{"word_count": 1632, "character_count": 11907}
Part of the TRAFO series “Reconstructing Neighborhoods of War”By Paul SigelNeighborhood Rebuilding in postwar Germany was notonly confronted with the challenge of reconstruction of housing,infrastructure, industry and sites of cultural identity, but was also embeddedin Cold War competition. Analyzing two case studies, Berlin and Dresden, isspecifically fruitful since these two cities can be considered as exemplarylaboratories for rebuilding in postwar Germany. Berlin as a divided city can beanalyzed as a prominent stage of competing rebuilding approaches, while Dresdencan be seen as case study of the German Democratic Republic’s (GDR) political intentionto transform the city’s identity from a former symbol of royal court andbourgeois culture into a model city of socialism.On the other hand, we can see that much of the plannedand executed postwar transformations were closely related to older and moregeneral discourses on city improvement and transformation that already existed atthe beginning of the 20th century. Visions of the “new city” withnew neighborhoods, functional, green, full of light and air, had enriched thisdiscourse for decades. The disaster of war destruction could therefore not onlybe considered as catastrophic loss but also as a chance for a new beginning anda better future. This belief in improvement fundamentally inspired neighborhoodrebuilding after the war and soon became a core element of politicalpropaganda.&#160; NeighborhoodRebuilding in Berlin as Cold War Propaganda “Berlin. More beautiful than ever before!” Propaganda poster for the GDR National Housing Program. 1952 (Postcard, author’s archive) Initial postwar planning in Berlin after 1945 focused onreconstruction concepts for the united city. A variety of rebuilding conceptswere adopted. The rebuilding of destroyed houses and the return of formerinhabitants were contrasted by the approach of radical new urban designs withnew neighborhood constellations as programmatic alternative to the notoriousprewar “rental barracks.” But soon after the founding of the GDR in 1949,radical changes in planning politics happened.&#160;Rebuilding in the GDR within the “National Rebuilding Program” shiftedfrom modernist planning concepts to the Stalinist concept of architecture and townplanning as both a continuity of national tradition and building the newsocialist society. Socialization of space and of building grounds was one ofthe most important preconditions of socialist city structures. The first representativerebuilding area in the GDR capital was the Stalinallee, today calledKarl-Marx-Allee, one of the main axes of the capital, located in a typicalworker’s district. Conceived as a monumental neo-classicist corridor avenue, itreflected clearly Soviet patterns, but was proclaimed as architecture in the nationaltradition. Palaces for the workers, as was the proclaimed aim of this buildingendeavor, sought to prove the success of the new socialist society as the winnerof history. The artistic iconography, notably the sculpture and relief program,referred to a classless society with equal opportunities for everyone. The highcomfort of the apartments with central heating and elevators, the denseinfrastructure with high quality shops, cafés, bars and restaurants, were to beregarded as the benefit of a caring state and the potency of the socialisteconomy. The broad sidewalks alongside the avenue with large green spaces andcommon roof top terraces on the residential buildings were to offer generousspace for community life. National lottery programs and voluntary participationin construction work could increase one’s chances to obtain one of theattractive apartments, which were distributed by national housing authorities. Thecollective spirit was to be expressed in numerous common activities, notably infestivities and political activities, and the social mix aimed to mirror the socialistsociety. Numerous publications, posters, and films served as mediums ofpolitical propaganda displaying these new neighborhoods as a core element ofthe victorious system. As a reaction, western rebuilding focused on theinternational modernist concept of neighborhood rebuilding, prominentlypresented in the International Building Exhibition “Interbau” in West Berlin in1957. Here, architects from West Germany and all over the western world, suchas Walter Gropius, Oscar Niemeyer, and Alvar Aalto, cooperated in developing anew neighborhood based on the principles of modern urban design. Composed asopen structure in a green surrounding, the quarter displays a multitude ofhousing typologies for a multifaceted neighborhood and once offered a multitudeof affordable housing based on social housing programs. The “Interbau” aimed toexhibit the modernity and international gesture of West Berlin. Although beingexecuted as a top-down process, the openness and typological variety was torepresent the “city of tomorrow” as proof of liberty and progress. At the same time, building politics in the GDR startedwith initial steps towards a radical turn, now focusing on the programmaticreintroduction of economic modernist planning, impressively demonstrated in thesecond section of the Karl-Marx-Allee. Built in the 1960s, it demonstrated a significantshift away from traditional urban patterns and a move towards standardizationand industrialization. This new section presented prefabricated apartmentblocks along the axis surrounded by green areas. The whole ensemble exemplifiedthe new, consequently modern gesture of the city center with a predominantpresence of low-cost housing, enriched by spectacular buildings for culture,leisure and shopping, such as the Cinema International and the glamorous CaféMoskau with its significant copy of the Sputnik satellite. This new socialistneighborhood sought to express modernity, internationality, and technical advancement.Dresden: Neighborhood Rebuilding between Reconstruction and the Search for a New Socialist IdentityLooking at Dresden comparable developments can be seen.Before its devastation in February 1945, the city was regarded as one of themost important cultural hotspots in Germany and as symbol of sophisticatedbourgeois culture, its shape being dominated by baroque and historicist towersand domes, especially the big stone dome of the Frauenkirche (the Church of ourLady).