Berlin, Germany

Home , Fernsehturm Berlin, Kunsthaus Tacheles

GROUP INTRODUCTION

Michael Baldwin Luke Carnaby Saskia Furman Y3_S3 A country with an already unstable economy, Germany suffered an embarrassing end to World War 1 in 1918. Forced to agree to the conditions set in the Treating of Versailles, the country fell into further debt, borrowing off the USA to pay heavy reparations fines. The Weimar Republic, established from the German revolution, set out to eliminate a majority of the terms.

The crises of 1923 saw Germany fall into gross unemployment and a sunken depression. The French invaded the Ruhr, when Germany missed a reparations payment in 1922, which led German workers to strike, providing a goods shortage and prompting the government to print more paper money, leading to hyperinflation. In Berlin, over 30,000 people rioted during the misery caused, while the Nazi party attempted a revolt in Munich. When the Wall Street crash caused the USA to call in their reparations loans, Germany’s economy plummeted even further, and by autumn of 1932, five million Germans were unemployed. The following year, Adolf Hitler was appointed the last Chancellor of Weimar, and the National Socialist German Workers (Nazi) Party continued to grow in popularity.

At this time, the Kunsthaus Tacheles (then “Haus der Technik”) – located in the Jewish Quarter of Orienstrasse – was used to hold meetings by Nazi Party members, and eventually became the central administrative office for the SS. The Second World War saw both characteristics and use of the building change dramatically. From a Jewish department store until 1914, the Nazi’s “closed the building’s skylights and removed ridge turrets” (Berlinartsjetzt, 2012) during the War, turning the attic into a prison for interrogation.

Although glass skylights were removed, bars remained over the windows to prevent escape from the “Haus Der Technik”; at this time, used as a prison.

Similarly, as the Nazi party continued to rise in power many changes occurred in and around Berlin as Hitler’s capitalist regime affected community, architecture and Germany’s moral. After coming up against escalating hostility from the Weimar Republic, Walter Gropius’ Bauhaus, a school for artists, architects and designers (1919), was forced to move from Weimar to Dessau in early 1925, where it remained until the school was closed under political pressure from the right-wing dictatorship in October 1932. The flat plain surfaces Gropius decided on dominate the design, uninterrupted by windows, peak or other architectural features. This was, in fact, one of the reasons used by the Nazis to close the school in 1933, as ‘flat roofs’ generated much public controversy.

In November 1938, the divide in Germany’s community became so great that a pogrom was carried out through the entire country, reaching parts of Austria. Kristallnacht, “Night of Broken Glass” saw Jewish owned stores, buildings and synagogues ransacked, demolished and burned to the ground. German society and culture was heavily controlled and regulated by Hitler’s capitalist regime, with a disregard for all creativity, leaving the country in a mess of destruction, “the little synagogue was but a heap of stone, broken glass and smashed-up woodwork” (Lucas, 1938). This act of control spread not only to destruction, but also the building of new architecture. The Fascist regime used architecture as a method of propaganda to display their strength and intimidation over the general public. The Re- ichsluftfahrtministeriumis 1933, located on Wilhemstrasse, is an existing limestone example of a large masonry building that housed the Ministry of Aviation during World War II. Hitler did not, however, limit his design control to government buildings only. To display complete control of the Nazi dictatorship, the Olympic stadium in Berlin, initially design by March for the 1939 Olympics, was forced to resign the original plans for “a steel frame with lightweight cladding, which expressed a ‘modern’ image”, (Fraser, 1996:115) in favour of Architect Albert Speer’s design of steel and masonry. 1 Hitler felt that everything wrong with Germany was Berlin, where Friedrichstraße was at the heart of that problem. After the boom period of the 1920’s, Friedrichstraße had become a real hedonistic capital of berlin filled with nightclubs, jazz dens and dive bars. When Hitler came to power in 1933, over 250 of these bars were closed and Friedrichstraße was transformed it into a shadow of its former self. The area to the west of this street was to become the central Govern- ment district, and later the centre of Hitler’s new Nazi Berlin.

Hitler believed that once Germany had won the war, Berlin would become a dominant world capital to be known as Welthauptstadt Germania, coming from the roman word for Germany. In a plan drawn up with his trusted architect Speer, Berlin was to be divided by a great axis running west to east, through Brandenburg gate, as well as a north-south axis known as Prachtallee - Avenue of splendours – which would pass the Reichstag towards the new Reich chancellery and south towards Tempelhof Airport. This axis would be traffic free and act as a parade ground for the Third Reich (The Times, 2008). This new architecture “aimed to dwarf the monumental cityscape of Paris… a typography of power on the model of the ancient empires” (Webber, 2008).

