K. F. Schinkel's Environmental Planning of Central Berlin ... - ADIP
K. F. Schinkel's Environmental Planning of Central Berlin ... - ADIP
K. F. Schinkel's Environmental Planning of Central Berlin ... - ADIP
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
K. F. <strong>Schinkel's</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong> <strong>Planning</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Central</strong> <strong>Berlin</strong><br />
Author(s): Hermann G. Pundt<br />
Source: The Journal <strong>of</strong> the Society <strong>of</strong> Architectural Historians, Vol. 26, No. 2 (May, 1967), pp.<br />
114-130<br />
Published by: Society <strong>of</strong> Architectural Historians<br />
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/988416<br />
Accessed: 09/12/2008 11:48<br />
Your use <strong>of</strong> the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance <strong>of</strong> JSTOR's Terms and Conditions <strong>of</strong> Use, available at<br />
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions <strong>of</strong> Use provides, in part, that unless<br />
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue <strong>of</strong> a journal or multiple copies <strong>of</strong> articles, and you<br />
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.<br />
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use <strong>of</strong> this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at<br />
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sah.<br />
Each copy <strong>of</strong> any part <strong>of</strong> a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed<br />
page <strong>of</strong> such transmission.<br />
JSTOR is a not-for-pr<strong>of</strong>it organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the<br />
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that<br />
promotes the discovery and use <strong>of</strong> these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.<br />
http://www.jstor.org<br />
Society <strong>of</strong> Architectural Historians is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The<br />
Journal <strong>of</strong> the Society <strong>of</strong> Architectural Historians.
K. F. <strong>Schinkel's</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong> <strong>Planning</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Central</strong> <strong>Berlin</strong><br />
THE architecture <strong>of</strong> Karl Friedrich Schinkel is well known.<br />
Modern pr<strong>of</strong>essional architects, such as Ludwig Mies van<br />
der Rohe, Philip Johnson and Paul Rudolph, have studied<br />
and praised it.1 Renowned historians and critics, such as<br />
Henry-Russell Hitchcock, Sigfried Giedion and Nikolaus<br />
Pevsner, have analyzed and acclaimed it.2 And, finally, the<br />
i. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe's indebtedness to Schinkel is most<br />
eminently reflected in several well-known projects, e.g., Hugo Perls<br />
House, <strong>Berlin</strong>-Zehlendorf, I9I ; Seagram Building, New York,<br />
1958; Museum <strong>of</strong> Twentieth Century Art, <strong>Berlin</strong>, 1965. About the<br />
last, Mies has been quoted as saying, "The placement <strong>of</strong> the new<br />
museum on a terrace . . . permitted a design <strong>of</strong> a clear and strong<br />
building in the tradition <strong>of</strong> <strong>Schinkel's</strong> <strong>Berlin</strong>." "New Work <strong>of</strong> Mies<br />
van der Rohe," Architectural Forum, Sept. I963, 87.<br />
Philip Johnson summarized his recognition <strong>of</strong> <strong>Schinkel's</strong> ability as<br />
follows: "... his greatness, however, lay in his unique sense <strong>of</strong> proportion,<br />
which transformed whichever style he used." Mies van der<br />
Rohe, 2nd ed., New York, 1953, p. I4. In a more personal statement,<br />
Johnson refers to himself: ".. . dass ich mich als den vielleicht letzten<br />
lebenden Schiiler Schinkels fiihle." "Karl Friedrich Schinkel im<br />
zwanzigstenJahrhundert," Festvortrag, Schriftenreihe des Architektenund<br />
Ingenieur-Vereins zu <strong>Berlin</strong>, 13 Marz 1961, p. 24. The entire article,<br />
translated into English and published as "Schinkel and Mies,"<br />
Program, Columbia University, School <strong>of</strong> Architecture, Spring 1962,<br />
pp. 14-34, ranks among the best interpretive writings on Schinkel<br />
and is by far the finest tribute paid by a modem architect to a past<br />
master.<br />
Paul Rudolph has personally stated to me his favorable impression<br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>Schinkel's</strong> architecture, which Johnson had urged him to see<br />
during a trip to <strong>Berlin</strong> in 1964.<br />
2. Henry-Russell Hitchcock summarizes his impressions <strong>of</strong> Schinkel<br />
in Architecture: Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries, Baltimore,<br />
1958, pp. 28-36. In my opinion, he overemphasizes <strong>Schinkel's</strong> relationship<br />
to J. N. L. Durand.<br />
Sigfried Giedion, Spdtbarocker und romantischer Klassizismus, Miinchen,<br />
1922, p. 4, remarks: "Fast geniigte es, allein Schinkels Werk<br />
aufzunehmen. So viel man auch vergleichen mag, immer wieder<br />
erscheinen seine Lisungen-sehen wir von der Intensitit des nicht<br />
zu voller Entwicklung gelangten F. Gilly ab-am freiesten von<br />
riickschauenden Kompromissen, instinksicherer und baulich von<br />
hoherer Vollendung, als die anderer."<br />
Nikolaus Pevsner, in the only existing summary <strong>of</strong> <strong>Schinkel's</strong> total<br />
achievement in English, refers to him as the "... best architect <strong>of</strong> his<br />
generation in Europe." "Schinkel," Journal <strong>of</strong> the Royal Institute <strong>of</strong><br />
II4<br />
HERMANN G. PUNDT University <strong>of</strong> Illinois<br />
late scholar, Ortwin Paul Rave, has documented and published<br />
it.3 Therefore, it appears that <strong>Schinkel's</strong> creative contribution<br />
as the designer <strong>of</strong> <strong>Berlin</strong>'s best-known neo-Classical<br />
buildings has received its due. Primarily on the basis <strong>of</strong><br />
individual buildings, Schinkel has been cited as a spokesman<br />
<strong>of</strong> "proto-modern" practicality and as an architect who<br />
ranks high among pioneering contributors to the "functionalist"<br />
theories <strong>of</strong> his age.4 However valid this summary<br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>Schinkel's</strong> appraisal may appear, it must be realized that,<br />
among the extensive corpus <strong>of</strong> Schinkel literature, there<br />
exist only a few critical works, and that hardly any studies<br />
<strong>of</strong> his achievement concern themselves with the particularly<br />
timely aspect <strong>of</strong> environmental design.5<br />
British Architects, 59, Jan. 1952, p. 95. Pevsner elsewhere states: "On<br />
the classical side, I82o-40 is characterized by the most correct neo-<br />
Greek ... The results are competent and, in the hands <strong>of</strong> the best<br />
architects, <strong>of</strong> a noble dignity... Carl Friedrich Schinkel (I78I-I84I),<br />
Gilly's pupil, is the greatest, most sensitive, and most original representative<br />
on the continent." An Outline <strong>of</strong> European Architecture, 7th<br />
ed., Baltimore, 1963, pp. 379-380.<br />
3. Rave's writings on Schinkel and his position as editor <strong>of</strong><br />
numerous additional Schinkel studies made this scholar the foremost<br />
authority on the subject. During a personal interview in Nov. 1960,<br />
he referred to the following publications as his major contributions<br />
in this area. It should be mentioned that few <strong>of</strong> these works are<br />
critical and that the exact subject <strong>of</strong> this essay was not treated in<br />
Rave's extensive ceuvre. For general reference, biography and bibliography,<br />
see "Schinkel, Karl Friedrich," Allgemeines Lexicon der<br />
bildenden Kunstler von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart, ed. Hans Vollmer,<br />
Leipzig, I936, xxx, pp. 77-83. For the most comprehensive coverage<br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>Schinkel's</strong> life and work, see Schinkel Lebenswerk, 11 vols. (to<br />
date), <strong>Berlin</strong>-Miinchen, 1939-1961.<br />
4. Schinkel is presented as the "pioneering functionalist" by<br />
Walter Curt Behrendt, in: Modern Building, Its Nature, Problems, and<br />
Forms, New York, 1937, pp. 38-49. Cf. also Edward R. de Zurko,<br />
Origins <strong>of</strong> Functionalist Theory, New York, 1957, pp. I97-I98.<br />
5. For the best contemporary analyses, see Gustav Friedrich<br />
Waagen, "Karl Friedrich Schinkel als Mensch und Kiinstler," <strong>Berlin</strong>er<br />
Kalender auf das Schaltjahr 1844, <strong>Berlin</strong>, 1843, pp. 308-428; and<br />
Franz Kugler, Karl Friedrich Schinkel, eine Charakteristik seiner kunstlerischen<br />
Wirksamkeit, <strong>Berlin</strong>, 1842.
