism. distinctive kind of urbanism. The “16 lutionary vision would have required a With the Reconstruction Law [“Aufbau- Principles” were widely believed to be an centralized political structure as well as gesetz”] of 1950, architecture and plan- adaptation of Soviet planning principles new laws that would have granted the ning were conceived of as complemen- and to signal the break from the Athens state a say in the design of buildings on tary tasks that had to be brought into uni- Charter, which Bruno (1998b, p. privately owned land” ( 2000, ty. Bruno (1998b, p. 63) notes that 59) describes as a “socialist sublation Flierl p. 220). Critics of the plan labelled it so- such unity corresponded to widely held [“Aufhebung”]”. Confurius Flierl cialist ( 2000, p. 239). In both high modernist wishes. The Aufbaugesetz Parting ways with the Athens Charter, the Collective Plan and the General Re- thus fostered among many planners and von Beyme construction Plan, work and dwelling we term “socialist modernism”. The Mo- it should be noted, is not specific to what 7 Quotes from German sources were translated by the dernist discussion among planners and authors of the article. 6 In this period, however, the buildings that were 8 Interestingly, one of these communist leaders, Kurt actually built were balcony access apartment rows Liebknecht, who supervised the reconstruction of [“Laubenganghäuser”] placed in regular arrange- Berlin, criticized the General Reconstruction Plan for 9 Henceforth, when quoting a German source, the ments. not being “modern” [“unmodern”] (Hain 1993, p. 54). translation is ours.

16 Markus Kip, Douglas Young, Lisa Drummond: Socialist Modernism at Alexanderplatz

architects in the West also moved on, as ration for the historically created struc- most important and monumental buil- evidenced in Eric ’s documen- ture of the city while abolishing its short­ - tation of debates within CIAM (the Con- comings”.11 As a consequence, the houette of the city” (principle 6) as well Mumford dings [...that] define the architectural sil grès Internationaux d’Architecture Moder- GDR-conception for Alexanderplatz saw as through “squares, main avenues and ne), through the 1950s, debates that con- a historical continuity from the pre-war voluptuous buildings in the centre of the tinued among its former members square. city (skyscrapers in the big cities). Squa- following that organization’s dissolution Calling to mind the Athens Charter’s ca- res are the structural basis for urban de- in 1959 ( 2009, 2000). In West tegorization of urban functions, principle velopment” (principle 9). Against the Germany, too, the paradigm of the Athens 2 stipulated as a goal of development “the attempt insinuated in the General Recon- Mumford Charter was contested. Edgar harmonious satisfaction of human claims struction Plan to dissolve the city into a (1970) and Hans Paul (1961) ar- for work, dwelling, culture and recreati- Salin gued against a functionalist understan- that “[t]o transform the city into a garden Bahrdt “tissue” of villages, principle 12 affirms ding of urbanity and for a political and the Athens Charter’s functional differen- is impossible. […] In the city, life is more on”. However, in significant contrast to sociologically-informed one. , in tiation of the city into spaces of habitati- urban, in the city periphery or outside of particular, advocated for a compact city - the city, life is more rural”. As we show Bahrdt with built spaces that allow for both ciples’ emphasis on “culture” takes the below, “abolishing shortcomings” (prin- on, leisure, work, and traffic, the 16 Prin with­drawal into the private sphere and - ciple 5), primarily meant improving the engagement with others in the public ding planner for the reconstruction of the quality of living, habitation, and culture place of “traffic”. Edmund Collein, a lea sphere. city centre in Berlin, in 1955, offers an in- The conceptual engagement with the teresting rationale as to why: as well as improving traffic circulation Athens Charter, however, moved in a dif- hub. The decision to build dwellings in without reducing the centre to a traffic ferent direction in the GDR with the 16 the city centre embraced the idea of “ur- “The street is not just a traffic band, Principles. A closer look at these two do- apartment building not a dwelling ban living” and “urbanity” with Alexan- the square not just a traffic hub, the cuments reveals how the 16 Principles machine, but street, square and buil- derplatz as the apex of such ideal. sought to establish a contrasting pro- ding are in their external appearance Alexanderplatz, thus, as a pre-war cen- gramme. In terms of formal differences, expression of a societal-artistic idea” tral square was to keep this role. As a his- B. (1998b, p. 59) notes that the 16 (quoted in 1993, p. 62). torical central location, its function of Principles “were not directed as an appe- Thus, at least with respect to theory, the centrality was to be further emphasized Flierl Hain al by city planners and architects towards greatest aspiration for Alexanderplatz through architectural and planning de- the government as [the Athens Charter], was its development for culture, more so signs of “dominance”. The development but vice versa as an assignment of the go- area was large and the adjacent TV tower vernment for city planners and archi- that had persisted for decades. was, at 368 metres, the tallest structure than its resolution of the traffic chaos tects. And thus they functioned in such Against the Athens Charter’s call for in Germany. At the time, no other Wes- fashion: as a charter from top to bottom”. the de-emphasis and thinning of the city tern German city had seen a building In terms of content, even remotely as high marking the city (2000, p. 260) summarizes the differen- centre. Tscheschner centre, principle 6 defines the centre as ces between the 16 Principles and the political centre for the life of its inhab- the “defining core of the city”, and “the Athens Charter as follows: “In contrast to itants. The most important political, ad- Siblings but not friends: The 16 the ‘Athens Charter’, the [16 Principles] ministrative and cultural sites are located Principles and the Athens Charter took on traditional ideas of a compact in the centre”. And, of particular concern (1993) cautions us not to overstate city with closed streets and squares as for the socialist regime: “On central squa- the difference between the Charter of Hain well as a centre with dominant buildings res, political demonstrations, parades Athens and the “16 Principles”, as the po- as the starting point for urban planning.” and festivals take place on public holi- litical regimes intend us to do. In opposition to modernist conceptions days” (principle 6). B. (1991) no- (1993, p. 60) presents an intriguing ge- Hain of radical renewal (à la ), tes that such emphasis on centrality is nealogy of the Athens Charter and the 16 Flierl principle 110 emphasized the historical distinctive of the socialist planning Principles and claims that the two are Le Corbusier development of cities as the basis of approach (in contrast to the capitalist). distinct outcomes of debates at the 4th Centrality was to be expressed symboli- CIAM (Congrès International d’Architec­ “principle of the organic and the conside- cally through the architectural design of ture Moderne) congress in 1933. Original- devel­opment. Principle 5 affirms the “dominance” ( ), i.e. in “the ly to be held in Moscow with its impen- 10 The principles can be found here (in German): http:// ding reconstruction and the Soviet Union www.bpb.de/gesellschaft/staedte/wiederauf- Flierl 1991 bau-der-staedte/64346/die-16-grundsaet- 11 The idea of the organic is also clarified by principle 14 - ze-des-staedtebaus (accessed online September 2, emphasizing “the experience of the people embodied 2014). in the progressive traditions of the past.” mentation” of the modernist movement, as “the most significant field of experi