“The Nazis had three fundamental problems in building Germania: a shortage of labour, a shortage of building mate- rial and the houses that stood in the way.” (The Times: 2008). Few projects were ever started and as the war continued, efforts moved to the front line both on the fields and in the camps. However, even though Berlin was bombed repeat- edly during the war, in the early years of the 1940’s there was a constant battle for Hitler and Berlin to stand defiant and rebuild. The berlin opera house Staatsoper was re-built and re-opened after being victim to bombing from the allied troops, a symbol of Hitler’s love for Prussian architecture and the opera.

After the War, Berlin was divided into four sectors; the USA, Great Britain, France, and Russia. Relationships between the 3 western allies and Russia quickly broke down, when USSR severed transport lines into the western allied sectors that responded in 1948 with the berlin airlift – supplies were flown into the western sectors (Melzer, 2003). In 1952 work began on the construction of Stalinallee, Germanys first Socialist Street, but a year later the workers went on strike against a rise in work quotas. Tensions continue to rise and with working and living conditions becoming increasingly difficult in East Berlin nearly 200,000 GDR residents flee to West Berlin in 1960 (Melzer, 2003). In 1961 as an attempt to stop residents moving from East to West Berlin, the German Democratic Republic (GDR) rolled out a barbed wire fence – the first stage of the construction of the Berlin Wall. In its final form, the separation consisted of a Wall with a piped cap on the western side, a raked sand ‘death strip’, lights, watch towers armed with guards on shoot to kill orders and a further two more fences (Berlin.de, 2008). The years between 1961 and 1989 saw West Berlin become an outpost for the western allies allowing them to peep over the wall at technological and architectural devel- opments within the socialist state, including the construction of the television tower to which the western allies retali- ated by inviting major architects to design for the International Building Exhibition which was completed in completed in 1987. (Webber, A, 2008:14)

The Berlin Wall separated families and friends when it was constructed in 1961 almost overnight, acted as a physical and symbolic divider of Europe for nearly 40 years. The GDR’s downfall began with the election of Mikhail Gorbachev to the position of General Secretary. With the USSR experiencing economic difficulty, Gorbachev put in place radical economic and social reform policies that allowed privatisation of industry and greater freedom of speech throughout the Eastern Bloc, ultimately changing the course of history. The new freedom of speech reforms led to revolution and eventually the complete dissolution of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics; for East and West Germany this meant unification (Graham, 2000).

On the evening of November 9th 1989 the announcement that East German citizens could now cross the boarder into West Germany, was inaccurately broadcast across the country stating that the new law was in immediate effect. Peo- ple all over the world watched as crowds rushed to the checkpoints where the situation was extremely tense, as the announcements did not correspond with the checkpoint guard orders. After attempts to regulate border crossing, the guards gave in and the hostile Berliners were allowed through; a truly iconic and emotive moment. One of the most important events of the 20th century, the fall of the Berlin Wall marked the end of the Cold War and the collapse of communism.

2 In 1990 the Berlin Wall was removed and Germany adopted sovereignty (Suau, 2009). Up until this point West Germany had experienced unprecedented economic success. However the country now faced a difficult challenge as East Germa- ny had experienced significantly less economic growth. The merging of the two states was a slow process economically and socially and West Germany invested over one trillion Deutschmarks in economic reconstruction (Lange and Pugh, 1998). Socially there was a rewarding outcome, exhibited best in Berlin. Counter-cultural life style and ideologies were rife in West Berlin before unification as it was a free democratic state, but occupied more of an underground status in East Berlin. In the years that followed reunification, income and quality of life greatly improved across former East Berlin and the city adopted a new identity. Artists and musicians who had occupied squats in Kreuzberg, formerly west Berlin, expanded into the abandoned residential blocks in the East (Feffer, 2013). Over the following two decades, Berlin was transformed and the city has become as famous for its freethinking art, music, squatting culture and wild nightlife as it is for war crimes and oppression.

Berlin, a city that bears the scars of war and Socialism alongside the reputation for revolt, anarchy and counter-culture, is now a fashionable tourist haven. However with crime rates rising and economic inequality growing, is the city again facing division? Much conflict and argument surrounds the topic of Berlin’s identity and poses the question: Is regeneration, gentrification and artificial re-fabrication of historical landmarks inviting an affected consumer generation to relocate to the site, warping the true identity and destroying the existing community?

3 The Death and Life of Berlin An essay based on Jane Jacobs’ “The Death and Life of Great American Cities”, 1961

New development is heavily prevalent in the Berlin of 2013. Is gentrification an advantage for the current inhabitants of Berlin, or is the city too focused on regeneration for monetary benefit?