Consequently, this essay will not attempt to reiterate past<br />
analyses <strong>of</strong> Schinkel as an architect <strong>of</strong> individual buildings.<br />
Rather, it will focus on that aspect <strong>of</strong> his achievement which<br />
the "functionalist generation" overlooked, namely, his<br />
concepts <strong>of</strong> environmental planning-his contribution to<br />
the development <strong>of</strong> a total urban design.<br />
<strong>Schinkel's</strong> evolution as an architect and city planner began<br />
during the opening years <strong>of</strong> the nineteenth century. In<br />
I800 he concluded a two-year apprenticeship under David<br />
and Friedrich Gilly.6 From I800 to I8I5 circumstances prevented<br />
him from practising his chosen pr<strong>of</strong>ession. As an<br />
ardent student <strong>of</strong> the arts and <strong>of</strong> history, he travelled in<br />
Austria, Italy, and France from I803 to I805, returning to<br />
Prussia only to find <strong>Berlin</strong> in political chaos after military<br />
defeat. Not one architectural commission <strong>of</strong> consequence<br />
was to come his way until after Napoleon's defeat at<br />
Waterloo in I8i5.7 Consequently, Schinkel became a<br />
painter.8 Utilizing the lessons <strong>of</strong> rendering, perspective, and<br />
optics learned from the Gillys, Karl G. Langhans and Heinrich<br />
Gentz at the recently established Prussian Bauaka-<br />
demie,9 he quickly emerged as one <strong>of</strong> the most competent<br />
painters <strong>of</strong> panorama and stage design in <strong>Berlin</strong>. His pano-<br />
ramas depicted contemporary scenes, such as the fire <strong>of</strong><br />
Moscow in 1812. His theatrical settings were admired by<br />
the nobility and the promoters and connoisseurs <strong>of</strong> art.10<br />
Much like Inigo Jones inJacobean London, young Schinkel<br />
The most recent studies on Schinkel which suggest his importance<br />
as a planner are Johnson, "Schinkel im zwanzigsten Jahrhundert,"<br />
pp. 16-18; and Goerd Peschken, "Eine Stadtplanung Schinkels,"<br />
Archaologischer Anzeiger, <strong>Berlin</strong>, 1962, pp. 862-875. A non-critical<br />
but invaluable reference work concerning <strong>Schinkel's</strong> planning is<br />
Paul Ortwin Rave, Schinkel Lebenswerk: <strong>Berlin</strong>, Stadtbaupldne,<br />
Briicken, Strassen, Tore, Pldtze, <strong>Berlin</strong>, 1948.<br />
6. See Friedrich Adler, "Friedrich Gilly, Schinkels Lehrer,"<br />
Zentralblatt der Bauverwaltung, I, Jg., I88I, pp. 8, I7, 22. For <strong>Schinkel's</strong><br />
personal account <strong>of</strong> these years and his reverence for Friedrich<br />
Gilly, see Alfred Freiherr von Wolzogen (ed.), Aus Schinkels Nach-<br />
lass. Reisetagebiicher, Briefe und Aphorismen, <strong>Berlin</strong>, I862-I864, I,<br />
pp. 172-175.<br />
7. <strong>Schinkel's</strong> own letters and diaries <strong>of</strong> the period 800- 815 serve<br />
as the principal source for his activities during this interim; see<br />
Wolzogen, Aus Schinkels Nachlass, I, pp. 1-177; m, pp. 151-I65. Cf.<br />
August Grisebach, Carl Friedrich Schinkel, Leipzig, 1924, chap. "Interregnum,"<br />
pp. 33-66; and Waagen, "Schinkel," pp. 330-335.<br />
8. A complete published study <strong>of</strong> <strong>Schinkel's</strong> career as a painter<br />
does not exist. For references, see Grisebach, Schinkel, pp. 36-58,<br />
especially notes I92-I93. Cf. also Ernst Riehn, Schinkel als Maler<br />
(unpub. diss. Universitat G6ttingen, I940).<br />
9. Rave notes in "Schinkel," Allgemeines Lexicon xxx, p. 77: "Der<br />
von Friedrich Gilly in der Akademischen Kunstausstellung 1796<br />
gezeigte Entwurf fur ein Denkmal Friedrich des Grossen fiihrte als<br />
starkster kiinstlerischer Eindruck Schinkel seinem Berufzu. Er lernte<br />
in der Werkstatt Gillys . . . [und steht in 800o] an der Spitze der<br />
besten 18 Eleven der 1799 begriindeten Bauakademie."<br />
Io. Kugler, Schinkel, p. 5o.<br />
II5<br />
furnished the stages <strong>of</strong> Romanticist <strong>Berlin</strong> with designs <strong>of</strong><br />
artistic fantasy and <strong>of</strong> strikingly "modem" architectural<br />
content.11<br />
However, if one looks at Schinkel as the future planner <strong>of</strong><br />
urban sites, such as the Gendarmenmarkt and the Lustgarten<br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>Berlin</strong>, another aspect <strong>of</strong> the artistic activity <strong>of</strong> these<br />
interim years appears significant. This concerns his interest<br />
in landscape painting.12<br />
Perhaps the best known <strong>of</strong> his architectural landscapes is<br />
his Mittelalterliche Stadt am Wasser <strong>of</strong> I813 (Fig. I).13 In this<br />
work, he shows the same degree <strong>of</strong> technical competence<br />
which is generally associated with the northern Romantics.<br />
He focuses on drama through the use <strong>of</strong> clashing contrasts<br />
<strong>of</strong> lights and darks in order to evoke an emotional response.<br />
However, instead <strong>of</strong> the melancholic ruins which haunt the<br />
canvases <strong>of</strong> Caspar David Friedrich or the frightening<br />
drama <strong>of</strong> nature which is depicted in the works <strong>of</strong> Philip<br />
Otto Runge, Schinkel creates a highly evocative, idyllic<br />
world where imaginative structures remain complete and<br />
function convincingly within their visionary setting. He<br />
conceives the scene as an architect; he delineates rather than<br />
paints. As the most architectonic among landscape painters,<br />
he excelled in rendering "living" architectural themes.14<br />
His Gothic cathedral is transformed into an almost ironlike<br />
fantasy, its towers faintly reminiscent <strong>of</strong> Fonthill Abbey,<br />
its flying bridges and exposed stairways defying the<br />
technology <strong>of</strong> the day.15 On the opposite bank, a group <strong>of</strong><br />
less majestic architectural forms is presented-a northern<br />
step-gabled facade, an eighteenth-century residence and, at<br />
the water's edge, a small neo-Classical temple, placed there<br />
as if in homage to Poussin. The complexity <strong>of</strong> contemporary<br />
architectural modes is represented, but the treatment<br />
indicates <strong>Schinkel's</strong> own philosophical struggles.16 The<br />
juxtaposition <strong>of</strong> the idealized forms <strong>of</strong> Classicism with the<br />
national expression <strong>of</strong> Gothic creates a tension which is only<br />
ii. For <strong>Schinkel's</strong> work as a stage designer, see his Dekorationen<br />
auf den koniglichen H<strong>of</strong>theatern zu <strong>Berlin</strong>, 32 Tafeln in 5 Heften, <strong>Berlin</strong>,<br />
I8I9-ca.I825, containing valuable aquatint engravings. Cf. Paul<br />
Mahlberg, Schinkels Theater-Dekorationen, Greifswalder Dissertation,<br />
Diisseldorf, 1916, esp. pp. 50-65; and Alfred Freiherr von Wolzogen,<br />
"Karl Friedrich Schinkel und der Theater-Bau," Bayreuther<br />
Bldtter, Io,Jg., 1887, pp. 65-90.<br />
12. The best available study <strong>of</strong> Schinkel as a landscape painter is<br />
Eckhardt von Sydow, "Schinkel als Landschaftsmaler," Monatshefte<br />
uir Kunstwissenschaft, 14, Jg., 1921, pp. 239ff.<br />
I3. Oil on canvas, 94.4 x 126.6 cm.<br />
I4. Kugler, Schinkel, pp. 121-123.<br />
15. PhilipJohnson, in discussing this painting, states that <strong>Schinkel's</strong><br />
imagination was thoroughly "modem" (i.e., Romantic), as indicated<br />
by his unbuildable Gothic structure; see "Schinkel im zwanzigsten<br />
Jahrhundert," p. 7.<br />
I6. For <strong>Schinkel's</strong> own writings on the problem <strong>of</strong> Gothic vs.<br />
classical, see Wolzogen, Aus Schinkels Nachlass, m, pp. 151-162.
Fig. I. Schinkel, Mittelalterliche Stadt am Wasser, Miinchen, Neue Pinakothek (photo: Neue Pinakothek).<br />
prevented from becoming an outright conflict by the modern<br />
bridge connecting the two worlds. Somehow modern<br />
man must learn to live in and be able to coordinate the<br />
different elements which make up the new environment.<br />
Thus, <strong>Schinkel's</strong> vision transcends the depiction <strong>of</strong> individual<br />
forms. Indeed, in a sense, it enters the conceptual<br />
phase <strong>of</strong> realistic environmental planning. He shows here,<br />
in a graphic representation, embryonic concepts <strong>of</strong> site<br />
utilization and spatial definition. He presents a scheme<br />
which is dependent upon limited vistas. The great, dark<br />
mass <strong>of</strong> the church rises to the left <strong>of</strong> center, acting as a<br />
visual barrier to any distant view. Its massive form is balanced<br />
on the right by smaller, cubic structures perched on<br />
the steep, rocky bank and warmly illuminated by the setting<br />
sun. The bridge, which spans the space between these<br />
two major elements, screens the view; but through its tall<br />
arches one glimpses the continuation <strong>of</strong> the curving spatial<br />
path <strong>of</strong> the river leading to bright, open spaces beyond. The<br />
vaguely defined buildings to the left <strong>of</strong> the church lead one<br />
back by gradual steps to the landing in the foreground,<br />
which not only acts as a foil, but, with its animated display<br />
<strong>of</strong> human activity, furnishes the vantage point for the consciously<br />
intended view <strong>of</strong> nonaxial, restricted vistas. The<br />
free-flowing spatial definition conceived by Schinkel, the<br />
Romantic painter, will find its echo in the volumetric and<br />
spatial arrangements <strong>of</strong> urban sites by Schinkel, the neo-<br />
Classical architect.<br />
In 18I6, three years after the completion <strong>of</strong> Mittelalterliche<br />
Stadt am Wasser, he began work on the designs for his<br />
first architectural commission. This was a new Royal Guard<br />
House for the city <strong>of</strong> <strong>Berlin</strong>.17 The location chosen for this<br />
building was neither a picturesque cliff, nor the rocky bank<br />
<strong>of</strong> a broad stream. The site was a narrowly confined city lot<br />
located between the Baroque armory or Zeughaus (I696-<br />
I706) by Arnold Nering and Andreas Schliiter, and the<br />
17. Referred to in German as Das Neue Wacht-Gebdude or Konigliche<br />
Wache. <strong>Schinkel's</strong> analysis <strong>of</strong> the building program and style <strong>of</strong><br />
the new Royal Guard House is to be found in Samrmltng architektonischer<br />
Entwilrfe, <strong>Berlin</strong>, 1866, I, p. I.
