Dissertation by Daniel Cardno

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE C O N S E R VAT I O N O F T H E N E U E S M U S E U M A look into the methodology and philosophy undertaken

Declaration The work submitted in this dissertation is the result of my own investigation, except otherwise stated. It has not already been accepted for any degree, and is also not being concurrently submitted for any other degree

Daniel Cardno 1002998 08.05.15

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE C O N S E R VAT I O N O F T H E N E U E S M U S E U M A look into the methodology and philosophy undertaken

A dissertation submitted to the Scott Sutherland School of Architecture and Built Environment, Robert Gordon University in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Architecture. by: Daniel Cardno Supervisor: Graeme McRobbie Word Count: 11 460 Turnitin: 9%

The philosophical background to conservation is considered under three main headings: Motive - Why do we wish to conserve? Monument - What are we trying to conserve? Manner and Means - How should it be done? (Earl,J. 2003, p.8)

ABSTRACT “The aim should be to generate not the romantic sentiment associated with ruins, but an experience of the building’s original aura and the high quality of its detailing.” (Buttlar, 2010, p.28) This dissertation will review David Chipperfield’s conservation of the Neues Museum in Berlin from both a philosophical and technical perspective. Initially the dissertation will help define the term ‘conservation’ before embarking further into the main body of work. This will constitute analysing the history of Berlin and the role of the building, constructing an attitude towards the conservation philosophy taken. Furthering the study into Chipperfiled’s inspirations and ambitions along with a collective study of the physical factors will give an added insight. Conclusively an amalgamation of these factors will be displayed in conjunction with various Architects’ reviews to answer the question of whether the conservation was effective.

Authorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s own opinion is expressed in italics.

C O N T E N T S PA G E Introduction

Research Aims

Methodology

Architectural Conservation

1.0 History 1.1 18th Century Enlightenment 1.2 19th Century Stülers Neues Museum 1.3 1920’s Modernisation of the Museum 1.4 1939-1945 Second World War 1.1 1945-1992 Cold War and East Berlin 1.2 1992 Conservation authority’s ‘Outline Conservation Plan’ 1.7 1994 Competition 1.8 Timeline

15 17 19 25 27 29 31

2.0 2.1 2.2

39 41 43

Architect Biographies David Chipperfield Julian Harrap

35 37

3.0 Conservation 3.1 Restoration Approach – Philosophy and Methodology 3.2 Detail examination – Look into techniques of conservation 3.2.1 Foundations 3.2.2 Structure 3.2.3 Main Exhibitions - Bacchusaal hall & The Egyptian Courtyard 3.2.4 Integration of Services 3.2.5 Finishing Materials 3.2.6 Doors and Windows 3.2.7 Art and Decoration

45 47

4.0 Appraisal 4.1 Reviews 4.2 Conclusion

71 73 75

Appendix

References

Image References

54 55 57 61 64 65 67 69

INTRODUCTION In 2009, 150 years after its initial construction, the Neues Museum opened its doors for a second time. This time however the visitors were faced with a museum matured in character, with a history as alluring as its collections. The building was originally designed by Friedrich August Stüler as part of a series of museums during a period of revelation regarding the exhibition of art. The Neues Museum has since endured damage from war and revolution with its ruined state exposed to the natural elements and botched attempts of restoration for over 50 years. With the reunification of the country came a willingness to restore. Meticulously chosen as part of an international competition was David Chipperfield’s somewhat controversial proposal. Based on careful preservation and considered insertion of crisp contemporary additions the Neues Museum has been hailed by many as a remarkable asset not only to Berlin’s Museum Island but to today’s architecture. “These different attitudes, intersecting here and there, constitute the essence of the strategy for a project that is, I believe, one of the most consequential lessons in architecture from the last decades.” (Chipperfield et al. 2009, p.9)

Page 8. fig. 1. Bacchusaal hall. Chipperfield, D. (2009)

RESEARCH AIMS Chapter 1 The research aim in this chapter is to take a look at the history of Berlin with particular attention to the Neues Museum. The research is split into sections: Examination of the building’s design inception as part of the 18th Century Enlightenment era. Analysing the design of Stüler’s Museum to determine its significance in relation to the conservation. The effects of modernisation on the building. Reviewing the damage implications sustained during the Second World War. The aftermath of war and adaptions made during the Cold War. Reviewing the conservation authority’s ‘Outline Plan’. Reviewing the other submissions as part of the architecture competition. Chapter 2 The research aim in this chapter is to identify the Architects involved in the conservation and provide background on their work. Chapter 3 The research aim in this chapter is to look at the philosophy and methodology of the conservation in theory and in practice. Chapter 4 The research aim in this chapter is to collate reviews from distinguished architects and critics to help build an overall conclusion to the research.