Saskia Furman Y3_S3 Kunsthaus Tacheles

WEDDING Our hostel “Odyssee Globetrotter“

EAST BERLIN MITTE

TIERGARTEN FRIEDRICHSHAIN

KREUZBERG

NEUKOLLN WEST BERLIN

Outline of the Berlin wall before it was torn down in 1989

CHARLOTTENBURG

N 5 Organising a city according to the principles and aims of city planning and rebuilding does not generate success. When cities begin to flourish, gentrification moves in, encouraging such principles in an attempt to enhance the city. However, gentrification can have the opposite effect, reducing everything that makes the city unique and successful by turning it expensive, regimented and capitalist. Milton Keynes, the UK’s first purpose built city based on the Master Plan of 1970, is a strong example of “middle-income housing projects which are truly marvels of dullness and regimentation, sealed against buoyancy or vitality of city life.” (Jacobs, 1961:4). Berlin is fast being consumed by gentrification, no longer a haven for free artistic expression. The city is renowned for its artistic and cultural diversity, but is Berlin flourishing this way in spite of its poor financial situation or because of it?

In the early 1990’s, people believed a post gentrification era was upon us due to the economic crisis of the 90’s, “the process itself will be of decreasing importance as we move beyond the recession of the early 1990s” (Bourne, 1993). However, when the Berlin Wall came down in 1989, the city was and still is exceptionally poor, with unemployment rates currently at 19%, most of which are artists. With the barrier between the two parts of the city destroyed, it is impossible to think change was not imminent; people expected growth and gentrification. Larry Bourne’s paper on the Demise of Gentrification describes the process as a social change to an elite inner city. This elitism is illustrated further by Tom Slater, who explains how gentrification once referred to “rent increases, landlord harassment and working class displacement…”, has since manifested into a far more materialistic definition, “street- level spectacles, trendy bars and cafes, ipods, social diversity and funky clothing outlets” (Slater, 2006).

1. A small part of the Berlin Wall remains to remind Berliners of its history

The demise of the Berlin wall offered opportunities for artistic expression to grow from the former West Berlin and merge with the rest of the city. In accordance with Slater’s original meaning of gentrification, one can look at increase in rent. In the now hip and current area of Kreuzberg, as the poor unemployed of the city were mainly artists, the areas in which they reside were soon filled with street art none can afford to clean up. This display from the artistic movement enriched the areas, increasing cultural value, thus prompting an increase in exchange value causing a rise in rent prices even though artists were still not profiting. Anti-gentrification movements popped up as rent increased and cosmopolitan, bohemian lifestyle replaced grocers and pubs; the impoverished community took a stand against the rise in a 2. The use of cheap materials and an display of bottom- up grass roots activism (June 2011), occupying a overnight build leaves the remaining house on Schlesische Straase in protest. part of the wall in a state of disrepair 6 However, once one of the cities poorest boroughs, it is now teeming with cool and quirky bars and independent over- priced vintage stores that flourish particularly on and around Bergmannstrasse. In line with Jacobs’ explanation as to why Wanamaker’s big department store moved from Greenwhich Village and into a suburb, “wherever lively and popu- lar parts of cities are found, the smaller outnumber the large” (Jacobs, 1961:191), KaDeWe, Berlin’s equivalent to Lon- don’s Harrods, lies in the wealthy area of Charlottenberg (see figure ),3 frequented by tourists and the city’s wealthier inhabitants. This idea reinforces that Kreuzberg has since developed from the derelict, isolated section of former West Berlin into the capital’s most cultural centre, as the increase in rent prices prompted shop owners to seek out Kreuzberg as the new up-and-coming location for young hipsters and invest in the district, successfully bringing wealth into the area.

3. Charlottenburg – a quaint, wealthy area. Free from the street art and litter that surrounds Kreuzberg

4. Contrast - Litter at Warschauer Strasse train station

Moreover, Kreuzberg has developed itself into a flourishing, youthful and vibrant area of living, without interference of city planners and regardless of their lack of government funding. Similar to Jane Jacobs’ assessment of North End – Boston… ‘Old, low-rent area…Boston’s worst slum…text book “megalopolis”’, yet a healthy, thriving community has established itself with a developed housing market unworthy of its status as a “slum”’, Bet and Gebhardt 2001 referred to Kreuzberg as a ghetto filled with mainly Muslim male youth, yet most of the former Eastern inner city neighbourhoods (including Kreuzberg and adjacent parts of the district Neukolln) have been thoroughly gentrified. Although truly struggling artists could not possibly afford to live here since its process of redevelopment, private investment has seen these boroughs transformed into the home of the middle class socially ‘alternative’ culture of Berlin. As a result, independent businesses have been given an opportunity to flourish, pumping circulation back into its struggling economy. 7 Yet gentrification, although heavily prevalent in these areas of Berlin post 1989, is a process rejected by the majority of Berliners, as it is a city created by its inhabitants. Left to their own devices, phenomenon such as street art and graffiti have succeeded in unifying the city by starting an interaction between inhabitants and creating a community, a network of communication throughout the city. In 2003, artist Roland Brueckner started a poster campaign illustrating his heart- broken loss of an ex girlfriend, Linda. These posters continued for a year before it was revealed to be nothing more than a concept to engage the inhabitants of Berlin. And it worked – people responded with opinions in newspapers and on radios shows. This thriving community would have been impossible under town planners’ controlled regulations, as with gentrification there is a loss of spontaneity. Yet government continue to ignore the evidence in front of them and insist that cleaner streets make for a more successful city, with current fines in place to anyone caught, of €500 for graffiti and €15 for a poster.