17 Europa Regional 22, 2014 (2015) 1-2

the preparations for the 4th CIAM raised - Upon returning to the GDR, the group re- political questions among CIAM members tion of civic communication in the city vised their paper into the 16 Principles. consciously left out the fifth urban func about “contentious problems of aes- - Given the peculiar legacy of the 16 Prin- thetics, societal conception and national troversy and instead concentrated on ciples, reaching back to the CIAM via centre, as it was a topic of significant con economics” ( 1993, pp. 49-50). The “technical” concerns that he believed all Moscow, (1993, p. 60) nicknames CIAM secretariat announced a decision, CIAM members could agree on irrespec- the 16 Principles the “Charter of Mos- Hain Hain for “reasons of timeliness”, to hold the tive of political commitments. cow”. meeting in Athens. had Left unresolved at the congress, the In short, while the differences between pushed for CIAM to hold a Congress in function of centres soon re-emerged as the Athens Charter and the 16 Principles Le Corbusier Moscow to allow a study of the “more an issue in the context of the reconstruc- - comprehensive Soviet strategies being tion of Moscow in the early 1930s. In the rely different to claim that the 16 Princi- may be significant, it is something enti debated” there ( 2000, p. 44), - ples were an overcoming of the moder- which he contrasted to CIAM’s focus on tively) settled in the “Principles of the Re- nist ideas. At the same time, the Athens Mumford Soviet Union this conflict was (authorita discrete elements of urbanism. The Sovi- construction of Moscow” of 1935 that en- Charter must not be mistaken for a quint- et debates tended to divide participants visioned centres as public spaces for essential declaration by the modernist into ‘urbanists’ (who favoured concentra- communication and political engagement movement, even if we consider CIAM as ted settlements) and ‘disurbanists’ who - an, if not the leading, organization of the supported the concept of relatively low cation that are marked by very tall struc- “modernist movement”. As such, the of citizens, places for collective identifi density development stretched along tures, visible from far away ( 1993, emphasis of the 16 Principles on the cen- transportation routes. ( 2000, p. 59). At its following congresses, the trality function of cities follows the line Hain p. 45) Plans were underway to hold the CIAM was not able to reconcile the diffe- of thinking of several former CIAM mem- Mumford Congress in Moscow in 1932 (later mo- rences. As a result, in 1949 at the 7th bers and member groups and is consis- ved back to 1933), however, as Stalin congress in Bergamo groups from socia- tent with approaches that had considered turned towards neo-classical architecture list countries left the CIAM. This, undoub- themselves “modernist”. Certainly by the and a view that considered modernism tedly, contributed to the political disavo- 1950s, the label “modernist” had become to be a representation of capitalism, wal of modernist terminology within “the disavowed politically in the GDR and was CIAM members in Western Europe East”. more or less replaced with “socialist”. Gi- turned against the idea of meeting there ven this legacy going back to a common ( 2000, pp. 71-75). again in full force in the case of the recon- body of knowledge, we think it is reaso- The conflict about centrality broke out highlights the fact that the struction efforts in Berlin, particularly in nable to use the terminology of moder- Mumford “Athens Charter” was ’s per- the city centre ( 1993, p. 58). As al- nism to discuss Alexanderplatz, and, in Hain sonal account (and attempted compromi- ready mentioned, by 1950, the Social De- order to do justice to its particular politi- Le Corbusier Hain se) of the heated discussions of the 4th mocratic reconstruction plans for East - CIAM congress. The congress itself voted Berlin, clearly derived from the Athens aptation “socialist modernism”. In this re- cal inflections, to call this particular ad against ’s proposal at the Charter and complemented by Scharoun’s spect, the distinctive emphasis on cent- end of the meeting in Marseille.12 At the idea of the “city landscape”, saw themsel- rality and the symbolic language of Le Corbusier time, the modernist movement in plan- ves increasingly cornered by a Commu- dominance at Alexanderplatz is not “anti-­ ning and architecture reveals a much bro- nist elite that favoured a solution similar modernist”, but rather follows a particu- ader approach than ’s to Moscow’s. In an effort to “resolve” the lar modernist legacy that the Athens technocentric account. Several “[CIAM] dispute, a German delegation of archi- Charter as well as the socialist regimes Le Corbusier members who were interested in com- tects and planners was sent to Moscow themselves had silenced. munism”, as well as CIAM groups from from April 12 to May 25 1950. In collabo- It is important to note ongoing and England, Yugoslavia, Spain and Italy re- ration with their Soviet colleagues, and jected ’s version for redu- architectural debates of the 1930s – fluid convergences and divergences in the cing the city to a mere economic enter- Soviet planning doctrine,13 this delegati- 1950s between positions taken within Le Corbusier thus under their influence of the official prise ( 1993, p. 50). In their view, so- - cial, political, and cultural questions were the conception of socialist centrality. ence) and outside of it among Western Hain on formulated a position paper reflecting the Soviet Union (and its sphere of influ left unaddressed in ’s members of CIAM. Of particular interest technocratic account of four city func- 13 On this collaboration, Hain (1993, p. 55) writes: to a consideration of the GDR redevelop- Le Corbusier “During lectures and discussions for days, the Soviet tions. As reports, interlocutors of the German delegation, especially the ment of Alexanderplatz were debates on department head of the newly established ministry for monumentality, centrality, and the core Hain Le Corbusier urban development, disposed with superiority over the 12 Le Corbusier published “La Charte d’Athènes” in knowledge of highly controversial theoretical or heart of the city. In a 1937 essay titled collaboration with the French CIAM group anony- developments abroad and in the Soviet Union over the mously ten years later in 1943. previous two decades.” “The Death of the Monument”, Lewis

