New Royal Opera House Berlin
The New Royal Opera House in Berlin was a project by the Prussian government and Emperor Wilhelm II to build a new opera building in Berlin , which the First World War and the financial shortage in the Weimar Republic prevented. It is one of the longest and most confused building projects of the imperial era. In 1924, the critic and journalist Paul Westheim described it as the "grotesquest architectural comedy of all time".
prehistory
The trigger for the plans for a new opera house was the fire in the Iroquois Theater in Chicago on December 30, 1903. After the Royal Opera House Unter den Linden with 1,500 seats had only been perceived as too small, its safety was now also in doubt. The emperor sent a telegram to his finance minister Georg von Rheinbaben , which suggested a "new building as quickly as possible" and ended with the words: "I can no longer sleep peacefully". The Prussian government then began planning a new building for at least 2,500 spectators, demolishing the old house.
Felix Genzmer's designs
The first choice for the new building project was the architect Felix Genzmer , who, after building the foyer of the Hoftheater Wiesbaden, worked as the architect of the royal theaters in Berlin and as a professor at the Technical University of Charlottenburg . Genzmer was proposed by the general manager of the Royal Drama, Georg Graf von Hülsen-Haeseler , and was also known and loved by the Kaiser through his work in Wiesbaden. Between 1904 and 1905, Genzmer rebuilt the interiors of the Berliner Schauspielhaus , whereby, in addition to fire protection, more representative furnishings were in the foreground. At the same time, he began planning the new opera house.
The commissioning of Genzmer met with criticism, especially from the national architects' associations. The opera building was the only major project planned at the time, and the architects demanded a competition, while the Kaiser rejected competitions on principle. The person Genzmer also met with criticism, for example from the publicist Maximilian Harden , who wrote in the future in 1906 :
“In addition to Messel , we have Gabriel Seidl in Munich, Fischer in Stuttgart, Wallot in Dresden, Behrens in Düsseldorf, Licht in Leipzig, and maybe a few others. Why must the most inefficient be called to a task that is the lifelong dream of every artist? Because the emperor doesn't find him inept and likes to work with the comfortable man? Is it really just because of that? That alone should decide? "
In 1906 Genzmer presented his first plans, which the emperor rejected, as he did not want to see “the simple but elegant architecture from the days of Frederick the Great that dominated the area around the current opera house damaged by a colossal building”. Genzmer was supposed to work on a new project for the Königsplatz opposite the Reichstag building , where in 1896 the Kroll Opera House was converted into the “New Royal Opera Theater” and there was significantly more space available.
The plans submitted by Felix Genzmer in 1909 envisaged the construction of the opera south of the east-west axis on Königsplatz; a second building was also to be built on the north side. This draft was rejected by the Prussian Ministry of Public Works on the grounds:
"The idea of erecting a building the size and importance of the opera house to the side of the center line of the Königsplatz must be described as a mistake and from a general artistic point of view as unacceptable."
The ministry also had a problem with the cost of the new building - mainly because the funding was not clear at the time. It was primarily about the shares that the Prussian state and the crown had to pay. The crown did not want to make a significant contribution to the building, although the emperor regarded the new building as “his” opera. Even the unpaid contribution of the Kroll Opera property was questioned internally by the Krone. The imperial advisor Count Philipp zu Eulenburg described the building as a cultural task of the state, on the other hand the Prussian Ministry of Finance could not find any reason to build a building with rooms for the courtyard without a contribution from the same. From the Finance Minister's point of view, it was almost impossible to explain this cost allocation to the Prussian House of Representatives and to enforce it.
After Genzmer's second plan was also rejected, the view prevailed that he was not the right architect for the planned building, especially since external pressure from architects' associations and the public increased. Count von Hülsen-Haeseler, on whose suggestion Genzmer had already been selected, obviously wanted to hire another architect to work on the project and for this reason asked the Berlin city planning officer Ludwig Hoffmann on January 11, 1910 without obligation , but he refused.