ME THODOLOGY

Data gathering tools and discussion of validity Methodology The main resource for the dissertation will be literature. Therefore the dissertation will read much like a literature review. The idea is to treat the dissertation like a case study and to gather as much information before amalgamating this into an easy to read document that highlights many areas whilst relating back to the main question posed. A visit to the building will allow me to input my experiences and photography which will appear throughout. Discrepancies Due to my interest in this building the dissertation could appear biased in favour of Chipperfield’s conservation. Also since researching the building there has been many topics that could be further explored however to remain consistent some areas have been shortened. One of the main sources is a self-published book that Chipperfield has produced which holds a series of essays from established architects and authors regarding their view on the conservation. Although some of the essays touch upon discrepancies within the design, the majority of reviews praise the conservation. Finding literature of a more critical viewpoint has relied on using online resources. Previous research pertaining to the choice of topic My interest into conservation started as part of a 3rd year studio project looking at an adaptive reuse of Aberdeen University’s Kings Pavilion. This involved working within the existing fabric of a building, designed originally to be a swimming pool, then changing its use to become a contemporary art gallery. The main precedent I used for the project was the Neues Museum. A visit to Berlin’s Museum Island as part of a study tour increased my interest in Chipperfield’s practice further.

A R C H I T E C T U R A L C O N S E R V AT I O N The Burra Charter (1999) defines conservation as “all the processes of looking after a place so as to retain its cultural significance. It includes maintenance and may according to circumstances include preservation, restoration, reconstruction and adaptation and will commonly be a combination of more than one of these”. (Orbasli, 2008, p.47) ‘Conservation’ is a term that originated in the 19th century but only after the Second World War had the technology and philosophy developed to see this theory in practice. (Weaver and Matero, 1997) In the context of conservation, John Ruskin (English art critic and father of modern conservation) has an important role. Conservation began as a theory to revolt against ‘Restoration’. (Niglio) “Restoration of historic building involves reconstructing parts of the building that have fallen into decay as imitations of the highest possible quality of the original building. This form depicts a building at one stage in time and removes any evidence of any other period in which the building existed.” (Niglio) Ruskin spoke out against restoration in his book ‘The seven lamps of architecture’. “Neither by the public, nor by those who have the care of public monuments, is the true meaning of the word restoration understood. It means the most total destruction which a building can suffer: a destruction out of which no remnants can be gathered: a destruction accompanied with false description of the thing destroyed. Do not let us deceive ourselves in this important matter; it is impossible, as impossible as to raise the dead, to restore anything that has ever been great or beautiful in architecture.” (Ruskin, 1913, p.194) Buildings are conserved to establish a link with the past. The built environment can be seen as a physical manifestation of a particular time or style that has cultural significance. A building can provide us with evidence of its past as it can be read through its adaptions and additions. “Historic buildings not only provide scientific evidence of the past, but can also embody an emotional link with it, allowing an experience of space and place as it might have been experienced by others before us.” (Orbasli, 2008, p.37) 13

Page 12. fig. i. Damaged colonnade

Neues Museum

Pergamon Museum

(Alte) Nationalgalerie

Altes Museum

1.0

HISTORY To fully appreciate Chipperfield’s restoration it is vital to explore the museums past. Originally designed by Friedrich August Stüler 1843-59 during Berlin’s industrial revolution. The museum has had a turbulent history, not only experiencing damage during the Second World War but also encountering numerous alterations as well as being left to ruin for over 50 years.

Page 14. fig. 2. Site Plan. Chipperfield, D. (2009)

1.1

1 8 th C E N T U R Y Enlightenment

The idea of publicly displaying art originated as part of the 18th century enlightenment movement. Art collections only belonged within the circles of the upper class. The aesthetic changed and art became a part of Bourgeois education. (Buttlar, 2010) In 1841, art enthusiast King Friedrich Wilhelm IV appointed Ignaz von Olfers as director of the royal art collections who proposed for the island between the River Spree and the Kupfergraben canal to be a cultural center of the city. With renowned Prussian architect Karl Friedrich Schinkel’s death in 1841 came Wilhelm’s romantic sketch of Museum Island. The sketch focused on the monumental classical colonnade of the Altes Museum [see fig.3] designed by Schinkel 1824-1830 as the front piece of Berlin’s aspiration to be the new Athens. The Neues Museum received its commission as part of the ‘fleshing out’ of the island. A series of grand museums were to be built to form Wilhelm’s notion of grandeur, centring around the Altes Museum. Friedrich August Stüler was Schinkel’s prime pupil who inherited the mantle after Schinkel’s death. Completing many of Schinkel’s work after his death, Stüler was an obvious choice for the adjoining plot behind the Altes Museum. The Neues Museum was the first commissioned museum followed by Johann Heinrich Strack’s (Alte) Nationalgalerie (1867-1876) then Alfred Messel’s Pergamon Museum which was finally completed by Ludwig Hoffman in 1930.