,<br />
r<br />
.<br />
1--1 ~ --1- 1-1-X, ---r<br />
7f3 e - ..- e .. -i- .-...<br />
^^ n *<br />
Packh<strong>of</strong> =<br />
ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING<br />
CENTRAL BERLIN<br />
1816-1841<br />
Karl Friedrich Schinkel - Architect<br />
I - - - Y r<br />
Fig. 2. <strong>Central</strong> <strong>Berlin</strong> (M. Plautz after Schinkel).<br />
;<br />
L l l<br />
Palladian palace <strong>of</strong> Prince Heinrich (1748-1766; the Humboldt<br />
University since 1945) after plans by G. W. von<br />
Knobelsdorff (Fig. 2). Moreover, the area was obstructed<br />
by a narrow canal which crossed the plot in a north-south<br />
direction. Immediately to the north stood a small grove <strong>of</strong><br />
chestnut trees, which was not to be disturbed. The southern<br />
boundary was defined by <strong>Berlin</strong>'s famous Unter den Linden<br />
avenue.18 In short, Schinkel was compelled to work within<br />
an extremely significant, yet severely restricted, building<br />
site. Consequently, the ultimate value <strong>of</strong> the final design<br />
must be seen in terms <strong>of</strong> its total context, rather than in<br />
terms dealing only with the building itself. The fact that<br />
<strong>Schinkel's</strong> preliminary design could impress Henry-Russell<br />
Hitchcock with its almost "Ledolcian" severity <strong>of</strong> blocklike<br />
forms does not suffice in assessing the total success <strong>of</strong> the<br />
Royal Guard House.19<br />
I8. The first record <strong>of</strong> the future Unter den Linden avenue can be<br />
found in Caspar Merian's engraving <strong>of</strong> <strong>Berlin</strong>, ca. I65o. An extension<br />
<strong>of</strong> the original section was projected in 1674 under Friedrich<br />
Wilhelm, "The Great Elector" (1640-1688) after completion <strong>of</strong> the<br />
fortifications; see Goerd Peschken, "Die Stadte-Bauliche Einordnung<br />
des <strong>Berlin</strong>er Schlosses zur Zeit des Preussischen Absolutismus,"<br />
Gedenkschrift Ernst Gall, <strong>Berlin</strong>, 1965, pp. 357-359.<br />
I9. Hitchcock, Architecture: Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries, pp.<br />
29-30.<br />
/ /i<br />
7<br />
' ~: '7 / 7<br />
/<br />
/. %~/.<br />
I .<br />
L<br />
- T- Lt- - _<br />
Lustgarten<br />
MJuseut<br />
/7t~ _-Opera2<br />
eae<br />
1- / z^ F<br />
U Schinkel<br />
II7<br />
i\ Major Existg<br />
A brief resume <strong>of</strong> the architectural composition <strong>of</strong> the<br />
building proper will serve here only as a preface to an<br />
ultimate examination <strong>of</strong> the structure as an integral part <strong>of</strong><br />
its total physical and civic environment. The several sheets<br />
<strong>of</strong> sketches which preceded the final design illustrate<br />
<strong>Schinkel's</strong> preliminary testing <strong>of</strong> various components and<br />
their interrelationships, and show that the evolution <strong>of</strong> both<br />
plan and faCade was a complex process emanating from a<br />
creative mind. The result was a fully matured composition,<br />
which may have incorporated certain traditional elements,<br />
but which subjects all the components to a compact, harmonious<br />
totality (Fig. 3).20<br />
In selecting a cubic shape as the main element <strong>of</strong> the<br />
building, Schinkel may have been influenced by a recently<br />
completed design by Heinrich Gentz for the Mausoleum <strong>of</strong><br />
20. Traditional elements, such as the so-called "castrum plan," are<br />
discussed by Schinkel, Sammlung, I, p. I: "Der Plan dieses, ringsum<br />
ganz freiliegenden Gebludes ist einem r6mischen Castrum ungefihr<br />
nachgeformt, deshalb die vier festeren Ecktiirme und der innere<br />
H<strong>of</strong>. Letzerer ist niitzlich, um die Okonomie gegen den ringsum<br />
laufenden Platz zu verbergen, auch nimmt er den Abfall samtlicher<br />
Bedachungen auf, und fiihrt das Regenwasser von den Dichern<br />
unmittelbar in den, unter dem Gebaude fortlaufenden, iiberwolbten<br />
Kanal."
II8<br />
Fig. 3. Royal Guard House, perspective view (from Schinkel, Sammlung).<br />
Queen Louise <strong>of</strong> Prussia. This suggestion is well supported<br />
by the fact that Schinkel himself had been an unsuccessful<br />
competitor for this commission in I8Io.21 However, in<br />
contrast to Gentz, <strong>Schinkel's</strong> design for the guardhouse is<br />
less dependent upon correctness <strong>of</strong> classical motifs and bears<br />
the stamp <strong>of</strong> a more individualistic approach.22<br />
In addition, one must refer to the well-known design for<br />
a monumental gateway <strong>of</strong> I798 by Friedrich Gilly, which<br />
Schinkel must have known from his days <strong>of</strong> apprenticeship<br />
(Fig. 4). In contrast to <strong>Schinkel's</strong> balanced articulation <strong>of</strong><br />
simple and detailed components, Gilly's gateway speaks a<br />
rhetoric <strong>of</strong> crude austerity. In their handling <strong>of</strong> form and<br />
proportion, one could almost compare the two projects to<br />
archaic Etruscan and classical Greek themes. While Gilly<br />
relied on the massing <strong>of</strong> bold, geometric forms such as the<br />
Tuscan Doric order, reminiscent <strong>of</strong> Jacques-Louis David's<br />
paintings, Schinkel enhanced his Grecian composition by<br />
the use <strong>of</strong> subtle refinements expressed in the variety <strong>of</strong><br />
sizes and textures <strong>of</strong> individual components. His drawing<br />
21. For <strong>Schinkel's</strong> design and extensive specifications, see Wolzogen,<br />
Aus Schinkels Nachlass, III, pp. 15I-i62. The best available study<br />
<strong>of</strong> Heinrich Gentz's project is Adolph D6bber, "Zur Baugeschichte<br />
des Charlottenburger Mausoleums," Zentralblatt der Bauverwaltung,<br />
32,Jg., 1912, pp. I37-I39.<br />
22. Objective scholarship has verified <strong>Schinkel's</strong> approach and<br />
attitude toward historical and contemporary sources; see Benjamin<br />
Rowland, The Classical Tradition in Western Art, Cambridge, 1963,<br />
p. 303: "Certain architects <strong>of</strong> genius, like Schinkel, were able to raise<br />
the classic idiom to a functional, rather than to an archaeological<br />
level."<br />
<strong>of</strong> the guardhouse reinforced the qualities <strong>of</strong> totality and<br />
repose, which could hardly be confused with Gilly's starkly<br />
portrayed chiselled boulders. Indeed, the austerity <strong>of</strong> Gilly's<br />
cold setting for his gateway makes one realize that the<br />
addition <strong>of</strong> natural growth surrounding the building in<br />
<strong>Schinkel's</strong> drawing is a necessary element in his conception<br />
<strong>of</strong> the structure within a particular environment. He contrasted<br />
the abstracted form <strong>of</strong> the man-made structure with<br />
the natural irregularities <strong>of</strong> the trees beside it.<br />
In his rendering, the main cube <strong>of</strong> the building is shown<br />
to its best advantage. He emphasized the simple planes <strong>of</strong><br />
his structure and the concise lines <strong>of</strong> the parapet above and<br />
<strong>of</strong> the projecting ashlar base-course below. The drawing is<br />
also very successful in relating the masterful manner in<br />
which he achieved the difficult juxtaposition <strong>of</strong> the solid<br />
main block and the open freestanding portico. In his final<br />
design, he had dismissed the bold piers <strong>of</strong> the preliminary<br />
sketches and had refined the entrance by a unique fusion <strong>of</strong><br />
Doric and Ionic features. Small-scale winged victories by<br />
Gottfried Schadow took the place <strong>of</strong> traditional triglyphs<br />
and metopes on the frieze above the Attic Doric columns.23<br />
Such deliberate modifications <strong>of</strong> classical prototypes will be<br />
found in all <strong>Schinkel's</strong> designs. His rejection <strong>of</strong> an archaeo-<br />
logical approach and <strong>of</strong> unrestricted dependence upon cur-<br />
23. Hitchcock (op. cit. 29-30), in illustrating one <strong>of</strong> <strong>Schinkel's</strong><br />
more advanced studies for the facade, states that the Pergamene<br />
heads on the frieze were retained in the final, executed version; but<br />
they were, in fact, replaced by the figures <strong>of</strong> winged victories.