6. Detail to show the vast number of 5. Little Lucy - a series of art works recognisable to Berliners posters that fill the city. Here, lampposts are not visible behind the sheer amount of paper left by various advertisers

The Berlin of today is not the same city as it was five years ago, nor will it be the Berlin of five years’ time. An ever changing city, it is populated by the young moving in to the city to study, before heading North into Mitte – a ‘yuppie’ area already gentrified for young families. It is here, close to Rosenthaler Platz, one can take a stroll in the scenic park t (see figure ),7 before dining in a local Weinerei; €2 for unlimited wine and three course meal, to pay what you feel is deserved on leaving. Although typical of Berlin, there is a distinct air of pretention inside, where small amounts of money will be accepted grudgingly. Mitte, gentrified so new and up-to-date, feels exclusive and somewhat ostentatious. It is an accomplishment for the area, however, that the park has manifested into a delightful feature of the district. One that would not have existed prior to the recent gentrification as large city parks, regardless of planners often encouraging “More Open Space”, unfortunately promote “muggings… vandalism…(and sit as) bleak vacuums between buildings,” (Jacobs, 1961:90). The process of gentrification in these areas is accepted, even welcomed as one leaves their poorer student selves behind, ready to join the world of the young professional. Part of a natural progression, these residents, previously students themselves, move onwards and upwards into more expensive parts of the city.

8 Weinerei

Veteranenstraße

Volkspark am Weinbergsweg

7. Volkspark am Weinbergsweg - a rare example of successful “Open Space”

In contrast to this, the problem occurs as new waves of the young bring with them changing views of what they want from a city, and hence the possibility of forced change to the areas wishing to remain untouched in order to develop at their own rate. This is evidence that directly contradicts Bourne’s prediction in 1993, that the “rate and impact of gentrification will be much reduced,” (Bourne, 1993:63) for reasons including a “decline in the younger cohorts”, and a demise in “private investment in the built environment”. Although this prediction was made based on data collected in Canada, it stemmed from the “persistent recession” of the 1990’s, a phenomena that affected globally, and thus generalisations can be drawn. With an influx of people generating change, only to move on after a few short years, the permanent residents are left with a dilemma, as living in an area of re-generation every few years, leaves them with a distinct lack of security as gentrification forces inhabitants out of the district when the cost of living begins to rise.

This is precisely what happened to the population in Kreuzberg and is working its way through Neukolln - currently in Hermannplatz. In the poor Turkish area, with cheap rent and authentic falafel, Pannierstrasse is home to a new, trendy restaurant “Berlin Burger International” bursting with foreigners and looking just a tad out of place amongst the Kebab shops. Although arguably the best burger in Berlin (not to mention the largest – see figure ),8 the tiny shop where it resides has put Pannierstrasse on the map. The restaurant is frequented on the trendy food blog circuit, and even features on ‘Tripadvisor’. Bringing customers from all over the world and city, it is quite possible to assume this is the beginning of a regener- 8. Berlin Burger International - my personal lunch one ation process. As more independent businesses open afternoon in the area, rent will eventually increase as gentrification moves in and the residents will be pushed out.