Page 16. Above fig.3. Sketch of Museum Island. Wilhelm IV, F. (1841) Page 16. Below fig.4. Columned halls. Gilly, F. (1796)

1.2

1 9 th C E N T U R Y Stüler’s Neues Museum

At the start of the 19th century Berlin’s existence as a town within Europe was considerably small. Berlin, unlike London or Paris only had a small number of inhabitants. Due to the current movement and leadership Berlin became the centre for politics, science and arts. This brought larger numbers to Berlin which soon gained the term ‘Preußens Mitte’, the heart of Prussia. Its growing success paired with the beginnings of the industrial revolution meant mechanical and civil engineers were flocking to Berlin as its character was adapting to become one of the biggest industrial centres within Europe. One of these engineers was Johann Carl Friedrich August Borsig. Borsig grew up learning carpentry yet decided to study engineering within Berlin. The ability to connect craftsmanship with mechanical engineering proved successful for Borsig who started operating his own mechanical engineering practice. (Lorenz, 1999) “The central foundation of Borsig’s success was his ability to connect tradition and modernism.” (Lorenz, 1999, p.42) Borsig soon became known to King Friedrich Wilhelm IV as they both shared a passion for the arts and crafts. Due to this Borsig started to become involved in the commission of new royal buildings and played a large part in the design and fabrication of the Neues Museum. Of all the museums on the island, Stüler’s Neues Museum was regarded as the most ‘literal complement’ to the Altes Museum. The façade appears to bear resemblance to the Altes with its row of colonnade and central axis. The elevated wings and domed pieces break the horizontal plane separating its form from the Altes yet these details still echo Schinkelesque Neoclassicism. (Chipperfield et al. 2009) Where Stüler’s museum departs from Schinkel is in its plan and structure. With only a decade separating the buildings both could not be further apart within their structure and construction methods. (Snodin, 1991) The industrial revolution played a large role in the construction of the Neues Museum. Borsig’s innovative prefabrication of iron construction parts meant a lot of work could be carried out at the factory with the delivery of large scale structural elements to site for assembly. To deliver the elements to site a temporary railway was installed as well as 120 ft high wooden hoist erected to unload 19

Page 18. Above fig.5. Elevation of Stüler’s Neues Museum. Stüler, F. (1862) Page 18. Below fig.6. Section of Stüler’s Neues Museum. Stüler, F. (1862)

Top Floor

Main Floor

Basement Floor

1.2 the cargo. Stüler worked in alliance with Carl Wilhelm Hoffman whose role as site manager meant working out the technical details (Common in Prussia at this time for site managers to take upon this role). With the building acting as a leading example of first phase industrialisation in Prussia it was important for both architect and engineer to take advantage of this unique opportunity and develop new construction techniques aided by this innovative period. (Lorenz, 1999) By studying the buildings structure from ground floor through to second floor it is possible to see Hoffmans realisation of the advantages prefabrication has on detailing. This development of detailing is seen almost step by step or floor by floor with structural elements taking a standardised form closer to the top floor. Casting the beams and junction pieces in the same moulds means acceleration in the speed of construction. Museum Island, situated in what was once a prehistoric river valley, has poor subsoil conditions. Firm soil falls 25m under the site for the Neues museum. Even with advances in construction, brought on by industrialisation, reaching the firm soil beneath was not a possibility. Borsig even supplied a steam engine of 5hp which acted as the energy source and powered the pile driver used to set the 2,344 wooden piles to form the foundations. As a result of this the building needed to be designed to be as light as possible which meant reducing the dead load of the structure and walls. The floors had to span 10m yet be as thin as possible, this allowed for three storeys (limit of building height was defined by the height of the neighbouring Altes Museum). (Lorenz, 1999) “For the first time, a monumental and prestigious building was erected in Prussia, the design of which evolved directly from industrialised methods.” (Lorenz, 1999. p.49) Each floor has a unique variety of ceiling vault designs. Prefab structural cast iron beams create vaulting structures which hold combinations of lightweight bricks or hollow clay pots. The clay pots show clearly Stülers attempts to decrease the dead load as much as possible. This method of ensuring the floors remain fireproof, whilst reducing dead load, not only has structural benefits but creates an interesting aesthetic quality reminiscent of Roman construction. It is apparent 21

Page 20. fig.7. Stüler’s plans of the Neues Museum. Stüler, F. (n.d)