ent publications, such as Durand or Stuart and Revett,<br />
distinguish him from less imaginative neo-Classical architects.24<br />
The appreciation <strong>of</strong> the Royal Guard House should,<br />
however, be expanded beyond the narrow boundaries <strong>of</strong><br />
stylistic inventiveness and proportional excellence. Indeed,<br />
a study <strong>of</strong> this work must focus upon its success as part <strong>of</strong><br />
its total planning context.<br />
It appears that it had been <strong>Schinkel's</strong> intention from the<br />
very outset to consider his new building as part <strong>of</strong> a total<br />
urban setting. The cubic shape <strong>of</strong> the Royal Guard House<br />
relates directly in basic outline to Nering's armory block<br />
toward the east, and the portico <strong>of</strong> <strong>Schinkel's</strong> building repeats<br />
a similar feature on G. W. von Knobelsdorff's Palladian<br />
opera house (1741-1743) across the avenue. But most<br />
importantly, the new guardhouse takes command <strong>of</strong> its site<br />
because <strong>of</strong> its carefully balanced placement within the<br />
limited confines <strong>of</strong> its location and because <strong>of</strong> its harmonious<br />
spatial disposition in relation to the neighboring<br />
buildings.<br />
In one <strong>of</strong> his final planning schemes, Schinkel had provided<br />
a definite set-back which created a plaza in front <strong>of</strong><br />
his structure. This arrangement would have given additional<br />
depth to his spatial composition. It was noted by<br />
Schinkel that the king himself rejected this scheme in favor<br />
<strong>of</strong> a location somewhat closer to the avenue. His disappointment<br />
at this change can be read from his own notes written<br />
on the site plan.25 One is somewhat reminded <strong>of</strong> Robert<br />
Mills' Treasury Building in Washington, D.C., which was<br />
located at its present site by a spontaneous decision <strong>of</strong><br />
President Andrew Jackson.<br />
24. For <strong>Schinkel's</strong> attitude toward the monuments <strong>of</strong> Greece and<br />
Rome and contemporary literature on classical architecture, see<br />
Kugler, Schinkel, pp. 22-28.<br />
25. For a published version <strong>of</strong> <strong>Schinkel's</strong> notes, see Rave, Schinkel<br />
Lebenswerk: <strong>Berlin</strong>, III, pp. 153-I54.<br />
Fg4 NaPb. \k<br />
Fig. 4. F. GiUy, Project for a gateway (from Beenken).<br />
To increase the effect <strong>of</strong> coordination between the new<br />
Royal Guard House and its surroundings, Schinkel had<br />
also planned a small park opposite the building at the south<br />
side <strong>of</strong> the Unter den Linden-a project which was never<br />
realized. Despite these curtailments in the overall dispositioning<br />
<strong>of</strong> the building, it is possible even today to sense<br />
<strong>Schinkel's</strong> concern for, and partial success in, creating a<br />
meaningful environmental scheme.<br />
A sequence <strong>of</strong> recent photographs shows the Royal<br />
Guard House in its formal and spatial relationships to its<br />
surroundings (Fig. 5). As one approaches the building<br />
from the southeast, only the portico appears between the<br />
facades <strong>of</strong> the palatial Baroque armory and one wing <strong>of</strong> the<br />
palace toward the west. As one advances closer, the two<br />
bulky structures on either side fade into the periphery <strong>of</strong><br />
vision and the guardhouse, like a precious gem, is progressively<br />
revealed in its totality. Once it is comprehended as an<br />
isolated form, it appears to be a self-contained, self-sufficient<br />
entity, like a cubic version <strong>of</strong> the Roman Pantheon. Despite<br />
its relatively small size, the principal design effects now<br />
merge into a single, monumental statement.<br />
In this context, it is not surprising that this structure,<br />
originally designed to house the Royal Prussian Guard,<br />
would eventually arouse the admiration <strong>of</strong> Russia's Marshal<br />
Georgi K. Zhukov, who is reported to have suggested<br />
the restoration <strong>of</strong> the badly damaged building after the<br />
Battle <strong>of</strong> <strong>Berlin</strong> in 1945.26 Unfortunately for the overall<br />
effect <strong>of</strong> <strong>Schinkel's</strong> scheme, the two freestanding monuments<br />
to Generals Scharnhorst and Biilow (1822) by<br />
Christian Rauch were not replaced. These two statues had<br />
originally played an important role in the spatial definition<br />
<strong>of</strong> the open plaza (Fig. 3). Their presence facilitated the<br />
transition between the open spaces toward the avenue and<br />
the building proper behind. Yet, despite their loss today<br />
and the somewhat machinelike precision <strong>of</strong> the restored<br />
columns <strong>of</strong> the portico, the Royal Guard House has continued<br />
to command its site. Since its conception in I816,<br />
this building has remained a permanent and significant part<br />
<strong>of</strong> its total physical environment. During the lifetime <strong>of</strong><br />
Schinkel and in subsequent decades it was considered a<br />
masterpiece in its own right.27 However, in a broader context,<br />
one can add that this building and its placement marked<br />
<strong>Schinkel's</strong> first attempt to create an urban environment.<br />
In view <strong>of</strong> <strong>Schinkel's</strong> successful execution <strong>of</strong> his first commission<br />
as a state architect,28 it is not surprising that he was<br />
26. This statement is based on a private interview with Pr<strong>of</strong>. Rave<br />
on I6 Nov. 1960.<br />
27. For a typical interpretation, see Grisebach, Schinkel, pp. 68-69.<br />
28. For data relating to <strong>Schinkel's</strong> career as <strong>of</strong>ficial Prussian architect<br />
(Ober-Baurat, I815 to Ober-Landes-Bau-Director, 1838), see<br />
Wolzogen, Aus Schinkels Nachlass, II, pp. 224-225.<br />
II9
120<br />
Fig. 5. Three views <strong>of</strong> the Royal Guard House from the southeast<br />
(photos: author).<br />
called upon in 1818 to design a replacement for the recently<br />
gutted theater at the Gendarmenmarkt (Fig. 6). This city<br />
plaza was located southwest <strong>of</strong> the center <strong>of</strong> <strong>Berlin</strong>. The old<br />
theater <strong>of</strong> I80o-I802 (Fig. 7) had been the work <strong>of</strong> Karl<br />
Gotthard Langhans, <strong>Berlin</strong>'s first neo-Classicist and designer<br />
<strong>of</strong> the famous Brandenburg Gate (1788-1791). In comparison<br />
to this well-known civic monument, the old theater<br />
was carried out in a somewhat nondescript manner, which<br />
quickly earned it the sobriquet, "c<strong>of</strong>fin," among the critics<br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>Berlin</strong>. If it is compared to Friedrich Gilly's competition<br />
entry for the same project (Fig. Io), Langhans's contribution<br />
appears even more mundane.29<br />
Although this uninspired structure was now gutted, the<br />
program for the new theater required the utilization <strong>of</strong> the<br />
still-existing foundations-a significant limitation placed<br />
upon the creative imagination <strong>of</strong> the new architect.30<br />
Schinkel also had to furnish a considerable number <strong>of</strong> new<br />
interior spaces. Besides the theater proper, there was to be<br />
included a large concert hall, a spacious royal reception<br />
lounge and several rehearsal rooms <strong>of</strong> various sizes. In order<br />
to solve this problem, Schinkel reserved the central portion<br />
<strong>of</strong> the plan for stage, orchestra, and auditorium and arranged<br />
the additional rooms in two lower wings on either<br />
side. On the exterior <strong>of</strong> the building, the major elements,<br />
i.e., the auditorium and stage, are marked by the elevated<br />
central block, while the symmetrically placed lateral wings<br />
housed the concert hall and rehearsal sections. Because <strong>of</strong><br />
this involved program and the specific requirements and<br />
restrictions imposed upon the architect, the space given to<br />
the theater proper was reduced to about one-third <strong>of</strong> the<br />
total area. "The Schauspielhaus is magnificent," remarked<br />
the crown prince pointedly, "... and if one searches long<br />
enough, one may even find a theater inside."31 While this<br />
remark by a young prince and architectural entrepreneur32<br />
may have been spoken in jest, it could be understood as a<br />
compliment to <strong>Schinkel's</strong> planning ingenuity.<br />
And yet, as one looks at this structure today (the interior<br />
gutted since 1945), neither the prince's comment nor the<br />
favorable opinion <strong>of</strong> Quatremere de Quincy33 touch upon<br />
the most important aspect <strong>of</strong> the theater. As in the foregoing<br />
discussion <strong>of</strong> the Royal Guard House, so the Schauspiel-<br />
29. For Langhans's theater (800o, destroyed I817) and <strong>Schinkel's</strong><br />
plans to remodel it in I813, see Rave, Schinkel Lebenswerk: <strong>Berlin</strong>,<br />
I, pp. 79-87.<br />
30. See Wolzogen, Aus Schinkels Nachlass, III, chap. "Uber den<br />
Bau des neuen Schauspielhauses in <strong>Berlin</strong>," pp. I70-I87. Cf.<br />
Schinkel, Sammlung, I, pp. I-2 (7 cols.).<br />
3I. See Rave, Schinkel Lebensverk: <strong>Berlin</strong>, I, p. 122.<br />
32. See August Stiiler, "Uber die Wirksamkeit Friedrich Wilhelms<br />
IV in dem Gebiete der bildenden Kiinste," Zeitscllriftfiir<br />
Bauwesen, II,Jg., I86I, esp. pp. 520-525.<br />
33. Antoine Quatremere de Quincy (1755-I849), the most influential<br />
French architectural critic <strong>of</strong> the time, acclaimed <strong>Schinkel's</strong><br />
Schauspielhaus in <strong>Berlin</strong> as follows: "Cet edifice l'emporte incon-<br />
testablement sous le rapport de l'architecture, de la conception de<br />
l'ensemble et de la belle execution tout ce qu'on peut voir ailleurs."<br />
Quoted from Giedion, Spdtbarocker, p. 142. For <strong>Schinkel's</strong> personal<br />
comments relative to his meeting with Hittorf and Quatremere de<br />
Quincy in Paris, 1826, see Wolzogen, Aus Schinkels Nacllass, II, pp.<br />
13, 23, 30.
Fig. 6. Theater (Schauspielhaus), perspective view (from Schinkel, Sammlung).<br />
haus must be studied as part <strong>of</strong> its total urban scene. Only in<br />
this context will it be possible to judge and to appreciate the<br />
architect's achievement and to understand his most important<br />
legacy to our own ideas about planning.<br />
Seen within its urban setting, <strong>Schinkel's</strong> new theater<br />
formed the focal point at the west side <strong>of</strong> a major city plaza<br />
(Fig. 8).34 To the north and south, it was flanked by two<br />
almost identical churches <strong>of</strong> an earlier period (finished<br />
I780-I786) by Gontard (Fig. 9).35 Carefully balancing the<br />
scale, mass, and proportion <strong>of</strong> his addition to the panoramla<br />
<strong>of</strong> the urban plaza, Schinkel succeeded in complementing<br />
the already existing framework <strong>of</strong> buildings in a variety <strong>of</strong><br />
ways.<br />
34. It is interesting to note that both Gilly and Schinkel illustrate<br />
their respective designs at an angle to the right. This is conditioned<br />
by the nonaxial approach to the site. The major entrance to the<br />
square was at the northeast corner.<br />
35. The flanking churches are: north, Franzosischer Dom (see Fig.<br />
9), I701-I705, finished by Quesnay after plans by Cayart, cupola<br />
executed by Unger after plans by Gontard, I78I-I785; south,<br />
Deutscher Dom (Neue Kirche), I70I-1708, finished by Simonetta<br />
after plans by Griinberg, cupola executed by Unger after plans by<br />
Gontard, 1781-1785. Senator fur Bau-und Wohnungswesen, Abt.<br />
Landes-und Stadtplanung <strong>Berlin</strong>, <strong>Berlin</strong> Planutngsgrundlagcn fiir den<br />
stddtebaulichen Ideenwettbewerb "Hauptstadt <strong>Berlin</strong>," Bonn-<strong>Berlin</strong>,<br />
1957, items 19-22, photo section.<br />
121<br />
Most obviously, the new building was similar to its<br />
neighbors in fundamental stylistic appearance. In its exterior<br />
design Schinkel employed the time-honored principles<br />
<strong>of</strong> Classicism, although his distinctly neo-Grecian Classicism<br />
could hardly be confused with Gontard's Anglo-<br />
Palladian motifs.36 In addition, Schinkel attempted to create<br />
a harmony between the theater and the existing churches<br />
by echoing their centralized scheme. However, he emphasized<br />
the central section <strong>of</strong> his new civic building with a<br />
dominant clerestory and a large sculptural group crowning<br />
the pediment, in contrast to the religious structures, which<br />
are terminated by domes on high drums. A colossal Ionic<br />
entrance portico, with a formal flight <strong>of</strong> steps, completed<br />
the frontal faCade.<br />
In regard to the design <strong>of</strong> the theater proper, the portico,<br />
with its grand approach, strikes a note <strong>of</strong> accentuated elegance<br />
in contrast to the blocklike character <strong>of</strong> the rest <strong>of</strong> the<br />
36. A certain tendency toward Anglo-Palladianism is noticeable in<br />
the <strong>of</strong>ficial Prussian architecture built by Gontard and von Knobelsdorff<br />
under the auspices <strong>of</strong> Frederick II (I740-1786). In the case <strong>of</strong><br />
the churches at the Gendarmenmrarkt, a certain resemblance to the<br />
domes <strong>of</strong> the Greenwich Naval Hospital has been suggested by Paul<br />
Ortwin Rave, <strong>Berlin</strong> in der Gescllichte seiner Baliten, Miinchen-<strong>Berlin</strong>,<br />
1960, p. 30.