18 Markus Kip, Douglas Young, Lisa Drummond: Socialist Modernism at Alexanderplatz

Mumford staked out a position against motivated by a “struggle for a new Ger- 1965, these housing complexes were urban monumentality claiming that clas- man architecture” against the “forma- built using industrial production sical monuments represented “the ‘dead’ lism” inherent in the “Bauhaus Style” or techniques and (2000, p. body of the traditional city” ( the “New Objectivity” [“Neue Sachlich­ ­ 265) sees their design as an example of a Tscheschner 2000, p. 150) and, as such, had no place keit de facto “return to modernism” in GDR Mumford in a dynamic and progressive city. At the classical cultural heritage in architecture” - ”] and called for a “reflection on the same time, , Sigfried Giedi- (quoted in 2000, p. 261). mations continued to label its approach architecture, even though official procla This kind of socialist classicism rooted in as “socialist”, never “modernist” (Inter- Le Corbusier Tscheschner CIAM) became interested in what they “national building traditions” sought to view 2011). on and Josep Lluís Sert (all key figures in called “the new monumentality”, a kind rebuild Berlin as an “urban metropolis” With respect to Alexanderplatz, Tscheschner of ‘modern monumentality’ that was ex- ( 1996, p. 217). It favoured herself considers the squa- pressive of “popular needs and aspira- monumentalism with columns and orna- re to be “homogeneous” and the “archi- Häussermann Tschesch­ner tions” of modern society ( mentation, called “gingerbread-style” tectural high point” of modernism in the 2000, p. 150). In 1943, Giedion and Sert [“Zuckerbäckerstil”] in German, and pro- GDR ( 2000, p. 268). An of- Mumford published with Fernand Léger “Nine posed a “closed” city structure, with long - Tscheschner Points of Monumentality”, a manifesto in building facades that formed walls along platz carefully noted the “modern cont- ficial 1971 GDR booklet on Alexander support of a new approach to urban cen- - ours” of the newly designed square ( - trality. They argued that pedestrian civic gious Stalinallee that ran into Alexander- 1971). (2009) points out the boulevards as exemplified in the presti Gum and cultural centres should be created at platz. This period of socialist classicism, composition of high-rise and low-rise mich Sigel a variety of scales in cities ( however, was also short-lived as the GDR building in Hermann Henselmann’s (2000), p. 151). In a scheme that seems elite had to face the fact that such archi- House of the Teacher and its Congress Mumford to presage the GDR development of Al- tecture could not be afforded on a long- Hall, located alongside Alexanderplatz, as exanderplatz, proposed in - a constructive engagement with interna- 1945 the rebuilding of the centre of St- struction section of the Stalinallee, refer tional examples of modernism, including Le Corbusier term basis (for a history of the first con Dié in France as a civic centre. This “pub- to 2009). This, and the politi- ’s design for the UN lic gathering space” was to consist of “an cal upheaval in the Soviet Union follo- headquarters in New York, and Oscar Bartetzky Le Corbusier open platform with freestanding buil- wing Stalin’s death in 1953, brought Niemeyer’s Capitol in Brasilia. dings: a high-rise administrative center, sweeping changes to Soviet ideas about The redevelopment of Alexanderplatz a civic auditorium, a museum designed architecture. thus occurred at a particular moment in as a square spiral, a department store, ca- Already in 1950 the Soviet Ministry of which on the one side, “Alex” became a fés and shops, and a hotel” ( Construction coined the motto “quicker, key piece in the planning of East Berlin’s 2000, p 152). The question of the centre cheaper, nicer” to lower housing const- city centre as an example of the socialist Mumford of cities was the focus of the 8th CIAM ruction costs by 25 %, a development planning approach, and on the other side, held in Hoddesdon, England in 1951 with that was deepened at the Soviet Const- - the theme “The Heart of the City”. In the - ted a “de facto return to modernism”. In its building style and techniques reflec discussions of centres, sometimes the ign against luxury in 1954, just after Kh- this context, the GDR development of Al- ruction Congress with an official campa word “core” was used to denote the phy- exanderplatz suggests a dialectical en- sical centrality of a location, while other 2014, p. 120). In 1955, following this di- gagement of the socialist regime with the rushchev had assumed office (Bohn times “heart” was used to suggest the rection, the First Building Conference modernist movement that warrants the [“Baukonferenz”] in the GDR was held un- designation “socialist modernism”. A clo- of a space. der the programmatic title: “Building bet- ser look at the history of Alexanderplatz, psychological and emotional significance ter, faster, and more cheaply”. This cer- with a focus on the period from the Architecture tainly also implied a revised understan- The Soviet Union under Stalin promoted ding of the 16 Principles (from 1950) details the ways in which the GDR de- 1920s to its finalization in 1969, further the idea of revitalizing “national architec- with their original emphasis on organic, velopment of Alexanderplatz built on its ture” as a way of increasing the populari- traditional and closed city structures now (high) modernist legacy. ty of socialist regimes.14 In 1951, the encompassing more industrially-pro- In particular, the inter-war unbuilt foundation of the German “Building Aca- duced housing complexes laid out with planning project for Alexanderplatz ser- demy” [“Bauakademie”] in Berlin was an “open city structure”. The second con- ved the GDR regime as a backdrop repre- struction section of the Stalinallee lea- senting capitalism’s failed urbanism. The 14 Häussermann (1996, p. 217) notes on this effort within ding from Strausberger Platz onto Al- development of Alexanderplatz thus not the GDR: “In 1950, Walter Ulbricht, the later leader of the governing party, proclaimed a return to ‘national exanderplatz thus displays striking diffe- only represented the “size and dimensi- traditions’, without any attempt to avoid resemblances to fascist urban development.” on of socialism’s victory” architecturally