The 1st architectural competition
On March 28, 1910, Count von Hülsen-Haeseler carefully proposed to Wilhelm II that several architects compete against each other in a closed competition (a limited competition) to build the opera house. He argued with the importance of the building, which should have been built as a monument to the glorious reign of Wilhelm II. He emphasized the architects' interest in the building and pointed out that the competition should be a non-binding invitation to tender (ideas competition) to bring the best ideas to light. The last decision-making body was to remain the emperor himself. The emperor finally consented to the competition, but turned down a review commission (jury) and made it clear that he would by no means give the architect a free hand. He accordingly commented on the proposal:
“In the case of the competition - ad informationem regis - the point of view should be established that it is not a competition in the usual sense, but only the provision of ideas for ME, the BUILDER, irrespective of which man I subsequently transfer MY IDEAL DEPOSITION to. The building should proclaim the fame of all those involved. "
The proposal also met with approval from the Ministry of Public Works and the Ministry of Finance, who saw competition as an opportunity to solve the critical issue of funding. The budget commission of the Prussian House of Representatives was to be brought to agree to the assumption of costs by means of an invitation to tender.
On June 28, the participating ministries developed the framework for the competition. The site of the Kroll Opera was still considered as the location, but the architects were also allowed to suggest alternatives. The opera itself should have 2,250 seats, with an “ amphitheater ” as a final tier in addition to the stalls and four tiers . In front of the auditorium, an entrance wing with a representative entrance hall ( vestibule ) and ticket offices as well as a staircase with access to the parquet and the first tier should be created. Two foyers for the different tiers and the parquet should also be planned. An important part of the planning included the area for the courtyard. This should include a large festival box in the first tier for 80 seats as well as additional seats in the stalls and in the first tier of the left anteroom ( proscenium ). The boxes should be equipped with different salons, and a separate entrance on the left should be planned as an access. All courtyard areas should be connected to one another, but separated from the rest of the audience.
In August 1910, the selected architects were notified; in addition to Felix Genzmer, they were Eduard Fürstenau , Ludwig Hoffmann, Ernst von Ihne , Anton Karst , Max Littmann , Heinrich Seeling and Friedrich von Thiersch . The choice fell on architects who had already worked successfully for the emperor and whose work convinced him. Anton Karst was brought in by the emperor himself because of his new building for the Royal Court Theater in Kassel (the predecessor of today's Kassel State Theater ). Max Littmann and Heinrich Seeling in particular were well-known theater architects. The designs submitted by the selected architects were to be transferred to the state as property with unrestricted right of disposal in return for payment of a fee. Ludwig Hoffmann did not take part in this tender and justified this with his diverse tasks for the city of Berlin and a development plan for the city of Athens , on which he was currently working.
To the public, the ministries justified the limited competition with the special technical difficulties of the construction. However, this did not calm the criticism voiced by both the press and the architecture associations. The latter called for an open competition and referred above all to the construction of the Paris Opera . The lack of a jury and the lack of binding force for placing an order with the competition winner aroused further criticism, which violated the fundamental rules of competition postulated by the associations. In the Berliner Tageblatt of September 2, 1910, one could read:
“If you didn't know any better men upstairs, or if you didn't dare propose to the emperor, then you had to put out a general competition. Such a task isn't there for embarrassed and considerate candidates. And the general competition would hardly have cost more than the eighty thousand marks paid to the participants in this close competition, which is hardly fruitful in a higher sense. The decision, which it seems the ministries have reserved for themselves - judges are not named - will by no means be final. The state parliament still has a say, and the architects will certainly not miss the opportunity to inform them about the competition and their character. "
The results were available at the beginning of December 1910. Ihne and Littmann in particular integrated essential elements of the Paris Opera by Charles Garnier into their design, including the central multi-storey festive staircase within a separate central room between the foyer and the auditorium . The Vienna State Opera by Eduard van der Nüll and August Siccard von Siccardsburg provided further ideas . On the basis of the results, the ministers involved suggested that a floor plan be drawn up together. They suggested that the participants Ernst von Ihne, Heinrich Seeling and Friedrich von Thiersch do this. Under pressure from the court, the Ministry of Public Works and the Ministry of Finance at the end of 1910 agreed to regard the building of the opera as a Prussian state building and thus to finance it at state expense with a grant from the Crown. The rest of the organization was entirely subject to the Ministry of Public Works. The emperor set a total of three million marks for the crown's contribution . The emperor also agreed to a closer competition between Ernst von Ihne, Heinrich Seeling and (contrary to the proposal of the ministries) Max Littmann.