122<br />
Fig. 7. Drawing <strong>of</strong> Langhans's theater by Schinkel (from Rave,<br />
Schinkel Lebenswerk).<br />
building.37 At the same time, however, the architect used<br />
major features <strong>of</strong> this portico as coordinating elements in<br />
the horizontal articulation <strong>of</strong> the entire structure. For instance,<br />
he carried the ashlar base to the top level <strong>of</strong> the<br />
frontal stairs and their two flanking spur walls. He continued<br />
the entablature <strong>of</strong> the Ionic frontispiece as a strong<br />
horizontal band, tying the lateral wings and the portico to<br />
the central block. In regard to the formal articulation <strong>of</strong> the<br />
city plaza, <strong>Schinkel's</strong> portico facade played yet another<br />
highly important role: it served to echo the similarly em-<br />
phatic freestanding porticos <strong>of</strong> the adjacent churches. Consequently,<br />
it is this particular motif which established a<br />
formal continuity between his new structure and the existing<br />
ones.<br />
At this point, it is necessary to compare <strong>Schinkel's</strong> theater<br />
and the relation to its site <strong>of</strong> the previous efforts <strong>of</strong> Langhans<br />
and Gilly. Such comparisons will vividly demonstrate to<br />
what degree Schinkel, the younger master, differed from<br />
his teachers; moreover, we shall see how the attitude toward<br />
overall planning <strong>of</strong> urban spaces had changed in the<br />
short interval <strong>of</strong> some twenty years.<br />
37. Schinkel explains the reason for raising the portico and ultimately<br />
the entire building in his report to the king, dated 27 April<br />
I818. "Die Magazine fur Decorationen sind sammtlich in dem<br />
Unterbau des Gebiudes, damit die grosse Gefahr vermieden wird,<br />
welche bei dem alten Hause durch die Aufhaufung der Lasten iiber<br />
den K6pfen der Zuschauer auf einem nur durch Hangewerke<br />
getragenen Boden entstand und zu <strong>of</strong>tmaligen dringenden Erinnerungen<br />
Behufs deren Abstellung Anlass gab.... Der fur die<br />
Decorationsmagazine nothwendige Unterbau tragt zugleich vorziiglich<br />
viel zum edlen Styl des Gebiudes bei, indem die Architektur<br />
dadurch iiber die gew6hnlichen Stadtgebaude hinausgehoben wird.<br />
"Die sechs noch brauchbaren alten Saulen, welche beim Neubau<br />
wieder angewendet werden, sind wiirdiger aufdiesen Unterbau mit<br />
einer sch6nen Treppe zu bringen, und werden so eine gr6ssere, dem<br />
6ffentlichen Gebaude entsprechende Wirkung machen. Zugleich<br />
wird hierdurch die bequeme Unterfahrt gewonnen." Wolzogen,<br />
Aus Schinkels Nachlass, In, pp. I78-I79.<br />
For an illustration for the porte cochere below the portico, see<br />
Rave, Schinkel Lebenswerk: <strong>Berlin</strong>, I, p. I2I.<br />
TOWARDS<br />
UNTER DEN LINDEN I<br />
FRANZOSISCHE - STRASSE<br />
JAEGER -<br />
TAUBEN -<br />
SCHAUSPIEL<br />
HAUS<br />
I NEUE KIRCHE<br />
MOHREN -<br />
01 I<br />
I0 20 [0<br />
100 0 100 200 300<br />
tlll,i,,1i 1 I i<br />
I I El ] I E lI I I<br />
I<br />
w<br />
c,<br />
z<br />
UL<br />
I<br />
Fig. Io. F. Gilly, Project for a theater at the Gendarmenmarkt<br />
(from Rietdorf).<br />
Langhans's theater <strong>of</strong> 800o, as mentioned above, was a<br />
building devoid <strong>of</strong> exterior distinction. Even its portico,<br />
which faced onto the square, could hardly have qualified as<br />
an element coordinating the three major buildings at the<br />
Gendarmenmarkt; it merely emphasized the entrance to the<br />
theater itself.<br />
Gilly's project, on the other hand, was drastically different<br />
(Fig. io). In the competition for the original theater, he<br />
had presented a structure which was inspired, in plan, by<br />
contemporary French theaters (such as the Theatre-Francais<br />
in Paris) and in exterior articulation by the geometric<br />
abstractions <strong>of</strong> recent projects by Boullee and Ledoux.38<br />
Judged by his own rendering, it was to be built <strong>of</strong> smooth,<br />
unadorned stone from base to cornice-a material and texture<br />
which would have reinforced the boldness <strong>of</strong> its major<br />
components: a massive cube in the center, flanked by two<br />
half-cylinders, and a highly abstracted entrance portico.<br />
Like Schinkel some twenty years later, Gilly had planned to<br />
unify the exterior composition with two dominant horizontal<br />
bands, one continuing the top level <strong>of</strong> the lateral<br />
arcades, the other, converted into a frieze <strong>of</strong> low-relief<br />
sculpture, encircling the cube and the half-cylinders at their<br />
cornice level. Unlike Schinkel, however, Gilly concen-<br />
trated exclusively on his own building. In the tradition <strong>of</strong><br />
French, so-called "revolutionary," Classicism, he not only<br />
worked with the severest <strong>of</strong> geometric forms, the plainest<br />
38. For the particular place <strong>of</strong> Gilly's project in the context <strong>of</strong> late<br />
eighteenth-century architecture, see Hermann Beenken, Schopferische<br />
Bauideen der deutschen Romantik, Mainz, 1952, pp. 6Iff. Cf. Alste<br />
Oncken, Friedrich Gilly (1772-1800), <strong>Berlin</strong>, I936, esp. pp. I-Io, 42,<br />
63-77. Despite its occasional political overtones, this work remains<br />
the only recent comprehensive scholarly publication on F. Gilly. Its<br />
publication date corresponds with the 1936 Olympic games in <strong>Berlin</strong>,<br />
when a portrait bust <strong>of</strong> Gilly by Gottfried Schadow was exhibited at<br />
the stadium. Cf. the text <strong>of</strong> Alfred Rietdorf, Gilly, Wiedergeburt der<br />
Architektur, <strong>Berlin</strong>, I940-I943, which contains good illustrations.<br />
<strong>of</strong> surfaces, and the most concise <strong>of</strong> framing contours, but,<br />
in addition, he conceived <strong>of</strong> architecture as the art <strong>of</strong> building<br />
majestically isolated monuments.39 In his drawing, he<br />
accentuated, one may even say dramatized, his structure's<br />
heroic scale by presenting it in a sharply foreshortened<br />
Umriss perspective. Finally, he did not hesitate to literally<br />
erase the domes <strong>of</strong> the nearby churches. In so doing, he<br />
created a misleading, yet highly individualistic, image <strong>of</strong><br />
the setting. Consequently, his building was conceived, and<br />
would have been executed, as a totally isolated entity with<br />
no formal or spatial reference to its environment.<br />
On the other hand, Schinkel, the Romanticist <strong>of</strong> the<br />
younger generation, considered his building to be an addition<br />
to the total environmental scheme. He underscored his<br />
own conscious endeavor to think in terms <strong>of</strong> totality by<br />
providing an especially enlightening document <strong>of</strong> his intentions.<br />
For the opening <strong>of</strong> his new theater in 1821, he designed<br />
and executed a panoramic backdrop depicting the<br />
new architectural setting <strong>of</strong> the Gendarmenmarkt (Fig. I ).<br />
The audience, arriving for the opening-night performance<br />
<strong>of</strong> Goethe's Iphigenie auf Taurus, was confronted with a<br />
visual recording by Schinkel the painter <strong>of</strong> the results <strong>of</strong><br />
urban planning by Schinkel the architect. They were made<br />
aware, in a most dramatic fashion, <strong>of</strong> the total urban setting<br />
<strong>of</strong> the theater in which they were seated-their vision expanded<br />
to include a distant horizon as well as the immediate<br />
spatial and formal relationships <strong>of</strong> the monuments framing<br />
the Gendarmenmarkt. Could they have left the theater,<br />
gone out into the square, untouched by what they had seen<br />
-by what the architect had forced them to visualize?40<br />
Just as Gilly's theater project had been a testimony to the<br />
principles <strong>of</strong> the Age <strong>of</strong> Reason, <strong>Schinkel's</strong> vision <strong>of</strong> a unified<br />
and comprehensible totality emerged as a tribute to the<br />
Age <strong>of</strong> Idealism, the age <strong>of</strong> Goethe.41<br />
The planning concepts first realized at the Gendarmenmarkt<br />
were to be carried even further in <strong>Schinkel's</strong> next<br />
commission: the total redevelopment <strong>of</strong> the Lustgarten<br />
area, <strong>Berlin</strong>'s civic and cultural nucleus. The program would<br />
ultimately consist <strong>of</strong> the functional and aesthetic coordination<br />
between several existing structures and a series <strong>of</strong> new<br />
buildings, as well as the extensive replanning <strong>of</strong> canals,<br />
streets and public spaces. On either side <strong>of</strong> the eastern ter-<br />
39. This argument stands in sharp contrast to that <strong>of</strong> Rietdorf,<br />
Gilly, p. 118, who reproduces a night-view sketch <strong>of</strong> the area by<br />
Gilly (Illus. 108) and insists on Gilly's conscious attempt to unify his<br />
project with the existing structures into a total setting.<br />
40. Characteristically, Schinkel included this view in his Sammnlung,<br />
I, pl. 14.<br />
4I. This opinion differs from that <strong>of</strong> Pevsner, Outline <strong>of</strong> European<br />
Architecture, p. 375, who writes: "... Gilly's National Theater for<br />
<strong>Berlin</strong> [was] clearly a conception <strong>of</strong> the Goethe age."<br />
I23
124<br />
Fig. I . Stage design for the Schauspielhaus (from Schinkel, Sammlung).<br />
minus <strong>of</strong> the Unter den Linden avenue, from the tip <strong>of</strong> the<br />
Museum-Island on the north to the Werderscher-Markt on<br />
the south, stretched an extensive area which would feel the<br />
impact <strong>of</strong> <strong>Schinkel's</strong> genius as an architect and environmental<br />
planner (Fig. 2).<br />
An analysis <strong>of</strong> a project which is as extensive as the Lust-<br />
garten calls for an approach which exceeds the investigation,<br />