rences to the first section. Finished in 19 Europa Regional 22, 2014 (2015) 1-2

(through the height dominance of the TV northern medieval city wall, the square trope for modernity: the migrant uproo- tower and the spaciousness of the squa- that now marks Alexanderplatz functi- ted from her conventional, if not traditi- re and surrounding boulevards) but also - onal surrounding, moving in the hope of its realization. The GDR saw socialism as merce and encounter. In the late 19th and a better life. oned as a dynamic place of traffic, com capable of actually transforming space early 20th century, the area north of Al- In the 1920s, the Berlin government and realizing the social promise of impro- exanderplatz was an impoverished neigh- targeted “Alex” for redevelopment in an ved living conditions that had already bourhood, the subproletarian milieu effort to impose a social and physical or- been articulated in previous development which Alfred describes in his fa- der. As Erich (2005, p. 182) com- visions for the square. At the same time, mous novel Berlin Alexanderplatz. A land- ments, Döblin Konter the GDR’s architectural and planning mark in the development of modernist li- “Alexanderplatz was chosen to pre- approach built on the historical legacy of terature in Germany, the novel uses Al- sent the principles of the modern Alexanderplatz as a “modern space” and exanderplatz as a quintessential space of city as purely as possible: The World modern experience, detailing the existen- City cast in one pour eliminating Many stylistic elements of (high) moder- tial struggles of its protagonists to cope local history, a homage to modern as a field for modernist intervention. nist planning were appropriated. This di- with the unintelligibility of the social. Re- alectical fashioning of modernism and so- - ownership of real-estate, exaggera- car traffic, promotion of large-scale cialism, however, renders the generalized derplatz, (1992, orig. 1929, pp. - flecting on people moving around Alexan notions of socialist urbanism used by 220-221) writes: ment, monofunctional concentration Döblin ted densification of the built environ Iván (1996) or Sonia - - (2008) inappropriate for a case study pening inside them, a tremendous ment of poor inhabitants and func- Szelényi Hirt “Who could find out what is hap of offices and retail areas, displace such as ours. chapter. [...] To enumerate them all tions”. and to describe their destinies is History of Modernity at hardly possible, and only in a few ca- At the time of the competition for the re- Alexanderplatz ses would this succeed. […] They development of Alexanderplatz in the late In the early 20th century, Alexanderplatz have the same equanimity as passen- 1920s, Martin Wagner, a major advocate had been acknowledged as a prime ex- gers in an omnibus or in street-cars. of modernist planning, was the chief plan- ample of a “modern” space. Its peculiar […] The wind scatters chaff over all ner of Berlin. Among his concerns was the social and spatial characteristics of mar- of them alike.” “irregularities” of the existent Alexander- ginality, diversity, and change, however, platz which were to be remedied by a have a long history reaching back to the Wolfgang ’s (1992) historical account foundation of Berlin in the 13th century. of Alexanderplatz as receptacle for (poor) square” (quoted in 1994, p. Kil “unified architectural design of the entire Originally an intersection of important immigrants coming from the East (Ger- 87). In the city as a “machine for work and Bodenschatz trade routes just outside of Berlin’s many and Eastern Europe) offers another good living”, Alexanderplatz was to beco- me a “clearing-point in a net of veins” de- termined by the principles of “accelerati- on, uninterrupted movement [“Stockungs- losigkeit”], clarity” (quoted in 2014). Wagner sought to disentangle car, Jähner - vels, and allow for the expansion of car rail, and pedestrian traffic at different le

traffic. According to Wagner’s colleague the opening up of new large streets was to and city councillor for traffic, Ernst Reuter, “air the inner city” not only for hygienic reasons, but also for economic develop-

housing blocks stood in the way, metapho- ment mediated by traffic. The proletarian rically and literally. As Wagner explained in the Deutsche Bauzeitung in 1934: “The neighbourhoods of the poor and poorest with their decimated spending capacity impede the development of the city and Photograph 2: Alexanderplatz in 1903 Source: Wikimedia Commons, CC-PD-Mark must be removed through a radical scrap-

20 Markus Kip, Douglas Young, Lisa Drummond: Socialist Modernism at Alexanderplatz

Photograph 3: Panoramic view of ruins and the reconstruction of the two Behrens buildings on Alexanderplatz on March 31, 1950 Source: Bundesarchiv, Bild 183-S95184, Photographer: Heinz Funck ping of the desolate dwelling quarters” blic plazas and massive housing estate- areas around the square itself. While such (quoted in 1994, p. 88). Ful- sAmong his concerns was Iván a slash-and-burn approach would be in- ly in line with high modernism’s embrace (1996, p. 301) himself mentions Alexan- consistent with the “principle of the or- Bodenschatz Szelényi of creative destruction and historical am- derplatz as an example of this aspect, cal- ganic”, it may have been accepted nonet- nesia, Wagner proposed to plan Alexan- ling it “indeed an impressive develop- heless on the basis of the intense war da- derplatz as a “world city square” [“Welt- ment, which expressed some kind of im- mage. That the emphasis on symbolic stadtplatz”] with a horizon of 25 years: perial grandeur and responded to certain renewal may have been a greater priority “With respect to the limited lifespan of the ceremonial needs of a socialist society”. than an historically more sensitive ac- world city square, it is also indicated that On this point, we concur. count is suggested by the following com- the buildings surrounding the square pos- ment by Paul Verner (quoted in sess no enduring economic or architectu- In terms of planning, the largesse of the Feireiss ral value” (quoted in 1994, 1960s Alexanderplatz redevelopment os- SED-district in Berlin, in 1960: 1994, pp. 24-25), first secretary of the p. 88). tensibly resembles high modernist plan- “In constructing the centre of Berlin, Bodenschatz - ning visions of building the city of the fu- the victorious ideas of socialism, the tical developments leading to World War ture on a large scale – and from scratch life of the people in peace, happiness The world financial crisis and the poli II brought these ambitions to a halt. With with hardly any concern for former street and welfare must be presented in a the founding of the German Democratic and building patterns. In the case of Al- work of urbanist and architectural Republic, however, the intention was to exanderplatz, the redevelopment virtual- art at a large scale so convincingly, continue the pre-war endeavour and to ly erased the historic grid of street and demonstrate its superiority by realizing square (only the two buildings by Beh- and strength, courage and enthusi- that it fills workers with confidence the modernist principles which had fai- rens from the early 1930s remained). asm. The building of the centre re- led under capitalist conditions. In the Such erasure was facilitated by the heavy quires a clear arrangement and next section, we scrutinize particular “so- damage the area sustained during WWII, thought-out structure. It must be ge- cialist” aspects of the Alexanderplatz de- but the development also suggests a nerous and spacious, have a bulked velopment and compare them to s conscious erasure of history by removing building development, broad streets claims about socialist urbanism. Asses- remnants of the built environment.15 As Hirt’ sing each claim, we will also point to an a radical approach, emphasizing rupture urban lungs.” and sufficiently large green spaces as additional social element of centrality and change ( 2008, p. 103), the that strikes us as important in order to building of Alexanderplatz resembles the Unquestionably, the enormous scope of Braun understand the development of Alexan- kind of high modernist approaches pro- the Alexanderplatz plan dwarfed many derplatz in the GDR. posed in the architectural competition in modernist planning efforts in the West. It 1929 as well as several others in the is particularly striking when compared Striking grandeur and rigid West. with the proposals of city planners such order? Layout and scope of The scope of the GDR development was as Martin Wagner and Ernst Reuter who Alexanderplatz wide and included large neighbourhood struggled to transfer private properties Sonia (2008, p. 786; following 1996) argues that socialist ci- thirty years earlier. The realization of Al- Hirt 15 Architectural critic, Dieter Hoffmann-Axthelm into city-ownership − and failed − only ties display “striking grandeur and rigid complains that residential areas to the north of exanderplatz was made possible by the Szelényi Alexanderplatz, in which the war-damage had largely order of spaces and buildings, as exhibi- been repaired, were slated for complete destruction to collectivization of land and real estate in make way for all-encompassing renewal (Interview ted in colossal but visually disciplined pu- Hoffmann-Axthelm 2011). the GDR. In a direct historical comparison

21 Europa Regional 22, 2014 (2015) 1-2

and exaggerated with respect to its use. In an interview, sociologist and planner, Professor Harald Bodenschatz from the Technical University in Berlin described this situation as “a car-oriented city wi-

Eastern Germany. It is very crazy. Totally thout cars! [...] You find it everywhere in car-oriented but there are no cars” (In- terview 2011). Such an as- sessment, however, must acknowledge Bodenschatz the expectation of economic impro- vements translating into a proliferation of cars.