&#160; After the devastations of WorldWar II, the ruin of the Frauenkirche became a memorial of war, a constant reminderof the disaster. It seemed to be impossible to rebuild the city, as the losseswere too extensive. Nevertheless, reconstruction of some of the most importantbuildings started soon, including the world famous baroque Zwinger, which wasrebuilt step by step until 1956.Besides the reconstruction of its cultural heritage,the city faced the even bigger challenge of providing concepts for thereconstruction of housing and neighborhood units. Especially the Altmarkt area,the old market square and historic core of the city, was chosen as one of thesymbolic starting points for neighborhood reconstruction. Comparable to thefirst section of Berlin’s Karl-Marx-Allee, the Dresden Altmarkt was meant to representan amalgamation of new mass housing complexes with baroque architectural designelements derived from regional tradition. Further parallels to Berlin wereobvious, since the Altmarkt area was to be a core element of politicalmanifestations and May Day parades, and the rebuilt neighborhood was conceivedas a stage for the representation of the new system, dominated by a big culturepalace on the north front of the square.Only a stone’s throw away, the adjacent Prager Straßerepresents a further step in Dresden’s neighborhood rebuilding. Comparable tothe second section of Berlin’s Karl-Marx-Allee, the Dresden Prager Straßeclearly demonstrates the radical 1960s shift from a national tradition tointernational modernism. The functional mix of Prager Straße, with long stretchedapartment buildings, big international hotels, pavilions for shops,restaurants, cafés and a big cinema, sought to represent neighborhoodrebuilding as a core element of identity building. Instead of simulatingtraditional bourgeois culture, this new neighborhood served as a programmaticstage where regional identity was to be incorporated into an internationalsocialist society. After Reunification: Valuation and DevaluationAfter the reunification of 1990, the results ofpostwar neighborhood rebuilding in both West and East Germany had soon become amatter of multifaceted criticism. On one hand, the monumental neo classicist Stalinalleereceived an iconic status and confirmed its status as a representativeneighborhood attracting numerous new tenants. The same is true for Dresden’sAltmarkt. On the other hand, the modern neighborhoods of the 1960s and 1970s havebeen frequently criticized as monotonous structures and as neighborhoods withproblematic social structures. The incorporated initial promise of the new cityas a place for a better life seemed to have failed, and the late modern masshousing programs became subject to devaluation. In many cases, the former significantsocial cohabitation of the neighborhoods was lost. Recent developments in thereal estate market, however, with their tremendous effects of gentrification haveled to a new valuation of these housing estates. Meanwhile, the modern sectionof Karl-Marx-Alle and the Prager Straße are protected monuments, and there arechances to preserve the physical and social structure of these quarters. Nevertheless,post-war heritage and post-war neighborhoods are still at risk, and theirfuture is still a matter of ongoing debate.Further Reading: Durth, Werner and Paul Sigel, (2009). Baukultur: Spiegel gesellschaftlichen Wandels. Berlin: Jovis Verlag.Paul Sigel studied Art History and German Literature. In 1997, he received his PhD for a thesis on the history of German pavilions in world fairs as a medium of national self-representation, published in 2000 as Exponiert: Deutsche Pavillons auf Weltausstellungen. From 1997 to 2005, he worked as academic assistant at the Technical University of Dresden, Department of Art History and Musicology. From 2006 to 2009, he worked together with Werner Durth in the Department of History and Theory of Architecture at the Technical University of Darmstadt on the research project Baukultur: Spiegel gesellschaftlichen Wandels (Building Culture), published as a book in 2009. In 2010, he was habilitated at the Technical University of Dresden. Since 2010, he has held various positions as guest professor at the Technical University of Dresden/Department of Art History, and the Technical University of Berlin/Center for Metropolitan Studies and the HafenCity University Hamburg. His research interests are concentrated on the question of urban identity constructions, the history of building exhibitions, debates on reconstruction, and urban transformation processes and debates in Germany since 1975. Some of his other monographs include Konstruktionen urbaner Identität (with Bruno Klein), Berlin 2006, and Freiraum unterm Fernsehturm: Historische Perspektiven eines Stadtraums der Moderne (with Kerstin Wittmann-Englert), Berlin 2015.Further articles in the series “Reconstructing Neighborhoods of War” on TRAFO:Birgit Schäbler,&#160;Introduction: The Importance of Being Earnest About Neighborhoods, 28 August 2019.Kevin Mazur,&#160;Not Just Neo-Liberalism: Spontaneous Settlement and Violent Conflict in Homs, Syria, 4 September 2019.Mazen Haidar, Neighbors at War in 1975-77 Beirut, 11 September 2019.Piotr Korduba, The Reconstruction of Warsaw: Between Abhorrence and Acceptance, 18 September 2019.Citation: Paul Sigel, “More Beautiful than Ever Before!” Neighborhood-Rebuilding in Divided Germany as Political Propaganda during the Cold War, in: TRAFO – Blog for Transregional Research, 25.09.2019, https://trafo.hypotheses.org/19748. 