description, and criticism <strong>of</strong> individual buildings. It is<br />
especially necessary to treat the project as a total achievement<br />
since some <strong>of</strong> the most sensitive students and historians<br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>Schinkel's</strong> work have failed to comprehend it as<br />
originally a composition <strong>of</strong> totality.42 Philip Johnson, for<br />
42. My view stands in exact opposition to Giedion's analysis <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>Schinkel's</strong> Lustgarten project, Spdtbarocker, p. 125: "Der Platz des<br />
'Lustgartens' . . . beim <strong>Berlin</strong>er Schloss zeigt wieder drei unverbundene<br />
Bauten. Den Riickhalt, den die weite Flache am Schliiterschen<br />
Schloss findet, lasst sie, die fast doppelt so gross als der Miinchener<br />
Konigsplatz ist, doch nicht zerfliessen. Es ist Schinkels Verdienst,<br />
dass er das Alte Museum I823, unter grossen Miihen in weitmiglichste<br />
Entfernung riickte, denn die Schliitersche Wand konnte<br />
niemals ein Gegeniiber in der Saulenstellung Schinkels finden. Auf<br />
instance, has spoken eloquently <strong>of</strong> the museum alone (Fig.<br />
12); but because <strong>of</strong> the radical changes which have occurred<br />
since I894, he was impressed only by the building's subtle<br />
proportions, its simple monumentality, and the clarity and<br />
restraint <strong>of</strong> its details.43 The younger generation <strong>of</strong> architects,<br />
however, may pr<strong>of</strong>itably expand their view and<br />
study <strong>Schinkel's</strong> total program: the redevelopment <strong>of</strong> an<br />
entire major sector <strong>of</strong> <strong>Berlin</strong>, a project which is comparable<br />
in scope and in consequence to many present-day efforts.<br />
The Lustgarten redevelopment and expansion program<br />
occupied Schinkel throughout the decade <strong>of</strong> the I820s.<br />
Indeed, his new museum (now known as the Alte Museum)<br />
diese Weise bedriickt nicht eine Gestaltung die andere und jeder<br />
Bau kann Individuum in seinem Reich bleiben. Ausserdem wird<br />
durch die grosse Entfernung ein Platz in romantischem Sinn ge-<br />
schaffen und eine eigentliche Raumbildung verhindert. Dass es<br />
Schinkel gar nicht um einen einheitlichen Platzraum zu tun war,<br />
kann man auch aus den spateren Entwiirfen fur das Friedrichsdenk-<br />
mal, 1829, ersehen..."<br />
43 Johnson, "Schinkel im zwanzigstenJahrhundert," op. cit., p. I I.
was only completed by 1830,44 while the custom warehouses<br />
(Packh<strong>of</strong>) and the new building for the Bauakademie<br />
were to occupy him until I835.<br />
Even though the renowned landscape architect Peter<br />
Joseph Lenne45 was present in <strong>Berlin</strong>, it was Schinkel who<br />
was approached by the court in 1822 to design the new<br />
borderlines <strong>of</strong> the Lustgarten (which had served as a military<br />
parade ground) and to give thought to designs for a<br />
permanent building for public exhibition <strong>of</strong> the royal art<br />
collection. Schinkel seized the opportunity and expanded<br />
the original hesitant program into a vast redevelopment<br />
scheme. His new bridge already linked the island with the<br />
Unter den Linden. He now proposed a museum which was<br />
to be, not an afterthought, but a monumental addition to<br />
the new Lustgarten as he conceived it. His ability as a planner<br />
must have already been recognized by the crown and<br />
his scheme appears to have met with the approval <strong>of</strong><br />
Friedrich Wilhelm III (I797-I840).46<br />
Outlining his specifications in a letter to the king,<br />
Schinkel emphasized that a total replanning <strong>of</strong> the entire<br />
Lustgarten section <strong>of</strong> <strong>Berlin</strong> would ultimately result in<br />
several significant "advantages." A translation <strong>of</strong> this communique<br />
seems appropriate since it does touch upon the<br />
essence <strong>of</strong> <strong>Schinkel's</strong> thinking, namely, to evoke the idea <strong>of</strong><br />
a coherent environment, instead <strong>of</strong> a series <strong>of</strong> isolated<br />
projects. In part, he wrote:<br />
<strong>Berlin</strong>, 23 January I823<br />
... Your Majesty commissioned me last summer to prepare a plan<br />
for the redevelopment <strong>of</strong> the orchards and borderlines <strong>of</strong> the<br />
Lustgarten. The design for this project has already been submitted,<br />
consisting in part <strong>of</strong> a plan and especially <strong>of</strong> a perspective drawing<br />
which projects the entire [area]. The most interesting aspect (the<br />
total area), occupied me for a long time afterwards, and I came to<br />
the conclusion that this [landscaping] project could be combined<br />
with the construction <strong>of</strong> the new museum and several related<br />
buildings . .. <strong>of</strong>fering in such a comprehensive scheme [the following]<br />
decisive advantages: the reduction <strong>of</strong> building costs over<br />
the last plan; the perfection and beauty <strong>of</strong> the [museum] building;<br />
the embellishment <strong>of</strong> the entire Lustgarten; and, finally, those with<br />
regard to the usefulness <strong>of</strong>the custom warehouses, river navigation,<br />
communication and convenience near the new Schlossbriicke.<br />
I felt it to be my responsibility to prepare promptly an extensive<br />
planning scheme in order to submit the same for Your Majesty's<br />
study and evaluation. Five drawings and explanatory specifications<br />
44. For the best analysis <strong>of</strong> the museum's design and construction,<br />
see Sabine Spiero, "Schinkels Altes Museum in <strong>Berlin</strong>,"Jallrbuch der<br />
preussischen Kunstsamnilungen, 55, 1934, Beiheft, pp. 41-86. For the<br />
architect's own analysis <strong>of</strong> the museum, see Wolzogen, Aus Schinkels<br />
Nachlass, III, pp. 217-266.<br />
45. P. J. Lenne (1789-1866), Director-General <strong>of</strong> the Royal<br />
Gardens in <strong>Berlin</strong>, enlarged the Tiergarten from 1833 to 1839, thus<br />
creating one <strong>of</strong> the first major public city parks in Europe.<br />
46. Wolzogen, Aus Schinkels Nachlass, III, p. 217.<br />
illustrate the project clearly and point out all advantages <strong>of</strong> such a<br />
scheme . . 47<br />
It appears that the royal architect and planner had his<br />
way. For once in his entire career, he was able to overcome<br />
curtailing financial limitations, frustrating criticisms and<br />
practical restrictions in order finally to achieve the realization<br />
<strong>of</strong> his plans.48<br />
<strong>Schinkel's</strong> museum was constructed at the north side <strong>of</strong><br />
the Lustgarten plaza. Designed in 1822 and executed from<br />
1823 to I830, this building became one <strong>of</strong> Europe's first<br />
public museums. It has repeatedly been cited as one <strong>of</strong> the<br />
most successful designs <strong>of</strong> its type. Critics have commented<br />
favorably on its adaptable exhibition spaces as late<br />
as the mid-twentieth century.49<br />
In addition to the economy and practicality <strong>of</strong> the general<br />
layout, the exterior composition <strong>of</strong> the museum was<br />
conceived as basically complementary in geometric form to<br />
the palace at the opposite side <strong>of</strong> the square and also to the<br />
armory across the Kupfergraben toward the southwest<br />
(Fig. 2).50 The general formal definition <strong>of</strong> the museum repeated<br />
the basic horizontal treatment <strong>of</strong> the existing struc-<br />
tures, their cornice levels all being <strong>of</strong> approximately the<br />
same height.<br />
The one existing building which was quite different in<br />
character was the old Domkirche (I747-I750) by Johann<br />
Boumann the Elder located on the eastern edge <strong>of</strong> the Lust-<br />
garten. The more compact, vertically emphasized religious<br />
structure acted as a foil for the lower, broader buildings<br />
surrounding it. When, in 1819, Schinkel had been called<br />
upon to remodel the entrance facade <strong>of</strong> the church, he had<br />
employed one <strong>of</strong> his favorite architectural forms, an Ionic<br />
portico.51 Characteristically, he then insisted on using this<br />
same classical order in the colonnade <strong>of</strong> his adjacent museum.<br />
Despite unfavorable criticism, he defended his choice<br />
47. Ibid., pp. 217-221.<br />
48. Wolzogen, in Aus Schinkels Nachlass, m, p. 218, adds the following<br />
important note concerning the principal condition under<br />
which <strong>Schinkel's</strong> plans could be realized: "Schinkels Plan wurde,<br />
trotz einiger Widerspriiche des H<strong>of</strong>raths Hirt, der mit zur Commission<br />
gehirte, lebhaft befiirwortet und durch Kabinetsordre vom 24.<br />
April 1823 (s. G.) genehmigt, unter der Bedingung, dass der ganze<br />
Bau mit einer Summe von siebenhunderttausend Thalern ausgefiihrt<br />
werde."<br />
49. Hitchcock, Architecture: Nineteenth & Twentieth Centuries, p. 3 I.<br />
50. "Schon bei der Wahl des Platzes, wobei er im Auge hatte,<br />
eine in der Nahe der schinsten Gebaude <strong>Berlin</strong>s gelegene, sehr<br />
unscheinbare Gegend durch einen stattlichen Bau zu verschonen und<br />
ihn als bedeutendes Glied mit obigen Gebauden in Beziehung zu<br />
setzen, zeigt sich der zugleich mit seinen Gebauden grissere,<br />
malerische Wirkungen bezweckende Architekt." Waagen, op. cit.,<br />
P. 370.<br />
5I. For <strong>Schinkel's</strong> remodeling <strong>of</strong> the old Domkirche, see Carl<br />
Schniewind, Der Dom zu <strong>Berlin</strong>, <strong>Berlin</strong>, 1905, pp. 31-33, 7o-8I.<br />
I25
I26<br />
Fig. 12. Museum at the Lustgarten, seen from the southwest (from Schinkel, Sammlung).<br />
<strong>of</strong> colossal Ionic columns as absolutely necessary for the<br />
creation <strong>of</strong> a sense <strong>of</strong> continuity between the portico <strong>of</strong> the<br />