Lack of functional diversity? Contrary to ’s and ’s asser- tion of a “lack of functional diversity”, we Hirt Szelényi contend that this GDR development of- fers a different picture. B. b), for example, contends that while com- Flierl (1998 mercial functions at Alexanderplatz were rather de-emphasized compared to city centres in the West, they were not absent. Photograph 4: View of Alexanderplatz weeks before its inauguration, August 13, 1969 Source: Bundesarchiv, Bild 183-H0813-0026-001 In 1971, the chief architect of the Alexan- Photographer: Eva Brüggmann derplatz redevelopment, Joachim as intended by its socialist builders, the pre-modern traditional city street gene- (1971, p. 347), addressed criticisms of Al- Näther planning of Alexanderplatz under capita- exanderplatz that claimed “there is too lism thus appeared to be too weak to rein the overcrowded and unsanitary condi- little ‘nightlife’, luminous advertising and rally, and, specifically, an overcoming of in land speculation as the Athens’ Char- tions of the pre-war neighbourhood cha- other effects”. ter demanded. racterized as “without sunlight” ( - “It must be said that we didn’t take (2009) accounts for the spacious- 1971, p. 27). The size of the square on the task to reproduce the com- Gum ness between buildings in the “Alex” area increased dramatically from 18,000 sqm merce of entertainment of Kurfürs- Sigel mich by way of the enormous scale of the enti- to 80,000 sqm and was destined for pe- tendamm or the hectic shindig of Pla- re planning concept. This spatial compo- destrians only. In the surrounding neigh- ce Pigalle. Alex is, in contrast to a ca- sition, as he claims, can be more fully bourhoods, previous densities of 850 to pitalist city, no stomping ground for grasped from the observation deck of the 1,000 inhabitants per hectare were to be the idle rich but a place for the leisu- adjacent TV tower 203m above the squa- reduced to 500 in entirely new buildings re of working people.” re. In this respect, spaciousness and the height dominance of TV tower and the in their use of space ( 2008, p. And Herbert Fechner (quoted in - that were to be more efficiently designed hotel must be considered complemen- 103). 1971, p. 21), Mayor of Berlin, clai- Braun Gum tary. Such a planning approach also spe- - med on the occasion of “Alex’s” inaugura- mich aks to the modernist method of concei- platz speaks to ’s characterization of tion in 1969: As a central traffic hub, too, Alexander ving and judging spaces from several per- “striking grandeur” and “rigid order”. The “In contrast to the centres of many Hirt spectives, arguably giving priority to the development was committed to the mo- capitals of capitalist countries with perspective from above, “the pilot’s” per- ‘city-character’ and that are all about spective.16 The generous openness of the representation but without real life dernist emphasis on facilitating traffic plan, with loosely grouped buildings on transportation, including trains, subways, and function like the well-known flows, including various modes of public and around Alexanderplatz can be read trams and buses that connected at Al- parlour [“gute Stube”], the reconst- as an embodiment of modernist aesthetic exanderplatz. The square was framed by ruction of central parts of Berlin is ideals, i.e. allowing for sun and ventilati- three major boulevards with up to 6 la- about the creation of a lively centre on and representing a repudiation of the nes in each direction, signaling a commit- for our population that offers good - housing, a diverse spectrum of expe-

16 See for example, Kuchenbuch 2010, p. 243 riences and opportunities for human ment to car traffic. The scope of this traf fic solution clearly proved to be oversized 22 Markus Kip, Douglas Young, Lisa Drummond: Socialist Modernism at Alexanderplatz