1.2 Chipperfield felt this was a feature worth retaining. “The builder’s architectural gesture was multi layered and full of different meanings.” (Lorenz, 1999, p.55) Apart from the industrial revolution having shaped Stüler’s building, the plan and sectional order follow a classical tripartite hierarchy: Doric columns at the ground floor, Ionic on the first and Corinthian on the second. Although this is a conventional system Stüler had managed to intertwine the exhibits within this. Placing the Egyptian collection at the lowest floor with the miniature of the Ramesseum [see fig.8] means the large stone supports harmonised with the heavy Doric columns and solid vaulted ceilings. The Ionic columns on the first floor were made of marble and housed the figures and ornaments. The top floor was more decorative with slender iron supports and wooden floors. This level held the prints and drawings. Decorating the interiors to tell a story behind the art is a phase associated with the Enlightenment era. The most notable would be in the Bacchusaal Hall where Wilhelm von Kaulbach’s painted murals depicted the development of mankind. One would read this in harmony whilst ascending the stairs. (Chipperfield et al. 2009)

Page 22. fig.8. Egyptian Courtyard. (n.d.)

1.3

1920’S

Modernisation of the Museum By 1920 Expressionism had enervated itself. Its over use lead to a stylisation subversively leading to a distaste by art critics which pushed artists to seek out a new path. In revolt to Expressionism the style moved towards Representationalism. This style can be categorised by its return to an awareness of the surrounding and a down-to-earth feel to the art. (Michalski, 1994) Within Germany the Neue Sachlichkeit era began to emerge yet its proximity to Nazi empowerment tarnished the style. However the period of art had an impression on the way that art galleries displayed art. The days of replicating the same power and extravagance the work had as part of the furnishing were no longer. Instead the new approach was to hang art in a room with neutral low key backgrounds with subtle lighting, simply letting the art speak for itself. This logic was implemented in the Neues Museum, meaning a number of rooms saw a rearrangement and redecoration. This included covering some wall detail and levelling the ceiling with plain suspended ones in an effort to neutralise the galleries. Although these adaptions were used as ‘masks’ the anchors holding the ceiling in place and ties to the walls scarred the decorative frescoes. (Chipperfield et al. 2009) The 1920’s alteration poses a question of what period in time the restoration should be reverted back to. To restore the building back to its original state would deny the buildings history however the building needs to be restored to a state of recognition whether that should be the 1920 neutral museum or Stüler’s 1866 original design.

Page 24. fig.9. Images to represent Neue Sachlichkeit movement. Lissitzky, E. (n.d.)

Top Floor

Main Floor

Basement Floor

1.4

1939-1945 Second World War

Upon the outbreak of the Second World War in 1939 the museum was closed to the public. Between that year and the following the majority of exhibits were evacuated yet the large exhibits remained. In 1943 the central staircase was destroyed by firebombs. Kaulbachâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s murals were destroyed by fire damage and the roof was incinerated leaving the central staircase open to the elements. In 1945 bombing caused severe damage to the north-west wing. Museum Island was later converted into a barricaded fortress. A barrage of artillery shelling, grenades and a constant spray of bullets wreaked havoc on the museum. When extinguishing fires the cooling effect from the fire hoses caused some of the structural cast iron to shatter.

Page 26. fig.10. Plans showing the extent of damage. (n.d)

1.5

1945-1992

Cold War and East Berlin The aftermath of WWII saw the emergence of the Cold War which was a state of political and military tension between the Western Bloc (United States and allies) and the Eastern Bloc (Soviet Union and allies). This was literally demonstrated in Berlin with the city being split into districts. United States, Britain and later France accounted for West Berlin forming the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG). East Berlin fell into the hands of the Soviet Union which formed the German Democratic Republic (GDR). (Nehring, n.d.) A loophole was soon found easing emigration from East to West. This resulted in a ‘brain drain’ as many young educated professionals left the East. In retaliation to a debunked ultimatum from the Soviet Union in regard to withdraw of allied forces from West Berlin came the erection of the Berlin Wall which effectively closed the loophole. (Harrington, 2012) Efforts to rebuild after the war relied on funding which East Berlin lacked. The Neues Museum was situated in the Eastern Bloc. This meant the museum ruin stood relatively untouched between the war up to Chipperfield’s restoration. Due to the GDR’s limited resources the idea of restoring the museum seemed out of reach. Even given the resources the GDR’s redevelopment programme was based on utilitarian needs thus rendering any aesthetic or cultural improvements within East Berlin frivolous. Basic restoration work took place simply to stabilise the building. Due to the museum resting on timber piles in poor soil conditions it meant the brick walls and vaulted ceilings had developed large cracks. The procedure for dealing with these structural problems came in the form of a brutal GDR restoration. Using predominantly red clinker bricks and cement to fill the gaps, the repairs displayed no aesthetic quality. The reasoning behind the brutal restoration was that it did not matter, the building if it were to be restored would be brought back to its 19th century design. This meant the walls would be concealed behind the re-plastering. (Ziesemer and Newton, 2009) “Nevertheless, there was never any question that it should be fully restored in the original classical style.” (Ziesemer and Newton, 2009, p.60) Although many of the works of art were removed from the museum prior to its destruction during the war there were still pieces that remained entombed within. Attempts to remove the damaged 29