9 However, Berlin is not a touristscape. It is the authentic real urban neighbourhood people want to see when they visit Berlin, which is why tourism plays such a large part. Urban tourism is generated because people, especially the young, want to see the city as it is now, with its modern artistic culture and rich diversity, “big cities are generators of diversity... (where) city diversity itself permits and stimulates more diversity.” (Jacobs 1961:145). Development and gentrification will see this valuable asset lost if it were to become a typical tourist ‘hang out’ as Berlin is visited for its deep routed cultural heritage; the art that litters the streets and the squat culture that expanded after the fall of the Berlin Wall. It is from this idea that we are introduced to one of Berlin’s most significant examples of unwelcome gentrification. After the fall of the Berlin wall, the many abandoned properties in East Berlin were joined to the network of squats that pre- existed in West Berlin. The Tacheles, Berlin’s most famous artists center, situated in Mitte, earned the city its reputation for cultural diversity and edginess. In September 2012, the 22-year history of the Tachales was destroyed as the government shut it down. Gentrification is, by definition, supposed to promote economic growth. Therefore, one must enquire as to what the government is trying to establish through gentrification. Development moving in to the North of Wed- ding, a Turkish area with much prostitution, will take advantage of the current gentrification in the way that renovation should increase standard of living for a district by improvement rather than decreasing creativity, “money is a powerful force both for city decline and city regeneration” (Jacobs’, 1961:380). It is true that the Tacheles had, by this time lost its edgy prestige, but if development is measured by money, the movement (already victim to gentrification through tourism and over-exposure) containing studios, workshops, a nightclub and a cinema, was by all accounts a tourist trap. A meeting point for artists, musicians, gallery owners and theatre people, here was a symbol of Berlin that proved the newly unified city in 1989 could provide opportunity for creative experiments, and offered a space perfect for it. What the Tacheles provided was urban tourism at its best where creative movement was happening naturally, without the help of planners. Furthermore, it opened a dialogue with the non-artistic community as rooms were open and encouraged interaction with artists. “To understand cities, we have to deal outright with the combinations or mixtures of uses, not separate uses” (Jacobs 1961:188). This was a prime example of joining the official culture of the capital, mixed with revolutionary underground, and yet gentrification is suffocating the creativity.

On the other hand, Jonathan Jones (Guardian, 2012) makes the point that the Tacheles did not try generating “iconic work or major artists”, perhaps this is why it was deemed useless and failed during the process of new development, “it was an experiment in the power of imagination”. Demolishing the Tacheles in a process of gentrification was to wipe out the layers of collective and personal article history to make way for the new simply because it was an un-official part of the capital; not in the text book history of the state. “When a centre of activity has reached a peak…by failing to modify itself at a critical point (it) becomes a malfunction”, (Jacobs, 1961:251); the Tacheles was overlooked in the process of regeneration, a great loss to the existing culture simply because it appeared irrelevant to Berlin’s 9. Tacheles, Mitte. Before closing Sept 2012 growth in monetary terms. 10 10. In elevation, the artists’ commune was in disrepair. Although currently closed, development is yet to begin, leaving a now abandoned, derelict facade.

In agreement, Jens Balzer of the New York Times (2012) writes of the fall in Berlin’s anarchic subculture from a monetary perspective, quoting the city’s mayor, Klaus Wowereit, “Berlin is poor, but sexy”, yet concludes that the closing of the Tacheles is not a great loss to the city, but in fact a necessity as Berlin is so poor, there must be a change in order to increase business development. It is interesting to note however, that the thriving business industry in Berlin is in web design. The majority of the city’s money comes from the creative sector. Gentrification is necessary to ensure this boom- ing industry remains established, but over-development is destroying creativity by trying to control it. It is difficult for the city to know how to react in this catch 22 situation, but overall Capitalism will stand as gentrification continues to encourage conformity.

Towards the end of the article, Balzer talks of how new generations are trying to transform Berlin culturally, “After 20 years of anarchy, of squatting and relying on a sympathetic City Hall to keep away the eviction notices, they must learn to professionalize, to find a long-term perspective for cultural visions and lifestyles.” (Balzer, 2012). The subcultures themselves, although against capitalist structures, are encouraged to form an alliance with the government and drive the creative industry forward. A current example of this collaboration is to look at Berlin’s Bar 25, infamous as one of the clubs that established Berlin to its globally renowned nightlife status. Once located right by the River Spree, the underground club was forced to shut down in 2010 and moved to a different location, with its owners working to turn the old site on Holzmarktstrasse, into an “innovative artist’s colony” (Balzer, 2012). The cultural and avant-garde are to be absorbed into and by the capitalist system in order to be controlled, where flair and originality become regulated with apartments and schools, forming a relationship with local economy and politics.

11. Section along the Media Spree. Bar 25, once situated adjacent to the River Spree. Office blocks in the background will soon move forward as development increases turning the view from the river monochro- matic and dull

11 On speaking to locals, however, it becomes ever apparent that Berlin will have lost something important here. These places came about by chance, by residents of the city using the urban environment and generating it into something un- planned. A further example of this is found in the Young African Art Market (YAAM). Also situated along the River Spree, created from a merger of street artists, DJs, musicians and athletes, this haven for creative outlet (since 1994) is soon to become no more than grey concrete office buildings. As the city’s profitable land has been continually sold to real estate developers by the poor city, the colourful, independent scene along the river Spree is losing to mass-produced grey space. Controlling artistic flair in an attempt to aid the process of gentrification simply does not work; as soon as Bar 25 shut down, it was lost forever. I agree with Jacobs’ opposing view to Balzer, that planning of cities according to a generic formula does not make a city work. Here we see a form of disaster capitalism, whereby culture is systematically wiped out by the state but masked by the state imperative for economic growth; “to defy Capitalism, you have to defy its institutions” (Guardian 2012).