The 2nd architectural competition
In preparation for this follow-up competition, the government master builder Hans Grube created a preliminary draft in the Ministry of Public Works as the basis for further planning. This included floor plans and a facade view of the planned building. The drafts were very well received, and Grube was subsequently admitted to the competition as the fourth participant. His plans formed the template for the official program outline and thus the binding requirement on which the participants had to base their new designs. On October 3rd, the architects were asked for their new designs; the results were available in February 1912. The results of both rounds of the competition were publicly exhibited in the House of Representatives in March 1912, with the plans from the closer competition being the basis for the final construction. Wilhelm II clearly preferred the results of the construction officer Grube. On March 6, the secret building officer Richard Saran from the Ministry of Public Works presented the current status of the discussions in a speech before the House of Representatives:
“In careful joint consultation, we could not ignore the judgment that the designs by Seeling and Littmann do not meet the justified demands of the administration, so that they have to be rejected for further processing despite other advantages, the beauty of the architecture and attractive details. This also applies to the Ihnese design, if not so bluntly. The Grubesche preliminary draft was regarded by the theater administration as the best basis for the elaboration of the actual building design and we could not contradict this view. "
The start of construction was planned for April 1913.
The decision met with strong criticism in the press and the public. In particular, the ministries' approach to the restricted competition and the fact that in the end an unknown construction officer delivered the winning design received very negative comments. The press again called for an open competition, the Association of Berlin Architects wrote a resolution on March 14, 1912 with the same demand. On April 20 of that year, the Association of German Architects decided that after a corresponding redefinition of the building program and the vote in the House of Representatives, an open ideas competition for the construction of the opera should be called for. This criticism, in which all parliamentary groups spoke out against the planned continuation of the project, carried through to the House of Representatives. On May 2, the House of Representatives passed a draft that required a new draft “including other circles of German artists”. After the decision, an open competition was planned, in which the participants were also allowed to deviate from the program outline and in which a final assessment was to take place by the Prussian Academy of Building . With this the MPs decided very clearly against the intentions of Emperor Wilhelm II. The SPD MP Karl Liebknecht made it very clear:
“There is an extraordinarily great danger - since ultimately only a 'builder', the 'beneficiary authority', as it has been called from time to time, has to rule on the building, although we have to approve the money here artistic expression of some decisive artistic mood and conception of our time or of the best forces of our time will be found, but that ultimately only the artistic mood and conception of a single person decides. "
The 3rd architectural competition
The third competition for the opera house was announced in June 1912 by the Ministry of Public Works. Although this competition was now actually open, the architects were Hermann Billing in Karlsruhe, Wilhelm Brurein in Berlin, Martin Dülfer in Dresden, Theodor Fischer in Munich, Georg Frentzen in Aachen, Otto March in Berlin, Bruno Möhring in Berlin, Carl Moritz in Cologne , Bruno Schmitz in Berlin and the architects Lossow & Kühne (William Lossow and Max Hans Kühne) in Dresden and asked to participate. Like the first selection, this one also consisted primarily of architects who already had experience in building theaters or similar buildings and who had attracted the emperor's attention. Of those invited, only Theodor Fischer canceled, all others confirmed their participation. In addition to this group of people, anyone who was a member of the Association of German Architects and Engineers Associations (VDAI) or the Association of German Architects (BDA) was allowed to participate.
The basis for the work was formed by three floor plans on which the projects should be based. In October 1912 a total of 68 drafts were available, on which the Prussian Academy of Civil Engineering commented. The jury's verdict was that none of the designs were so superior to the previous designs that they could be recommended as the basis for the construction. The designs by Otto March, Richard Seel, Martin Dülfer, Carl Moritz and the contribution made by the architectural office of Peter Jürgensen and Jürgen Bachmann (Berlin) were particularly praised . The jury also recommended a simplification of the construction program, which was rejected by the general manager. Ludwig Hoffmann was also one of the experts in the Academy's building construction department.
ground floor
Upper parquet
1st rank
The results of the third competition were publicly exhibited in January 1913. Although there was agreement in the press that the competition represented a step forward, there was no result on the question of which design was now the best. The favorite was obviously Otto March's design, but it was also not completely convincing. Again, there was criticism of the entire building concept, especially the new planning of the entire Königsplatz was called for. One result, however, was clear: the third competition did not produce a winner and therefore also no architect for the opera house. On February 13, 1913, the Prussian House of Representatives adopted a resolution according to which the government should look for and commission a free architect who should bring the best suggestions of all previous concepts into a design. A new competition should be announced for the Königsplatz. However, this resolution was not unanimous, Karl Liebknecht, for example, strongly criticized it:
"It is a fig leaf on the fact that the House of Representatives, after having dared to contradict a little in the past year, incited by the artists and their opposition, has now completely ducked before the Royal State Government, before the building authorities."