contacts as well as recreation and re- Berlin in which guests could get their was compensated for with colourful mo- laxation.” choice of dish by putting in special coins saics and friezes. Moreover, the develop- and then opening the desired glass cabi- ment integrated two original buildings of Using similar reasoning, Bruno net ( 1998). The dance bar Behrens from the 1930s that were resto- (1991, p. 59) claims that central spaces “Berliner Kaffeehaus”, one of the few red after suffering war damage to beco- Flierl Mühlberg like Alexanderplatz were primarily desi- spots in East Berlin open late at night, me key parts of the assemblage. The gned for “communicative centrality”. This along with a popular bowling centre com- housing estates surrounding the Alexan- was to be achieved by multifunctional pleted the range of entertainment in the derplatz area also display architectural buildings in the city centre for education, area ( 2006, p. 190). The “Wor- differences that have often been overloo- culture, leisure, dwelling, commerce, jobs ld Time Clock” as well as the “Fountain of Jochheim etc.; a mix that was expected to foster ur- the Peoples’ Friendship” were common estates in the GDR were often referred to ked after reunification when all housing banity. meeting points in East Berlin and the as “Platte”, assuming that they were all Among its diverse functions, Alexan- landscaping of the area around the TV to- built as prefabricated slab-construction wer, including the Neptune fountain, was (which in fact is not true for the housing hub for people traveling through the city, inviting of leisurely activities. The Alex­ estates at Alexanderplatz). derplatz was the most important traffic be it by car or one of the many modes of anderplatz itself occasionally hosted lar- ’s and - public transportation. After the moderni- ge information events, parades, festivals cialist urbanism thus mischaracterizes Hirt Szelényi’s definition of so zation of the train station in 1964, 1000 or meetings. In several instances, the sub- the planning of “Alex” in terms of its fun- S-Bahn trains and about 40 long-distan- way tunnels were used as galleries to ctional and architectural diversity (har- ce trains passed through the train station exhibit works of art ( 2008). monized but not uniform), but import- on a daily basis. But Alexanderplatz also antly also misses its symbolic emphasis Braun included commerce, culture, gastronomy, An oppressive monotony of on centrality. and a great number of jobs (particularly styles? - Characterizing the design of Alexander- From marginality to centrality wly-built dwellings in the immediate sur- platz as an “oppressive monotony of sty- Prior to World War II, Alexanderplatz ef- office-based) as well as thousands of ne rounding residential areas. To name only le” hardly seems appropriate. As we have fectively functioned as a barrier between the most renowned establishments: The already seen, Alexanderplatz architect of the bourgeois and imperial city centre House of the Teacher and its adjacent the GDR era, Dorothea , (marked by the large palace) in the West, Congress Hall were sites of conferences considers the architectural style at Al- and the impoverished neighbourhoods in Tscheschner and gatherings accommodating some exanderplatz “homogeneous”, an outco- the East. The GDR fashioning of “Alex” 1,000 visitors. The “Interhotel Stadt Ber- me of overall planning by a central autho- rity. The designs of individual buildings people”. As a popular space, Alexander- was to reflect the changing role of “the approximately 2,000 beds and included platz area was marginalized under capi- lin”, a high-rise of 39 floors (123 m), had 11 restaurants, a large ballroom and a ca- anderplatz and are ostensibly inspired by talism, yet in in the GDR it was to become fit within the overall concept of Alex­ sino on the 38th - a modernist aesthetic of simplicity and the civic centre of the state. There were renhaus” was the largest department sto- sobriety. Nevertheless, each of the new several scales to this new function as a floor. The “Centrum Wa re of the GDR with 15,000 sqm of sales buildings had different architects and al- people’s square. At neighbourhood level, lowed for some differentiation in style. In Alexanderplatz became a crucial piece in customers daily ( 2008, p. 115) 1960, the Politbüro explicitly asked the the upgrading of the Eastern part of the floor, able to accommodate up to 60,000 chief architects of the Alexanderplatz re- city. This upgrading was also necessary Braun of consumer goods in the GDR. A furni- development to avoid “monotonous con- due to the Western parts of the city being and offered the most refined assortment ture store was located in one of the Beh- crete boxes” following complaints from cut off through the division of the city. rens buildings. The store “Natasha” offe- the public ( and 2003, p. Nevertheless, Tschechner assesses: “For red specialty items from the USSR, right 8). The Alexanderplatz design accommo- - Holper Käther dates various differences and contrasts: lin, the Eastern districts, disdained since the first time in the urban history of Ber ( 2015). The House the honeycombed facade of the Centrum time immemorial, created for themselves next to a hunting and fishing outfitter of the Berlin Publishing Company was the Warenhaus can be juxtaposed to the line- ‘a bit of equality’ in the context of the in- Se­nats­verwaltung umbrella agency for various publishing arity of the hotel “Stadt Berlin”; the cur- ner city” (quoted in 2008, p. 113). houses, including several daily papers. tain wall-facade (Lamellenfassade) and In the “Alex” neighbourhoods, several Braun There were also plenty of cafes and res- large (eight to eleven-storey) housing taurants, including the “Alex Grill”, “Alex- estates were built to represent the regi- the flying roof at the base of the House of treff”, the “Mocca-bar”, and the “Automat”, House of Electric Industry. On some buil- me’s high aspirations for socialist living Travel contrast the flat facade of the dings, parsimonious architectural design standards across the population. In the the first self-serving restaurant in East 23 Europa Regional 22, 2014 (2015) 1-2

1960s, the housing estates were pro- travel agency and its state-run airline “In- or as Elmar (2013) demonstrates duced using industrial methods and terflug”) entitled “Humanity overcomes in his biographical narrative of architect Kossel counted internationally among the tech- time and space” may be given a symbolic Hermann Henselmann, who worked for nologically most advanced mass housing reading beyond its more literal invitation Nazi Germany and later became a chief complexes at the time ( 2004, to frontier-crossing travels: a liberation - p. 122). The advancement this housing from closed and marginalized quarters bility should not be mistaken to mean Leinauer architect in the GDR. Nevertheless, flexi represented for Berliners is even more towards an engagement with the world that the outcome is necessarily the same dramatic in the context of the pre-war ex- on this world city square. Assessing the regardless of political context. In this perience of overcrowded, unsanitary plans for the centre of Berlin, the editor- vein, we have discussed some of the mo- dernist peculiarities in the case of Al- the GDR presented this upgrading of the Kurt (1959, p. 2), envisioned “a exanderplatz. living conditions in this area. Officially, in-chief of the official architects’ journal, “working class area” that previously had central place of urban, national and inter- By highlighting the political character Magritz been neglected and discriminated against national encounters”. In fact, Alexander- of modernism at Alexanderplatz, we hope as a reversal of history ( 1971). platz became a popular place for leisure to contribute to the debates surrounding Compared to the density of the pre-war visits and encounters for people throug- the preservation of the DDR- or Ostmo- Gummich quarters, the spaciousness of the new de- hout Germany and in other socialist derne which have largely focused on eit- velopments must have appeared immen- countries. Several annual large-scale pa- her aesthetic or economic reasoning. sely liberating, not as the act of urban de- rades and demonstrations, involving tens, While it is understandable that advocates struction it was criticized for several if not hundreds of thousands of people for preservation refrain from using the decades later. throughout the country ended at Alexan- descriptor “socialist” due to its negative At an urban level, the emphasis on cen- derplatz. (2013) details how connotation in hegemonic discourses trality at Alexanderplatz can also be vie- Alexanderplatz became an important tou- Standley wed in its particular solution to the traf- rist destination for residents of Eastern the demise of the GDR, such a strategy particularly in the first decade following Europe, particularly in the early 1970s also abandons the possibility that these Previously Alexanderplatz had been a when residents of socialist countries buildings might actually tell us something fic chaos that had been persistent there. dense mix of pedestrian, car, and public could travel without a visa to the GDR. A today about the social life of cities. particular high point in this context was which (1971) illustrates with the 1973 World Youth Festival with its Bibliography transport traffic, the dangerousness of historical accounts of fatal accidents and focal events at Alexanderplatz which at- and Gummich injuries. By contrast, the new design tracted 8 million visitors from 140 coun- (2005): Hochhauser Berlin-Mitte und Aschenbeck, N. C. Niedenthal strictly adhered to the principle of sepa- tries to East Berlin ( 2008, p. 120). andere Bauten der DDR-Moderne. Del­ - menhorst. Braun wing ’s “Kill the street!”, Conclusion (2009): Stadtplanung als rating pedestrian and car traffic, follo except on days of demonstrations and pa- Throughout this paper we have argued Glucksverheißung: die Propaganda fur Le Corbusier Bartetzky, A. rades when the boulevards were closed that Alexanderplatz can be considered as - Ost-Berlins nach dem Zweiten Welt- den Wiederaufbau Warschaus und nism”. We have consciously refrained krieg. In: Bartetzky, A., M. Dmitrieva off to vehicular traffic. This separation of a specific example of “socialist moder - from construing a “type” of socialist mo- and A. Kliems (eds.): Imaginationen pedestrian, car, and train traffic, intended dernism and we do not claim that Alexan- des Urbanen. Berlin, pp. 51-80. to improve traffic flows and avoid acci in the design of Alexanderplatz. A negati- derplatz is in any way paradigmatic or re- (1961): Die moderne Groß- dents, amounted to a significant novelty ve feature was that the boulevards sur- presentative. Instead we have attempted stadt: Soziologische Überlegungen zum Bahrdt, H. P. rounding the perimeter were not inviting Stadtebau. Reinbeck. (1991): Modernity and Ambi- to make sense of the specific influence ideas in the creation of this space. It valence. Ithaca, N.Y. to pedestrian traffic. It was a rather long and confluence of socialist and modernist Bauman, Z. broad boulevards at street-level or by un- might be true that “modernism” is a tool- , K. von (2000): Ideas for a Capital and difficult endeavour to cross these derground tunnel. - City in East and West. In: Scheer, T. et al Beyme The overcoming of marginality at Al- rious political contents, as James C. (eds.): City of Architecture/Architec- box flexible enough to accommodate va exanderplatz, however, did not only aim (2000) argues in his account of - ture of the City. Berlin, pp. 239-250. Scott at improving conditions for employees, ’s attempted ingratiation with (1994): Berlin Alexan- Le Cor customers, and residents of the area, but both capitalist and socialist countries17, derplatz. In: Architektenkammer Ber- busier Bodenschatz, H. -