Skate ramp

Sand. Used in the summer for Basketball games such as courts (A) volley ball

Bar and perfor- mance area (B)

12. The Young African Art Market (YAAM), a socia- ble green space under threat of closure

(A) (B)

12 13. A hub of creativity and, above all, thriftiness, as the community use whatever resources available in the best possible manner without financial support. Here, a bench fashioned from disused pieces of wood.

14. Current section through the YAAM, creative space behind the East side gallery

15. Plans for development with turn the section into a typical piece of dull, uninteresting grey-space

As rising rent in the former East Berlin and later, the more expensive parts of former West Berlin, pushed bars and nightclubs as well as underground galleries out of Tacheles, they moved into unused industrial buildings and along the banks of the River Spree. Before now, Berlin has had the ability to thrive on gentrification, for when spaces closed, another always opened. Known as “Zweischennutzung”, meaning ‘temporary use’. This constant movement was seen as a com- mon part of Berlin’s culture. Deemed the “closing of the frontier” the end to this guerilla movement is just around the corner as precious few areas of creative personality are sold for development just as the ruins of Potzdamer Platz have since becoming a heartless shopping mall.

Overall, I believe gentrification, which was once such an advantage in the regeneration of poor and downtrodden areas, is taking the creative and artistic stature away from Berlin by fighting its way through the city. Although I agree that development is necessary in a city so full of debt and unemployment, especially in the areas of high prostitution, such as Wedding, capitalism has taken it one step too far by trading in flourishing areas such as the YAAM, for dull mass produced office buildings. It is interesting to see that now gentrification is having a detrimental effect on Berlins thriving culture, the media’s attention is being drawn to the next creative, artistic city – Leipzig, just a couple of hours South-East of Berlin and so often referred to as the ‘New Berlin.’ Popp (2012) writes for the Spiegel that Berlin, once Germanys “hippest town”, now succumbed to gentrification, the “latest city to attract the creative class is the former East German industrial seat of Leipzig”. Current articles in circulation are acting as the catalyst that sets this cultural change in mo- tion, “can it actually dethrone the capital?” (Diehn, 2012), while the real question should be “does it want to dethrone the capital?” as the underlying risk is that Leipzig will be the next target of gentrification. 13 In a similar feat to the Tacheles, Leipzig’s abandoned cotton mill Spinnerei, was taken over by artists in 1990. “Spinnerei is gaining renown as a space for cutting-edge artists from across Europe and elsewhere.” As opportunities are closing for artists in Berlin, an influx of talent is moving in to the small town as this change in culture is finally, though begrudg- ingly, accepted in Berlin. Artists here are not interested in making a lot of money; “rather they’re focused on living their art in the present.” This lack of ostentatious exclusivity means that currently, anyone who wants an art show can have one. The problem veering around the corner, however, is that with the publicity now surrounding the town, “Eastern German city has been gaining attention as a hub for young, creative people.” (Diehn, 2012), promoting it as the “New Berlin”, an excess of media attention will draw in new investment and thus turn the wheel on the gentrification that has been so detrimental to Berlin. “It is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism” (Slavoj Zizek). With Berlin not even halfway through its redevelopment scheme, Leipzig is already threatened as the next city to be consumed by gentrification, “and in Leipzig, the present won’t last forever” as in come the people with money.

14 BERLIN, GERMANY

GROUP CONCLUSION

Michael Baldwin Luke Carnaby Saskia Furman Y3_S3 In conclusion, we believe development in Berlin is having a detrimental effect on both the culture and community of the city. As development moves in and private investment collaborates with the wants of the government, it is easy to loose sight of what the current residents need and with plans to regenerate an area, the inhabitants become less important to private investors. But what role do the people play in the governments’ plans for the future identity of Berlin, if any? Only if there is an alliance between the public and the developers, will Berlin be both economically sustainable as well as socially sustainable. Through gentrification of Berlin, new planning for the city targets wealthy visitors and tourists as their clients. Turning a profit seems to be at the forefront of the city’s agenda, where individual welfare of the general public is back benched.

The people of Berlin have recently strengthened their sense of community as protests against the loss of the city’s identity begin to grow. 6000 people assembled to prevent the demolition of a part of the East Side Gallery, in protest against Maik Hinkel’s plans to build a luxury apartment complex right on top of the preserved section of the wall (Shea, 2013). Berliners are starting to fight against the re-development as not only does the end of the wall destroy part of their history, but the replacing flats, “luxury apartment complex” (Shea, 2013), bring with them a yuppie clientele.