Page 28. fig.11. The war-damaged and derelict New Museum. Klapsch, T. (1992)

1.5 artwork and rubble impended an investigation into its structural stability. (Ziesemer and Newton, 2009) In 1986 the East German cultural politicians decided to go ahead with a restoration of the building taking it back to its original design at the cost of 350 million marks. Not long after work began the revolution started which lead to the fall of the Berlin wall subsequently halting the restoration. (Buttlar, 2010) The GDR restoration attempts are stricken off Chipperfield’s conservation as though this period of history did not exist. Truthfully the brash restoration attempts are not aesthetically in keeping with Stüler’s design and do not bare the same romantic notion the ruin possesses. However to justify removing the GDR alterations would falsify the philosophy. Those arguing that the removal was inconsistent with the philosophy were confronted with the argument of misunderstanding the difference between an ‘archaeological’ and ‘architectural’ approach. Being that the architects felt justified in returning the building to a state of ruination before the point of 1980s interventions. “authorities were eventually convinced that this was a necessary measure in restoring a sense of harmony to the disjointed museum structure”. (Chipperfield et al. 2009, p126)

1.6

1992

Conservation authority’s ‘Outline Conservation Plan’ In 1992 an expert committee of conservation professionals were formed out of necessity due to the delicate task of dealing with the reconstruction of the Neues Museum; a current world heritage site. With the announcement of the competition came a restoration plan with a strict set of guidelines regarding how to handle the conservation. It became a topic of much discussion in Berlin and caused controversy in regard to what philosophical approach would be taken for handling the ruins of such a culturally significant building. The topic appeared very prominent for a lot of the population. (Buttlar, 2010) The committee put together the restoration plan which lay on two ethical foundations: The writings of John Ruskin, and the post war German tradition (Hans Döllgast’s work for example). (Buttlar, 2010) John Ruskin has a conservation methodology which can be seen as contradictory especially when implementing it to a ruin such as the Neues Museum. A preference to conserve objects and buildings as a whole is made. “What was once a Gothic altarpiece may be dismantled into isolated sculptures, easel paintings and decorative carvings, the result being that the experience of the altarpiece as a whole has to be rediscovered…The same situation applies to architecture.” (Philippot, 1976, p.271) This could be interpreted as a comparison between a dismantled altarpiece and a destroyed building. Meaning that for a destroyed building to be appreciated again it will need to be reconstructed to its former state. Although this does contradict Ruskins next point about a buildings history. “A monument of the past, be it architecture, sculpture, painting or any combination of these forms of art, has come to man through time and history. During this period it usually undergoes changes of various kinds—additions, reductions or modifications in shape, use or sense due to mans interventions and material alterations due to physical and chemical processes…All this history must be taken into consideration when establishing what is the whole to be safeguarded.” (Philippot, 1976, p.272) A later edition of Ruskins writing presents his approach to conservation more directly, 31

1.6 “the old quarries may be exhausted, the new material mimicking the old is not weathered, and the skills and craftsmanship have most probably changed. So, for both technical and cultural reasons, the replica usually arrives stillborn.” (Jencks, 2011, p.102) Should result of war and the following historic actions visible on the building be stripped off and concealed or should they be shown as part of the buildings history. The real question might be what is worth conserving. At what point should the Neues Museum be stripped back to, would it be of importance to show the brutalist alterations made during its dormant period in East Berlin or is that period of history not as relevant. A case study to further explore could be Hans Döllgast’s 1957 repair of Leo von Klenze 1826 Alte Pinakothek. This war torn museum in Munich offers a very similar precedent for the conservation of the Neuses Museum as it follows the post war German tradition that the committee’s restoration plan outlines. The methodology for the Alte Pinakothek was to strip back the interiors to its skeleton structure with the external skin remaining and restored [see fig.12]. This allowed freedom of design inside the building for Döllgast to re-order the internal spaces and create two large ramped staircases leading to the galleries [see fig.13]. (Rosenfeld, 2000) “The effects of the damage that occurred during the war are still visible on the outer façade. A particularly impressive feature is the imposing stairway which, with its untrammelled grandeur and lightdrenched airiness, brings a new tone to the building and could, without exaggeration, be thought of as a symbol of democratic openness. Architectural historians have come to appreciate the Alte Pinakothek as a classic example of German architecture of the reconstruction period” (Baunstark, 2002, p.9) A contradictorily standpoint comes from the modernist architecture critic Hans Eckstein. His view on the Alte Pinakothek sees the original Klenze building as being destroyed in the war and its conservation comparable to a deceased person left only in our memories. (Rosenfeld, 2000) “a… patched-up Pinakothek will not be the old one… What once charmed us is gone” (Rosenfeld, 2000, p.43)