Walter Womacka’s frieze on the “House 17 At various stages in his career Le Corbusier sought buch 1993/1994. Hamburg. also those beyond the confines of the city. work in Mussolini’s Italy, Vichy France, Vargas’ Brazil, lin (ed.): Architektur in Berlin − Jahr of Travel” (the headquarter of the GDR’s Soviet Moscow and the post-war U.S.

24 Markus Kip, Douglas Young, Lisa Drummond: Socialist Modernism at Alexanderplatz

and C. genieure. Deutschland und Schweden (1995): Berlin auf der Suche 121-171. im 20. Jahrhundert. Bielefeld Bodenschatz, H., H.-J. Engstfeld Reflexionen 1990-1997. Berlin, pp. nach dem verlorenen Zentrum. Ham- (1998b): Stadtplaner und Ar- (1973): The Athens char- Seifert burg. chitekten im Staatssozialismus der ter. New York. Flierl, B. Le Corbusier , T. (2014): ‘Closed Cities’ versus DDR. In: Flierl, B. (ed.): Gebaute DDR. (2004): Das Wohngebiet ‘Open Society’? The Interaction of Über Stadtplaner, Architekten und die Karl-Marx-Allee. Industrielles Bauen Bohn Leinauer, I. De-Stalinisation and Urbanisation. In: zwischen Strausberger Platz und Al- Bohn, T., R. Einax ad. M. Abeßer (eds.): 1997. Berlin, pp. 52-75. exanderplatz. In: Butter, A. and U. Har- Macht. Kritische Reflexionen 1990- De-Stalinisation reconsidered. Persis- (2008): List und Schicksal der tung (eds.): Ostmoderne. Architektur tence and Change in the Soviet Union. Ost-Moderne. Hermann Henselmann in Berlin 1945-1965. Berlin, pp. 114- Flierl, T. Frankfurt, pp. 115-131. zum 100. Geburtstag. Berlin. 123. (2008): Der Sozialistische (1971): Der Alexander- (1959): Die sozialistische Hauptstadtplatz: Schaufenster Ostber- platz. Berlin. Umgestaltung des Zentrums von Ber- Braun, J. Gummich, K. H. Magritz, K. lins. In: Schug, A. (ed.): Funf Platze. Ein Die andere „Charta“. Der lin. In: Deutsche Architektur 1, pp. 1-5. Name. Der Berliner Alexanderplatz. moderne Städtebau auf dem Prüfstand - Hain, S. (1993): Berlin, pp. 99-132. der Politik. In: Kursbuch 1, 12, pp. 47-62. sign: CIAM Architects and the Forma- Mumford, E. (2009): Defining Urban De and (eds.) (2004): (1996): From the Soci- tion of a Discipline, 1937-1969. New Ostmoderne. Architektur in Berlin alist to the Capitalist City: Experiences Haven. Butter, A. U. Hartung Häussermann, H. 1945-1965. Berlin. from Germany. In: Andrusz, G., M. Har- , E. (2000): The CIAM Dis- (2007): Requiem for a lost Pa- loe and I. Szelenyi. (eds.): Cities After course on Urbanism, 1928-1960. Cam- Mumford last. ‘Revanchist urban planning’ and Socialism. Urban and Regional Change bridge, Mass. Colomb, C. ‘burdened landscapes’ of the German (1998): Der Automat am Democratic Republic in the new Berlin. Oxford, pp. 214-231. Alex. In: Pysall, H.-J. (ed.): Das Alexan- and Conflict in Post-Socialist Societies. Mühlberg, D. In: Planning Perspectives 22, 3, pp. (2008): Landscapes of Postmo- derhaus. Der Alexanderplatz. Berlin, 283-323. dernity: Changes in the Built Fabric of pp. 51-54. Hirt, S. , G. (2000): Attempts at a na- - (1971): Städtebau für das Le- tional New Beginning. In: Scheer, T. et cialism. In: Urban Geography 29, pp. ben. In: Deutsche Architektur 6, 1, pp. Confurius Belgrade and Sofia Since the End of So Näther, J. al. (eds.): City of Architecture/Architec- 785-810. 344-349. ture of the City. Berlin, pp. 215-228. and (1970): Von der Urbanitat zur (2011): Zum Umgang mit DDR-Baudenkmale in Berlin. Berlins „Urbanistik“. In: Kyklos 23, 4, pp. 869- Holper, A. M. Käther (2003): Salin, E. dem stadtebaulichen Erbe der Osten neu entdeckt. Berlin. 880. Danesch, S. DDR-Moderne in Berlin-Mitte. Mun- (2014): Die leere Seele Ber- (1998): Seeing Like a State. chen. lins. In: Tagesspiegel, 28.2.2014. How Certain Schemes to Improve the Jähner, H. Scott, J. C. (1992, orig. 1929): Berlin Der Berliner Alexan- Human Condition Have Failed. New Ha- Alex­anderplatz. The Story of Franz Bi- derplatz. Berlin. ven, C.T. Doblin, A. Jochheim, G. (2006): berkopf. Transl. E. Jolas. New York. , M. (2000): The 1960s: The Leg- - (2012): Denkmal Ost-Mo- acy of Modernism - Curse or Blessing? lexander- Kieren Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwick derne. Aneignung und Erhaltung des In: Scheer, T. et al. (eds.): City of Archi- platz. Das Haus der Statistik. http:// Escherich, M. lung und Umwelt (2015): A baulichen Erbes der Nachkriegsmoder- tecture/Architecture of the City. Berlin, www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/pla- ne. Berlin. pp. 283-294. nen/staedtebau-projekte/alexander- (1994): Alexanderplatz: Städ- Das Tor Berlins zum Os- platz/de/heute/haus_der_statistik/in- tebaulicher Ideenwettbewerb = urban ten. In: Die Zeit, 50, 4.12.1992. dex.shtml (accessed online March 18, Feireiss, K. Kil, W. (1992): planning ideas competition. Berlin. (2005): Das Zentrum von Ber- 2015) (1991): Stadtgestaltung in der lin. In: Bodenschatz, H. (ed.): Renais- (2009): Ein Platz, viele Platze: Konter, E. ehemaligen DDR als Staatspolitik. In: sance der Mitte. Zentrumsumbau in Projektionen und Spurensuche am Ber- Flierl, B. Sigel, P. Marcuse, P. and F. Staufenbiel (eds.): London und Berlin. Berlin, pp. 167- liner Alexanderplatz. In: A. Bartetzky, Wohnen und Stadtpolitik im Umbruch. 335. M. Dmitrieva and A. Kliems (eds.): Ima- Berlin, pp. 49-65. (ed.) (2013): Hermann Hensel- ginationen des Urbanen. pp. 81-118. (1998a): Der Zentrale Ort in mann und die Moderne: eine Studie zur (2013): “Here Beats the He- Kossel, E. Berlin – Zur räumlichen Inszenierung Modernerezeption in der Architektur art of the Young Socialist State”: 1970s’ Flierl, B. Standley, M. sozialistischer Zentralität. In: Flierl, B. der DDR. Königstein im Taunus. East Berlin as Socialist Bloc Tourist (ed.): Gebaute DDR. Über Stadtplaner, (2010): Geordnete Ge- Destination. In: The Journal of Archi- Architekten und die Macht. Kritische meinschaft. Architekten als Sozialin­ tecture 18, 5, pp. 683-698. Kuchenbuch, D.