The residential shift in Berlin is the main consequence of Hipster-led gentrification, and the primary reason locals protest through rallies. The irony is, however, that as Berlin gains more media attention, pressure increases to generate more interesting news worthy activity. It therefore becomes difficult to differentiate between the true Berlin and the stories that get carried away in the hype of the city. For the squatters, the media threatens their existence, and although they thrive from the tourist industry, their homes are heavily controlled environments, denouncing the use of photography. On the other hand, pro-hipster advocacy groups also exist, encouraging gentrification and the nonsense brought by the young “artistic types…who think that video art installations in dirty squats are cool pushing up rent and forcing out the established community,” (Shea, 2013). This battle within the city is growing at a ridiculous rate as Berlin continues at the centre of media attention and gentrification divides the opinion of its inhabitants.

Berlin’s cultural and club scene is a major part of the city’s tourist industry and culture, with 24 hour licences on the weekend allowing clubs to open for 72 hours of non stop partying. This industry grew out of the void left by the Berlin wall leaving a need for social change, using art and music as a form of escape. Artists and squatters occupied abandoned factories and warehouses that littered parts of the city that had become empty after reunification. Gradually Berlin came to be recognised as the capital of electronic music in Germany and the artists that constructed its image became household names across Berlin. These clubs helped unify a divided city; none more so than the club ‘Berghain’ who name comes from its location between Kreuz-BERG and Freidrichs-HAIN. This area where the wall once stood along the banks of the River Spree became a hot bed for clubs, bars and artists workshops, the most famous being Wa- tergate, Club der Visionaere, KaterHolzig and bar 25 to name just a few. The growing popularity of Berlin’s music scene began to attract a global audience, “10,000 tourists travel to the city every weekend and 35% of them cite Berlin’s night-life as a big draw” (Dowling, 2012).

However, as the music and club scene grew, so did its economical value, and with that came gentrification. Gentrifica- tion is well under-way across Berlin and has already taken many casualties, Bar 25 was one of the first and most famous to go followed by a string of others along the river bank as the city unveil its plans for ‘Media Spree’; a multi-million pound development of offices, retail and apartments that will suck the life and culture out of the vibrant district. But pressure from private investors isn’t the only thing threatening the safety of these spaces. Since January 2013, a change in surcharges put on ticket sales have left clubs with extended opening hours to face a massive hike in taxes to collec- tion agency GEMA. Watergate nightclub will now pay around €200,000 compared with the €10,000 it paid in 2011. Club owner Steffan Hacks fumed to the Guardian, “How is one supposed to operate as a free entrepreneur under these kinds of conditions?” (Dowling, 2012). The question that now faces Berlin is how can it juggle the economical pressures of being a global city with the culture and identity it so desperately cant afford to lose?

Berlin certainly has a strong identity that would be hard to confuse with any other city in the world, with a magnetism that its inhabitants are more than happy to share. Interviews with residents of Berlin document “the city is good to me” and “the never ending love story” (Kurz, 2003) proving that residents clearly share a passion for their city. Travel writers such as Louise Hawson describe the city as “a place to be free”, and also writes, “Berlin has a different kind of buzz, it is not fast paced like New York or London” (Hawson, 2012). This is an interesting observation of the city and perhaps 16 due to the counter-cultural and socialist past, the hunger, greed and competitive capitalist values that are associated with London and New York are lesser.

Moreover, there is a constant reminder of socialist oppression and the atrocities of both World War I and II, due to the many monuments scattered across the whole of the city, giving Berlin a humble and sombre tone. The identity of Berlin has been portrayed in the arts for decades; Wim Wenders’ 1987 film ‘Wings of Desire’ combines an intimate study of life in Berlin behind the Wall, with birds eye views over the city and flash backs to the destruction caused by WWII. Wend- ers’ shows the viewer theatres and nightclubs in contrast to shots of empty areas with scrubland in the heart of the city. The film also contrasts coloured footage with black and white and although this film is about love and is ultimately positive, it is perturbed by melancholy.

On the other hand, Paul Beatty’s novel Slumberland illustrates a far different side of Berlin and addresses many contro- versial and complex topics such as ethnic minorities in the city, the fall of socialism and the city’s struggle with cultural identity after reunification. Hard-hitting topics such as these, narrated though the eyes of an African-American DJ, are perhaps more appropriate and relevant today. Although Beatty focuses on the free thinking underground arts culture of Berlin during the 80’s and 90’s, he also touches on a contemporary major issue in planning and development; that the noun ‘German’ is “loaded with so much historical baggage it’s impossible for anyone to be indifferent to its mention” (Hawson, 2012). How Berlin should identify itself and develop in the 21st century is debatable, as the city has literally been shaped by history. However during an era of stability in the country, it has been suggested that Berlin is sinking into a culture of tourism and becoming a cold war museum and adult theme park. The once hated Berlin Wall has crowds of people protesting to keep it and entrepreneurs are making money selling the experience of socialism to tourists. Although this may seem like insanity – a post-modern dream – it is in fact the reality.