Page 32. Left fig.12. Front Elevation of the Alte Pinakothek, (n.d) Page 32. Right fig.13. Staircase of the Alte Pinakothek, (n.d)

1.7

1994

Competition The original competition was not as restrictive as the later enforced restoration plan, it allowed more free rein for the architects. However when the architects first presented their proposals Frank Gehry’s design, which somewhat disregarded Stüler’s building in favour of unrelated metal structures, became a growing favourite. Both architects regarded the central hall as the heart of the building and proposed the main circulation within. Unlike Chipperfield’s subtle take on replacing the old staircase [see fig.14], Gehry made his alteration prominent with a new curving staircase [see fig.15]. “The jury censored his proposal because ‘the individual masses were highly autonomous in appearance and articulation and ignored the existing typology of the city.” (Buttlar, 2010, p30) This led to a further competition entry with a more intensive brief. Contradictorily to both Ruskins writing on conservation and Erksteins view on German post war restoration Chipperfields initial intention was to restore Stüler’s museum. (Buttlar, 2010) “confirmed our intuitive feeling that the Neues Museum should be restored and that this restoration should be complete and authentic as possible’… By removing all trace of damage, Stüler’s authorship of the Neues Museum would be re-established.” (Jencks, 2011, p.102) After the reopening of the competition Chiperfield presented his new scheme. “By polar contrast, the realised scheme [of Chipperfield and Julian Harrap] entirely abandons the idea that the Neues Museum could have been returned to its original form” (Jencks, 2011, p.102) The sudden change in the philosophical approach is particularly bold as Chipperfield stands by his new philosophy. “The challenge was to invent a new architecture which would bring back the wholeness of the building that would see both additions and subtractions to the existing structure.” (Chipperfield et al. 2009, p.123)

Page 34. Above fig.14. Revised design, model of staircase. Chipperfield, D. (1997) Page 34. Below fig.15. Revised design, model of staircase. Gehry, F. (1997)

2.0

ARCHITECT BIOGRAPHIES Although Chipperfield is a renowned architect with a practice of a relatively large size, the challenge of taking on a project of this size with such cultural presence has understandably resulted in partnering up with another practice further experienced in conservation work. Amongst the many restorers and consultants involved in the conservation the notable are Juilan Harrap Architects. To better understand the architects involved it seems beneficial to include a short biography of their work and design ethos.

2.1

D AV I D C H I P P E R F I E L D Information David Chipperfield was born in London and studied architecture there. He set up his practice in 1984 after working for a number of practices including Foster and Partners. The practice has won multiple national awards, international competitions and produced Stirling Prize winning designs. The practice has offices in London, Berlin, Milan and Shanghai. Theory Chipperfield believes architecture should a pluralistic harmony. That there should be a combination of theories and factors within architecture central to one main vision or concept that drives the project, “that can give order and direction to all other decisions” (Nys, 2009, p.35). Within an interview with Max Thompson for the AJ he describes his fascination with Classical architecture within Germany, “I think the one thing we have done in Germany that has been picked up is a legitimisation of a modern Classicism and from our point of view we are interested in the abstract qualities of Classical architecture.” (Chipperfield and Schwarz, 2007) Other works Chipperfield’s portfolio is extensive however a few selected examples of work within Germany which pertain to the Neues Museum include Am Kupfergraben 10 gallery (2007) [see fig.18] which sits across the Kupfergraben canal on looking the Neues Museum. The practice have also worked on the Museum of Modern Literature in Marbach (2006) [see fig.17] and the Museum Folkwang in Essen (2009) [see fig.19].