25 Europa Regional 22, 2014 (2015) 1-2

(1996): Cities under socia- - Szelényi, I. Markus Kip loe and I. Szelényi (eds): Cities After York University lism − and after. In: Andrusz, G., M. Har Socialism. Urban and Regional Change Department of Sociology 4700 Keele Street Malden, M.A., pp. 286-317. Toronto ON M3J 1P3 and Conflict in Post-Socialist Societies. Canada and (2006): Bau- [email protected] haus-Tradition und DDR-Moderne. Thöner, W. P. Müller Munchen. Douglas Young (2000): Sixteen Princi- Lisa Drummond ples of Urban Design and the Athens York University Tscheschner, D. Charter? Die sechzehn Grundlagen des Department of Social Science 4700 Keele Street Städtebaus. In: Scheer, T. et al. (eds.): Toronto ON M3J 1P3 City of Architecture/Architecture of the Canada City. Berlin, pp. 259-270. [email protected] (2007): The Disintegra- [email protected] tion of a Socialist Exemplar. In: Space Weszkalnys, G. and Culture 10, 2, pp. 207-230.

Peзюме Résumé

Социалистический модернизм на Александерплац Le modernisme socialiste sur l’Alexanderplatz Маркус Кип, Дуглас Янг, Лиза Драммонд Markus Kip, Douglas Young, Lisa Drummond - mettant de comprendre le développement de l’Alexanderplatz В предлагаемой статье концепция «социалистического Cet article plaide en faveur d’un «modernisme socialiste» per sous le régime de la République démocratique d’Allemagne dans модернизма» используется для понимания реализации les années soixante. Nous supposons que le développement de развития Александерплац в 1960-х гг. во времена Гер­ l’ère socialiste sur l’Alexanderplatz est une réalisation de la vi- манской Демократической Республики. Авторский подход sion moderniste. Dans le même temps, le design des années состоит в том, что развитие Александерплац в эпоху soixante de l’Alexanderplatz comprend également des particu- социализма было воплощением модернистского замысла. В то же время оформление Александерплац в 1960-х гг. et la visibilité des hautes structures dominantes qui sont en включает отличительные «социалистические» характе­ larités «socialistes», notamment l’accent mis sur la centralité contraste saisissant avec le canon haut-moderniste (occiden- ристики, в частности, подчёркивание централитета и роли tal). L’article comprend deux parties: dans un premier temps, оптически доминирующих высотных зданий, которые nous étudions la conception de l’urbanisme en RDA et l’aména- находятся в разительном контрасте с традиционными gement du centre-ville. L’Alexanderplatz était à bien des égards модернистскими канонами (принятыми на Западе). Статья l’apogée de ce genre de conception, construite à partir du pa- состоит из двух частей. Вначале рассматривается градост­ trimoine moderniste associé aux idées importées par les Sovié- роительная концепция ГДР и развитие городского центра. tiques en matière de construction de villes. Dans un second Район Александерплац во многих отношениях был кульми­ temps, nous examinons l’Alexanderplatz à travers le prisme his- нацией концепции, базировавшейся на модернистском­ torique. Nous pensons que le développement de la RDA tire par- наследии и на привнесённых из Советского Союза идеях в ti de l’expérience des précédents plans d’aménagement moder- области градостроительства. Во второй части статьи Алек­ сандерплац­ рассматривается в историческом­ плане. Alors que le but de l’Alexanderplatz était de démontrer la capa- Авторы полагают, что дизайн Александерплац­ во времена nistes réalisés pour l’Alexanderplatz à la fin des années vingt. cité socialiste unique à réaliser les promesses de modernité, ГДР был построен на опыте предшествующих модернист­ ских проектов конца 1920-х гг. В то время как Алексан­ дерплац должна была представлять уникальную «Alex», nom familier de la place, contraste également avec la Hirt ou Iván Szelényi. способность социализма по воплощению задач совре­ stylisation des «villes socialistes», comme le supposent Sonia менности, «Алекс», как это место именуется в народе, (Sonia Hirt und Iván Szelényi). Berlin, Alexanderplatz, République démocratique d’Allemagne, urba- выделяется на фоне стиля «социалисти­ ческого­ города» nisme -

Берлин, Александерплац, Германская Демократическая Республи ка, градостроительство 26