As the government invests more money into formalised cultural tourist attractions and residential areas become increasingly privatised, Berliners battle to hold on to Cold War relics and the low rent, sub-cultural neighbourhoods. Neverthe- less the future of Berlin remains uncertain; will the hordes of tourists turn it into a museum city such as Venice, or will it be reduced to cheap beer and parties until it’s comparable to Amsterdam? Will gentrification force locals and old Berliners to abandon the city, or will the revolutionary spirit of Berlin’s residents rise to defeat the bureaucrats? The city is currently hanging in the balance and only time will expose the fate of Berlin.

17 REFERENCES

BOOKS_

Beatty, P (2009). Slumberland. 1st ed., USA: Bloomsbury.

Webber, A. (2008). Berlin in the Twentieth Century: A Cultural Topography. 1st ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fisher, M. (2009). Capitalist Realism: Is there no alternative? 1st ed., UK: 0 Books.

Fraser, D. (1996) The Buildings of Europe. 1st ed., Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Jacobs, J. (1961) The Death and Life of Great American Cities. 1st Vintage Books ed., New York: Random House.

Kurz, C (2003). Berliner Style. 2nd ed., London: Booth-Clibborn Editions.

Lange, T and Pugh, G (1998). The Economics of German Unification. Cheltenham, 1st ed., UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Lees, L, Slater, T & Wyly, L. (2012). The Gentrification Reader. 1st ed., New York:Routledge .

ONLINE_

_Balzer, J. (2012) Creative Destruction. The New York Times [Online] [Accessed on 10 March 2012] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/20/opinion/creative-destruction-of-an-artists-center-in-berlin. html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

_BBC News. (2007) East German ‘Licence to Kill’ found. BBC [Online] [Accessed on 8 April 2013] http://news.bbc. co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6943093.stm

_Berlin.de (2008) Berliner Fernsehturm. Berlin.de [Online] [Accessed on 8 April 2013] http://www.berlin.de/orte/sehen- swuerdigkeiten/fernsehturm/index.en.php?lang=en Diehn, S. A. (2013) Leipzig: the new Berlin. DW. [Online] [Accessed on 2 February 2013]

_Dowling, S. (2012) Berlin Clubbers Fear Royalties Hike will stop the all-night Beats. The Guardian [Online] [Accessed on 8 Apr 2013] http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2012/jul/03/berlin-clubs-royalties-closure-threat

_Feffer, J. (2013). The Squats of Berlin. Huffington Post. [Online] [Accessed on 10 March 2013] http://www.huffington- post.com/john-feffer/the-squats-of-berlin_b_2772197.html

_Graham, J. (2000). The Collapse of the Soviet Union. History Orb. [Online] [Accessed on 16 Apr 2013] http://www. historyorb.com/russia/intro.php

_Hornzig, F. (2011). Darth Vader vs. Death Strip: Berlin Wall Sinks into Cold War Disneyland. Spiegel [Online] [Accessed on 7 February 2013] http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/darth-vader-vs-death-strip-berlin-wall-sinks-into-cold- war-disneyland-a-778941.html

_Jones, J. (2012) The closure of Berlin’s Tacheles squat is a sad day for alternative art. The Guardian [Online] [Accessed on 10 March 2013] http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2012/sep/05/closure-tacheles-berlin- sad-alternative-art

18 _Popp, M. (2012). Calling All Hipsters: Leipzig Is the New Berlin. Spiegel [Online] [Accessed 29 December 2012] http:// www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/leipzig-is-the-new-berlin-a-863088.html

_Shea, M. (2013) Berliners are fighting a war against Hipster-Led Gentrification. Vice Beta. [Online] [Accessed on 5 April 2013] http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/berlins-war-against-gentrification?fb_action_ids=10152724081555529&fb_ action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map={%2210152724081555529%22%3A144653 009040803}&action_type_map={%2210152724081555529%22%3A%22og.likes%22}&action_ref_map=[

_Swain, M. (2013) It’s a love/Hate Thing: The Protest to preserve the Berlin Wall. thisbigcity. [Online] [Accessed on 9 April 2013] http://thisbigcity.net/berlin-east-side-gallery-protest/

VIDEO_

Suau, A. (2009). The iconic photo of the fall of the Berlin Wall. [Online] [Accessed on 10 March 2013] http://www.you- tube.com/watch?v=VkTO8ZDcOeg

Wings of Desire, 1987. Film. Directed by Wim WENDERS. Germany: Road Movies Filmproduktion.