Page 40. Above, left fig.16. Photo of David Chipperfield. Chipperfield, D. (2013) Page 40. Above, right fig.17. Museum of Modern Literature. Chipperfield, D. (2006) Page 40. Below, left fig.18. Gallery Building ‘Am Kupfergraben 10’. Chipperfield, D. (2007) Page 40. Below, right fig.19. Museum Folkwang. Chipperfield, D. (2010)

2.2

JULIAN HARRAP Information Julian Harrap was born in Essex and studied architecture in London. He set up practice in the 1970’s specialising in the preservation of historic buildings. Harrap has since served on the historic buildings committes of conservation societies in the UK and regularly lectures on the theory and techniques of conservation throughout Europe. Theory Harrap believes that restoration is not an archaeological exercise rather a representation within a contemporary context. Showing the increment of time in a valid manner means a mutual correlation between traditional craftsmanship and twentieth century technology. Harrap dismisses a distinction between and instead emphasises the importance of design. “An architect working extensively on old buildings who is not just a repairer, but cares about design and dares to practise it… Caring about the little things, Harrap believes, does not mean ignoring the wider issues.” (Powell, 1999) Other works For the last ten years Harrap has acted as a design consultant for the Royal Academy of Arts. Commissions have included the conservation of Sir John Soane’s Museum [see fig.22] and Victoria and Albert Museum in London [see fig.23].

Page 42. Above, left fig.20. Photo of Julian Harrap. Sternberg, M. (2013) Page 42. Above, right fig.21. The Well and Bucket. (2014) Page 42. Below, left fig.22. No’s 12-14 Lincoln’ Inn Fields. Charles, M. (2009) Page 42. Below, right fig.23. Completed Renaissance Galleries. Williams, A. (2004)

3.0

C O N S E R V AT I O N The process for Chipperfield and his team was very long and political. Working in a world heritage site caused uproar among the historic society of Berlin. Who in retaliation wrote to the world heritage in Paris as they were concerned that Chipperfield’s intervention would harm the site. Their argument was that Stüler’s Neues Museum should be reconstructed down to the detail. (Schwarz, 2011) “There were those who argued that the museum should be restored to exactly how it had been. Others wanted a modern whitewashed affair with plenty of neutral gallery space, to help the artworks hold their own against the architecture. Some simply objected to the idea of a British architect working on such an important German building.” (Glancey, 2009) When working with the external fabric of the Neues Museum there was a decision posed upon the architect whether or not to represent the building as an aging ruin or to conserve it as a ruin frozen in time. Choosing to conserve it meant creating a form of artificial holding around the fragile fabric allowing its natural decay to extend and in turn increasing the buildings lifespan. However conservation of this type will have some argue that the building shows a dishonest character, that the fragile crumbling walls are not true and its ruined state is only for show. (Buttlar, 2010) “To one the ruin may be manipulated as any artifact can be for visual effect, while to the other every fragment is a part of a jigsaw or a puzzle to which there is only one correct answer.” (Chipperfield et al. 2009, p.121)

Page 44. fig.24. Concept Sketch. Chipperfield, D. (1997)

3.1

R E S T O R AT I O N A P P R O A C H Philosophy and Methodology

Philosophy Unlike the Neues Museum, the other surviving structures on Museum Island were fairly intact allowing the GDR to patch them up for little expense. The first museum to receive restoration treatment was obviously the Altes as it still resembled the front piece of the island. However the museum was carelessly restored disregarding Prussian history in favour of making functional spaces. Thankfully, due to the unification of Germany in 1989, the restoration attempt to bring the Neues Museum back to Stüler’s original were halted. The straight forward replication restoration approach was tested in the following years calling for a revaluation of the philosophical approach. Chipperfield was faced with two conventional methods of restoration, the GDR model of remaking the original as well as the conventional Western European model that deliberately shows the stark contrast between new and old. Instead Chipperfield and Harrap insisted on using the museums historic layers to build the new architecture around. The new architecture would appear polite and none intrusive. With avoidance of using suspended ceilings and false floors it meant the building could be fully read. This makes the building completely legible to the viewer. (Julianharraparchitects.co.uk, 2014) “The best form of restoration is that which inconspicuously rectifies any damage.” (Ziesemer and Newton, 2009, p.60) Taking the building back to its original state is a slight ‘red herring’. The building in some ways was never finished. After its completion in 1859 rooms were left uninhibited, not until 1866 were the Bacchusaal hall murals finished however not long after that Egyptian court was re arranged and galleries changed to appease trends all before the buildings destruction in the war. Therefore there could not be a way to pinpoint a finished state. The conservation therefore relies on taking the building back to a fictitious ‘ideal’ moment in time. (Chipperfield et al. 2009) Page 46. Above fig.25. Model. Chipperfield, D. (n.d) Page 46. Below fig.26. Facade model. Chipperfield, D. (n.d)