church and the facade <strong>of</strong> his new building.52 In fact, he designed<br />
the columns <strong>of</strong> the museum at approximately the<br />
same height as those <strong>of</strong> the church entrance. Concluding<br />
his clearly outlined argument for continuity in design, he<br />
rejected the criticism <strong>of</strong> his museum facade with the comment<br />
that simplicity, monumentality, and overall unity<br />
were <strong>of</strong> foremost importance and that the totality <strong>of</strong> his<br />
scheme must not be affected by financial restrictions, nor by<br />
lack <strong>of</strong> appreciative response. Consequently, it is an established<br />
fact that <strong>Schinkel's</strong> museum facade was designed in<br />
accordance with one <strong>of</strong> his major principles, namely, that<br />
architecture must be created in terms <strong>of</strong> the integral coordination<br />
between units <strong>of</strong> a given area or site.<br />
And yet, <strong>Schinkel's</strong> museum differed from the neighboring<br />
buildings in at least one important respect. It was raised<br />
on a high substructure or podium. The architect himself<br />
explained the function <strong>of</strong> this podium as tw<strong>of</strong>old. It was<br />
designed first as a masonry vapor barrier and a firepro<strong>of</strong><br />
shell for the heating equipment <strong>of</strong> the museum. Secondly,<br />
it would furnish rental and storage spaces.53 However, it<br />
appears to me that, in addition to <strong>Schinkel's</strong> consistent pre-<br />
dilection for "purpose" (one <strong>of</strong> his favorite terms), this<br />
substructure served yet another function. It is clear from a<br />
study <strong>of</strong> his perspective drawing <strong>of</strong> the entire Lustgarten as<br />
52. Wolzogen, Aus Schinkels Nachlass, mII, pp. 244-249, "Schinkels<br />
Votum vom 5. Februar 1823 zu dem Gutachten des H<strong>of</strong>raths Hirt."<br />
53. Ibid., pp. 231, 247.<br />
seen from the palace bridge (Fig. I3), that the podium <strong>of</strong><br />
the museum also served a decidedly visual purpose. Only<br />
by elevating the Ionic colonnade well above ground level<br />
was it possible to view this major exterior feature in its<br />
entirety from a distant observation point. At the same<br />
time, a comprehensive view <strong>of</strong> the building, including the<br />
complete frame <strong>of</strong> the giant columned screen, could effect<br />
an impression <strong>of</strong> total unity-a concept foremost in the<br />
mind <strong>of</strong> any classical architect.<br />
It is interesting to speculate on the source <strong>of</strong> <strong>Schinkel's</strong><br />
podium concept. Its origin for northern neo-Classicism<br />
may well be traced to Friedrich Gilly's famous project for a<br />
monument to Frederick the Great (1797), the very design<br />
which had inspired Schinkel to become an architect and to<br />
seek out Gilly as his master.54 The conjecture that Gilly's<br />
design did indeed influence <strong>Schinkel's</strong> own use <strong>of</strong> a massive<br />
substructure is further substantiated by the fact that Schinkel<br />
had designed a museum in 800o which included a<br />
podium as an important, though nonfunctional, element.<br />
Thus, while both Gilly's projected design, and <strong>Schinkel's</strong><br />
early museum, feature the podium as a reflection <strong>of</strong> the<br />
Renaissance concern for monumental form and, perhaps,<br />
the neo-Classical ideal <strong>of</strong> a manl-made "acropolis," Schin-<br />
kel's mature work clearly combines traditional visual emphasis<br />
with modern functional considerations.<br />
Besides the formal relationships among the various build-<br />
54. Ibid., i, pp. 172-176; cf. Waagen, op. cit., pp. 317-320. A<br />
secondary inspiration could have been G. W. von Knobelsdorff's<br />
Opera, 1741-1743.
"IBBC-T<br />
1<br />
?'? 1*SY:I<br />
M<br />
5"; 1"::%<br />
t:id:<br />
Fig. I3. View <strong>of</strong> the Lustgarten from Unter den Linden (from Rave, Schinkel Lebenswerk).<br />
ings surrounding the Lustgarten, we must also consider the<br />
spatial relationships, which were an integral part <strong>of</strong> the<br />
planning <strong>of</strong> so large a complex. In the presentation <strong>of</strong> one<br />
<strong>of</strong> his early schemes for the Lustgarten in I824 (Fig. 14),<br />
Schinkel was fully aware <strong>of</strong> the fact that all <strong>of</strong> the monumental<br />
buildings at the plaza demanded a large open space,<br />
which would form the Lustgarten itself and at the same time<br />
also act as the unifying spatial element <strong>of</strong> the entire area. Since<br />
he wished his museum to be a large, dramatic addition to the<br />
site, it would have been impossible to squeeze it into any <strong>of</strong><br />
the available spaces. Consequently, he chose to make the<br />
extraordinary effort <strong>of</strong> diverting the flow <strong>of</strong> river traffic.<br />
By broadening the Kupfergraben and filling in an old canal<br />
(the Pomeranzengraben), which had cut the island in two<br />
at the northern edge <strong>of</strong> the plaza, he was able to place his<br />
new building on the recovered ground.55 Thus, the desired<br />
physical distance from the long, impressive facade <strong>of</strong> the<br />
palace could be maintained. Considering <strong>Schinkel's</strong> repeated<br />
and emphatic statements concerning economy, one<br />
can only conclude that the decision to remove the canal<br />
was influenced by his overriding desire to procure the exact<br />
site he felt his building required and the overall scheme<br />
demanded.<br />
In considering the placement <strong>of</strong> the museum at the<br />
northern flank <strong>of</strong> the square, Schinkel wanted to take into<br />
account the fact that the facades <strong>of</strong> the Domkirche to the<br />
55. For <strong>Schinkel's</strong> extensive explanations concerning the validity<br />
<strong>of</strong> the site he selected and the reasons for closing the canal, see<br />
Schinkel, Sammlung, I, p. 4v.<br />
I27<br />
east and the palace to the south were not perpendicular.<br />
Consequently, a strictly rectangular enframement <strong>of</strong> the<br />
plaza was precluded. He intended, however, to place the<br />
museum facade parallel to that <strong>of</strong> the palace and to create a<br />
"third facade" along the eastern edge <strong>of</strong> the square by<br />
means <strong>of</strong> a long row <strong>of</strong> trees. Composed <strong>of</strong> the irregular<br />
forms <strong>of</strong> nature, yet regimented into a dense screen, the<br />
trees effectively mask the awkward buildings to the east <strong>of</strong><br />
the plaza, as well as the wings <strong>of</strong> the church, and act as a<br />
natural foil for the solid, man-made facades to the north<br />
and south. Their role as a "third facade" is obviously intended<br />
by Schinkel, who designates them on the plan as "a<br />
wall <strong>of</strong> tall lime trees." In front <strong>of</strong> this "wall" were to be<br />
placed monuments on high pedestals, emphasizing the barrier-like<br />
character <strong>of</strong> the row <strong>of</strong> trees and relating this distant<br />
panorama with the statues <strong>of</strong> the palace bridge, as seen<br />
from the ideal point <strong>of</strong> view (Fig. I3).<br />
<strong>Schinkel's</strong> early scheme did not remain intact. From a<br />
handwritten note on the plan we learn that the king insisted<br />
the museum be shifted slightly, so that it was no longer<br />
parallel to the palace. It was not a drastic change, but one<br />
which did loosen the formal composition somewhat. The<br />
final placement <strong>of</strong> the museum can be seen on <strong>Schinkel's</strong><br />
presentation plan for the landscaping <strong>of</strong> the Lustgarten<br />
(Fig. 15). Perhaps as a reaction to the shifting <strong>of</strong> the building,<br />
Schinkel now proposes to obscure oblique views <strong>of</strong> the<br />
museum by adding a thick row <strong>of</strong> chestnuts along the<br />
water's edge and replacing the wall <strong>of</strong> linden trees with<br />
chestnuts as well. A break in the western screen <strong>of</strong> trees still<br />
allows a view onto the portico <strong>of</strong> the Domkirche and, in
128<br />
4 - I .,, "I 1, I I .11 "I I., -, , , - I -11,<br />
"<br />
i 4 1<br />
I I ', ,<br />
-j<br />
A"&& Am<br />
1, -a 1 ka<br />
i I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<br />
11<br />
I it p. "<br />
JV,.l . ~<br />
~t<br />
5'.. 9 :<br />
_<br />
Fig. I4. <strong>Schinkel's</strong> plan for the Lustgarten, 1824 (from Rave, Schinkel Lebenswerk).<br />
a A<br />
,<br />
;<br />
a<br />
- *,<br />
u ' ' ^ i<br />
::\~ :: :s<br />
'H'e<br />
rfact, emphasizes the role <strong>of</strong> the high-domed church as the<br />
j ,., L. ....... .<br />
tfocal point <strong>of</strong> / the vista from the Unter den Linden. An<br />
-,-' "in l<br />
Lwlsitttirrl |^ ti ~!fsrt1- *<br />
X^" arrow on the plan and the inscription, Durchsicht nach dem<br />
Portal des Doms, indicates <strong>Schinkel's</strong> intention that the<br />
' . ........ .. Js E ...<br />
..'.<br />
' ; .. . ' '..'' : a A ^<br />
:"<br />
; : :" | ;.......:<br />
;<br />
< * :.H.. 'i _ ... ......<br />
w l?\ ,j i _ ffi<br />
trttJ sThis, .<br />
;'-"4: t^ -. . .<br />
transverse axis <strong>of</strong> the plaza should visually span the river.<br />
<strong>of</strong> course, had been his conception <strong>of</strong> the site from the<br />
very beginning, as is attested by his perspective view <strong>of</strong><br />
i 823.<br />
The line <strong>of</strong> this view from the west is echoed in the con-<br />
'..^ A. * -<br />
' :'<br />
-^ ?| :::z;: "<br />
figuration <strong>of</strong> planting in the center <strong>of</strong> the plaza. Another<br />
2>1>zw--.'.~ .. . ..' "3.,, ,^ ,t,<br />
i ::. :::::'. promenade relates the entrance <strong>of</strong> the museum to one <strong>of</strong> the<br />
?* :-. ,* jl |l :: .. , i ^ '^ : ,%:.:-,<br />
^<br />