Ludwig Hoffmann's designs
For the selection of an architect who had been largely uninvolved so far, only very few people were considered, as all known architects and specialists had already commented on the opera house issue. One of the few was the Berlin city planning officer Ludwig Hoffmann, who had been asked several times, but had so far refused the task every time. In April 1913 he was asked again if he would like to design and build this building. Hoffmann, however, continued to show no interest in it, mainly due to his rather poor experience with the execution of the Pergamon Museum designed by Alfred Messel on Berlin's Museum Island . The cooperation with the general director of the Royal Theater put him off, and at that time Hoffmann's main interest was in the construction of social and welfare buildings. In his memoirs he wrote:
“After my experience in building museums, I found it very doubtful that I would be able to work successfully with the general manager of the theater as the client, but I was so overwhelmed with big tasks that I didn't long for a new one at the moment. I was also more interested in relieving many thousands of their troubled living conditions in the large urban welfare buildings over the years than building state rooms for a theater-heavy audience. "
However, after Kaiser Wilhelm II also wanted Ludwig Hoffmann to take over the construction, and the Lord Mayor Adolf Wermuth insisted, Hoffmann finally agreed. On May 4, 1913, he gave the ministry his promise to work on the new building. He himself wanted to concentrate on the artistic questions and the ministry should take over the structural engineering tasks.
As early as May 9, 1913, Ludwig Hoffmann submitted an exposé in which he shared his thoughts on the new opera house. Since he was already part of the expert group for the drafts in 1912, he had already dealt with the building in detail. Hoffmann presented the first drafts in the form of facade drawings at Pentecost of the year. The three pencil drawings were dated May 11, 1913 and showed alternative fronts of the opera building, partially flanked by other buildings that were not previously planned to show the further development of the square. The public did not find out about Hoffmann's participation in the construction until the end of May, but the response in the press to this selection was very positive and at the same time associated with high expectations. The draft, along with a cost estimate, should be ready in December, and Hoffmann should stick to the program outline as much as possible. On November 5, Hoffmann had the Emperor confirm his designs; in December he submitted a cost estimate for 19.5 million marks. After a meeting with the finance minister, some savings were decided, especially in the design of the interior as well as in the depot building, which was to be connected to the opera.
In January 1914, Ludwig Hoffmann presented a model of the building to the imperial couple in a specially set up studio . The emperor was satisfied and agreed to the construction of the opera house based on Hoffmann's designs. On May 19, 1914, the first construction rate was approved by the Prussian Ministry of Labor, but the outbreak of the First World War prevented construction.
Architectural consideration of the Hoffmann design
As the commissioned architect, Ludwig Hoffmann was to adhere even more closely to the given basic plans than the participants in the competition. Nevertheless, Hoffmann tried, above all, to change the facade according to his ideas. While the original plan, at the emperor's request, provided for a large triangular gable with eight supporting columns ( portico ), Hoffmann planned a spacious vestibule with a colonnade of Corinthian columns with only a subtle gable. In addition, he set the window axes closer than planned and planned the entire building with a width of 96 meters, four meters wider than required in the specifications. A spacious foyer was to be created behind the portico. Hoffmann placed the cash registers, which according to the specifications were to be located on the side of a central vestibule , at the two extreme ends and equipped each of these areas with their own building protrusion ( risalit ), which was to accommodate additional ancillary rooms.
One of the main problems with the floor plan was the strong impression of the square box structure, which was supposed to be covered up in the designs of the various competition participants by the porches and designs of the portico. Hoffmann tried to convey an elongated impression by pulling the stage over the auditorium and the layout of the central staircase, which he visually matched to the Berlin theater. In the overall picture, however, the extension in length was the bigger problem, especially since the building was not supposed to fill the entire width of Königsplatz for reasons of cost and so the disproportion was even more noticeable. For this reason, Hoffmann planned functional buildings directly adjoining on both sides and an emphasis on the outer edges while he rather wanted to do without emphasizing the central part. In addition to the risalites already mentioned, the colonnade, as an open pillared porch built over two floors, was intended to reinforce this effect. Large arched windows were provided for the main floor. Elaborate figure decorations were used to accentuate the surrounding balustrade of the building.
Inside, Hoffmann divided the building into a stage and an audience part. The audience part forms the center of the building, with a large staircase and a foyer in front of it. Four atriums further subdivide the building. The central entrance should be on Königsplatz, through this one should get into a transverse vestibule that should take up the entire width of the building. A few steps led to the central staircase or the side corridors. A wide staircase in the central stairwell and further staircases in the side corridors lead to the first tier, two flights of stairs behind the main hall to the upper parquet. The auditorium was to consist of four tiers, spanned by additional rows of seats in the manner of an amphitheater , the festival box and the three-part proscenium boxes were architecturally emphasized. A large foyer was to be set up above the entrance hall for breaks, and there were additional lounges throughout the building.
A side entrance was created separately for visitors to the imperial box. This led via a staircase into a large salon in front of the festival box. This entrance should only cross the spectator path at the side of the salon, so that the two groups of visitors were well separated from each other. Further rooms for the members of the court were grouped around the rear left atrium. A passage to the proscenium boxes was created via a dining room and a tea room.
The People's Opera House
After the First World War, Ludwig Hoffmann was asked by Adolph Hoffmann , the new Prussian minister of education from the ranks of the USPD , to reconsider the project as a people's opera house. The audience capacity was to be increased to 3,000 seats, whereupon Ludwig Hoffmann expanded the floor with a steeper curve. The composer Richard Strauss , who was consulted for advice, was enthusiastic about the idea, as in this way the audience could see the singers in their entire form over the heads of those sitting in front of them. These plans came to nothing, however, and instead of the Volksoperhaus, the old Kroll opera on the intended property was modernized between 1920 and 1923.
literature
- The buildings and art monuments of Berlin. Supplement 10. Memoirs of an Architect - Ludwig Hoffmann . Published u. ed. by Wolfgang Schächen . Gebr. Mann, Berlin 1983, ISBN 3-7861-1388-2
- Dörte Döhl: Ludwig Hoffmann - Buildings for Berlin 1896-1924. Ernst Wasmuth, Tübingen 2004. ISBN 3-8030-0629-5
- Hans Schliepmann : The new designs for the Berlin Royal Opera House. Berliner Architekturwelt, special issue 12. Berlin: Wasmuth , 1913. Digitized by the Central and State Library Berlin, 2020. https://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:109-1-15382701
- Saran: The previous development of the preparations for the new building of a royal opera house in Berlin. In: Zentralblatt der Bauverwaltung. Ernst, Berlin 1912, p. 133 f. ISSN 0372-8021
- Maximilian Harden: The new opera house. In: Maximilian Harden (Ed.) The future . The future, Berlin 1906, ISBN 3-89131-445-0
- Fritz Stahl: The new Berlin opera house. A very close competition. In: Berliner Tageblatt , September 2, 1910, Mosse, Berlin.
- Paul Seidel: The Emperor and Art. Schall, Berlin 1907.
- Paul Westheim, in: Das Kunstblatt. Ed. Paul Westheim. Reckendorf, Berlin 8.1924, p. 135.
Individual evidence
- ^ Das Kunstblatt , 8, p. 135
- ↑ From: Maximilian Harden: The new opera house . In: The Future , 55, 1906
- ^ After Seidel: The Emperor and Art . 1907
- ↑ From the report of December 4, 1909, based on Döhl 2004
- ^ Marginal notes on a report from Count Hülsen-Haeseler to Wilhelm II, capitalization according to source. After Döhl 2004
- ↑ from: Fritz Stahl: Das neue Berliner Opernhaus. A very close competition , Berliner Tageblatt of September 2, 1910
- ↑ from Saran 1912
- ↑ from the 62nd session of the House of Representatives on May 2, 1912, based on Döhl 2004
- ↑ from the 131st session of the House of Representatives on February 13, 1913, based on Döhl 2004
- ↑ From Ludwig Hoffmann: Memoirs of an Architect