Lustgarten entrances <strong>of</strong> the palace. The low, formal plant-<br />
-^.. ^;: 7- t:.*t,Z !<br />
m- L t<br />
, ing <strong>of</strong> the Lustgarten contrasts with the more picturesque<br />
'<br />
,,t9--'::",,,,:'.__:'<br />
_ . -<br />
'<br />
'4<br />
..<br />
cnrate tne ; s netue, character <strong>of</strong> the looser clumps <strong>of</strong> chestnut trees, strategically<br />
'' 4" r ::<br />
,~:.i.: -'.::7' .;: '-<br />
. . . , . .<br />
PIC<br />
placed to mask or accent parts <strong>of</strong> buildings or awkward<br />
_"_,7':7,,, ::777L:';7;57,':<br />
. ._ _ 7 .'Z. :-.''_"<br />
'<br />
,r ...........U;' 1 * .:...---- _ *- 7,.'<br />
.......;<br />
r...spaces.<br />
The whole Lustgarten area thus becomes a con-<br />
Fig. i5. <strong>Schinkel's</strong> plan for the Lustgarten, I828 (from Grisebach,<br />
Schinkel).<br />
trolled visual experience, with nature playing a decisive<br />
role in relating both the masses <strong>of</strong> solid structure to one
Fig. I6. View from the upper vestibule <strong>of</strong> the museum (from Schinkel, Sammlung).<br />
another and the open or confined spaces to the whole.<br />
The museum, long acclaimed as <strong>Schinkel's</strong> masterwork,<br />
can now be understood not solely in terms <strong>of</strong> its merits as an<br />
architectural landmark, but also as a unit within a larger,<br />
more comprehensive scheme <strong>of</strong> environmental planning.<br />
While <strong>Schinkel's</strong> plans and drawing <strong>of</strong> the Lustgarten teach<br />
us to look at the building from a distance and see it within<br />
a larger context, another significant presentation shows us<br />
the opposite point <strong>of</strong> view: the surrounding environment<br />
from within the museum itself (Fig. I6). His rendering <strong>of</strong><br />
the semienclosed vestibule on the second floor emphasizes<br />
once again that Schinkel never concentrated solely on the<br />
form <strong>of</strong> individual buildings. Through the double screen <strong>of</strong><br />
columns one sees, carefully delineated, an oblique view <strong>of</strong><br />
the palace, the newly landscaped Lustgarten and, to the<br />
right, the distant towers <strong>of</strong> his own Werdersche church <strong>of</strong><br />
1824. The choice <strong>of</strong> vista is intentional-not an axial view<br />
to the palace across the square, but an oblique angle <strong>of</strong><br />
vision showing the larger city environment <strong>of</strong> which the<br />
museum is only a part.56<br />
Thus, although Schinkel used some traditional methods<br />
in composing his spaces, his vision was not solely dependent<br />
upon traditional axial relationships. Right angles and axial<br />
56. <strong>Schinkel's</strong> intentions are also explicitly expressed in his writings:<br />
"Der doppelte Aufgang der Haupttreppen ist so angeordnet,<br />
dass man im Hinaufsteigen und aufdem oberen Ruheplatz, der einen<br />
Altan in der Halle bildet, die Aussicht durch die Saulenhalle auf den<br />
Platz behalt . . ." From the 6th installment <strong>of</strong> Sammlung, I825,<br />
I29<br />
alignments were simply means to organize what might<br />
otherwise become disparate elements haphazardly grouped<br />
together. Yet, he realized that relationships existed among<br />
these elements, which were independent <strong>of</strong> the imposed<br />
rational order. These were the visual relationships which<br />
the architect had to consider when placing his new building<br />
on the site. These were the panoramic relationships which<br />
the painter <strong>of</strong> architectural landscapes could envisage and<br />
control.<br />
Upon its completion in 1830, the Lustgarten became an<br />
organized civic space, taking its place in the long development<br />
<strong>of</strong> city plazas beginning in sixteenth-century Italy.57<br />
Indeed, it was one <strong>of</strong> the last great urban plazas and one <strong>of</strong><br />
the most significant examples executed in Germany in the<br />
nineteenth century. In comparison to Leo von Klenze's<br />
contemporary work in Munich or Friedrich Weinbrenner's<br />
plans for Karlsruhe, <strong>Schinkel's</strong> planning <strong>of</strong> the Lustgarten<br />
quoted from Rave, Schinkel Lebenswerk: <strong>Berlin</strong>, I, p. 42. See also,<br />
<strong>Schinkel's</strong> letter to Christian Rauch, dated 8 January 1823, reproduced<br />
in Hans Mackowsky, Karl Friedrich Schinkel, Briefe, Tagebucher,<br />
Gedanken, <strong>Berlin</strong>, I922, p. 9I, which reads in part: "Die<br />
Front gegen den Lustgarten hin hat eine so ausgezeichnete Lage, man<br />
konnte sagen die schinste in <strong>Berlin</strong>, dass dafiir auch etwas ganz<br />
Besonderes getan werden miisste. Eine einfache Saulenhalle in einem<br />
grossartigen Stil und mit dem bedeutenden Platze im Verhaltnis<br />
stehend wird dem Gebiude am sichersten Charakter und schine<br />
Wirkung geben."<br />
57. It is interesting to note that one finds numerous views <strong>of</strong><br />
Italian city plazas in the portfolios <strong>of</strong> <strong>Schinkel's</strong> first visit to Rome in<br />
1803-1804, among them an exquisite drawing <strong>of</strong> the Campidoglio.
I30<br />
Fig. I7. View <strong>of</strong> the custom warehouses and museum from the palace bridge (from Schinkel, Sammlung).<br />
appears less static and monumental, his site more picturesque<br />
or nialerisch, to use his own term. His ability to coordinate<br />
the various elements, both old and new, into a<br />
single unity <strong>of</strong> formal, spatial, and visual relationships may<br />
have been the result <strong>of</strong> his earlier activity as a painter <strong>of</strong><br />
architectural landscapes. Moreover, as his own rendering <strong>of</strong><br />
the Lustgarten (Fig. 13) shows, he was extremely sensitive<br />
to the panoramic effect <strong>of</strong> the total site. Contemporary<br />
painters in <strong>Berlin</strong>, among them Eduard Gartner and Franz<br />
Kriiger, recognized this quality <strong>of</strong> the urban spaces Schinkel<br />
had created. Their canvases <strong>of</strong> the Lustgarten and the<br />
Opernplatz testify to his success as an environmental planner,<br />
and capture in lively, scenic effects the visual dominance<br />
<strong>of</strong> his new buildings within their total setting.<br />
For several years following the completion <strong>of</strong> the Lustgarten,<br />
Schinkel, now Prussia's first state architect, enjoyed<br />
a fine view onto the splendid urban scene he had created. A<br />
drawing <strong>of</strong> 1835 illustrates, with very close approximation,<br />
the view from his <strong>of</strong>fice window in the new Bauakademie<br />
(I832-1835), which he himself had designed (Fig. I7).<br />
From this vantage point, he could see his palace bridge, his<br />
new museum, and the blocks <strong>of</strong> his recently finished custom<br />
warehouses (a group <strong>of</strong> buildings long since replaced by<br />
Adolf Messel's Pergamon Museum). In one glance he was<br />
able to encompass an entire panorama <strong>of</strong> urban spaces, <strong>of</strong><br />
harmonious yet varied building forms, <strong>of</strong> tree-lined streets<br />
and quays and lively waterways. In the context <strong>of</strong> <strong>Schinkel's</strong><br />
career, the Lustgarten had become a personal triumph,<br />
a culmination <strong>of</strong> his lifelong concern, as painter and architect,<br />
for the total environment <strong>of</strong> man's creations.<br />
Before the destruction which occurred during World<br />
War II, the central area <strong>of</strong> the Lustgarten retained some <strong>of</strong><br />
its original character. But already by I894 <strong>Schinkel's</strong> con-<br />
tinuity <strong>of</strong> scale had been disrupted. In that year, Julius<br />
Raschdorff replaced the old church. His new Domkirche, a<br />
neo-Baroque giant, outraged in height and fancy all subtlety<br />
<strong>of</strong> scale and simplicity <strong>of</strong> form that had once united the<br />
total architectural scene. Subsequently, during the Nazi<br />
regime, the Lustgarten was reduced to a grid <strong>of</strong> stonesurfacing<br />
for political rallies and parades.58<br />
Today, some twenty years after the holocaust <strong>of</strong> 1945,<br />
<strong>Schinkel's</strong> recently restored museum is the lonely survivor<br />
<strong>of</strong> a once splendid urban area.59 Gone are the Royal Palace<br />
and the Bauakademie.60 The museum has irrevocably lost<br />
its communication with the spatial and physical context<br />
which originally formed a comprehensive, organized,<br />
urban environment. As a result, <strong>Schinkel's</strong> major achievement<br />
as an architect and planner has been effectively<br />
destroyed, while his imaginative ideas and solutions live on<br />
only in his drawings and writings.<br />
In conclusion, it appears that, despite interest in <strong>Schinkel's</strong><br />
architecture, one <strong>of</strong> the key aspects <strong>of</strong> his achievement has<br />
been largely overlooked. His schemes for extensive urban<br />
projects and civic centers stand out as significant contribu-<br />
tions to the history <strong>of</strong> environmental planning. It is hoped<br />
that this essay has demonstrated <strong>Schinkel's</strong> effectiveness in<br />
this field and that his vision, rather than his faCades and<br />
floor plans, may become a source and stimulation for<br />
further research into the art <strong>of</strong> building cities.<br />
58. For a summary <strong>of</strong> the changing character <strong>of</strong> the Lustgarten,<br />
its buildings and spaces, see Hans Miither, "Schinkels Museum in<br />
<strong>Berlin</strong>," <strong>Berlin</strong>er Heimat, Zeitschriftfur die Geschichte <strong>Berlin</strong>s, 2, 1959,<br />
pp. 72-82.<br />
59. Restoration <strong>of</strong> the badly damaged museum was completed in<br />
1966 and it is once again open to the public.<br />
60. The ruins <strong>of</strong> the Royal Palace were razed in I950, those <strong>of</strong> the<br />
Bauakademie in 1964.