3.1 Coherent linking material Conserving the building to a state of recognition meant the rebuilding of damaged areas. Where the damage was only small it is easy to borrow from the surroundings to ‘bridge the gap’ however the Neues Museum was at various states of destruction. Within an interview with Chipperfield he describes the need for a solution; “When it’s 10cm you can borrow from the surroundings but when it’ 20m you cannot borrow any longer.” (Chipperfield, 2008) Not to follow the Western European model of creating contrast between the new and old it felt necessary to introduce one coherent linking material. To reveal the history of the building and tie in the newly rebuilt elements in a subtle way Chipperfield decided to use a uniquely mixed concrete material that would act as neutral linking piece. To further follow, Schwarz partner of David Chipperfield Architects Berlin practice describes the material used in the conservation and the meaning behind doing so in a lecture at KTH School of Architecture. There had to be one consistent material used in the conservation that could easily be distinguished as new but not to have a loud quality that would over power Stüler’s architecture. The decided upon material is a white concrete that has either been sand blasted or polished. This corresponds with the rich variety of Stüler’s Prussian styles. (Schwarz, 2011) “The restoration and repair of the existing elements of the building were driven by the idea that the spatial context and materiality of the original structure should be emphasised – the contemporary reflects the lost but without imitating it.” (Davidchipperfield.co.uk, 2014)

3.1 Building from the ruin (facade and brickwork) The concrete binds the past and present together. However when used in places such as the staircase and Egyptian court the concrete stands as a prominent feature. “In both instances we are presented with strictly abstract forms where Chipperfield handles everything as a ‘zero-degree’ statement, so as to foreclose the least possibility of kitsch somehow entering into the rebuilt fabric” (Chipperfield et al. 2009, p.103) To maintain the power of the concrete it seems essential to minimise the use of it. When rebuilding upon the ruin, selected bricks were used to show the difference between the new and old. Subtle discolouring in the bricks make it possible to tell the difference between what was there and what is replaced. One of the defining parts of the conservation is the rebuilding of the lost north-west wing. Compositionally the rebuild takes the same form of its previous state and mirrors the existing wing with the same attention to scale. The selected bricks used from the salvage have been treated to appear tonally similar to the existing stone fabric. Chipperfield wants the facade to tell a story and does not want that to go unnoticed. There is a confidence in the rebuild, without shying away from producing a dummy replica or an extravagant gesture to the contemporary. The neoclassical detailing and projecting brickwork have been simplified with the horizontal bands of coursing providing reference to the aged neoclassical facade [see fig.26]. “The fenestration pattern mirrors that of the original facade, and the design was pared down to the essential skeletal essence of solid and void.” (Chipperfield et al. 2009, p.123)

3.1 Reclaiming the museum The conservation goes beyond the fabric of the building. Chipperfield reinstates Stüler’s pedagogic function of storytelling between the rooms. The conservation has been crafted with the museum exhibits in mind from the inception. To look at any contemporary museum the photos are often of empty spaces that have the capability of displaying exhibits on a generic level. They are photographed empty with no visitors as the building looks at its best in this state. Chipperfield’s Neues in fact feels the opposite. Without the exhibits the museum feels hollow as if something is missing, this is the case as the museum was designed with the displays in mind. “Often the displays and interiors are in dialogue.” (Chipperfield et al. 2009, p.82) This is clear when walking from room to room as the rhythm and tone changes. The changing states of preservation combined with newly built rooms vary in texture and density. For example the low height heavy vaulted basement layered with intense brickwork and multiple tunnels relate to a catacomb like space. Placed rather in fitting within these spaces are the sarcophagi from the Egyptian collection. This contrasts with domed rotunda on the top floor as the space has an intense atmosphere that focuses on one pinnacle point. In this case the bust of Nefertiti is placed alone within this space drawing all attention directly towards it. (Chipperfield et al. 2009) The small corridors between exhibition rooms have a distinct character. The brass panelled corridors that contain lifts and services also act as a break between rooms. The dark quality of material used and proportions of the ceiling and corridor widths create a compressing experience. A corridor using this material palette and proportions would become too sombre if it was extended any longer. However, as a link between exhibits this feeling of compression works well as the linking rooms have such grand qualities and extensive lighting that the feeling is amplified due to the momentary shift in room proportions that the corridors offer. The only criticism would be the consistency of the conservation process. The buildings conservation rests heavily on exploiting the 50

3.1 damage inflicted by WWII. The time left as a ruin after the damage brings a romantic quality to the building. Rebuilding the north-west wing and the main hall are crucial in establishing a fully functional building. However the conservation as already expressed was done in a neutral manner to appear sympathetic to the remaining building thus building around the romantic setting of the post WWII ruined museum. Yet it is also known that during the GDR era there were restoration attempts. These attempts to restore were very brutal and unsympathetic taking no regard for the cultural significance of StĂźlerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s design. However the style of restoration and the brutal actions are characteristics of this era. Is it simply because this brutal response lacked an aesthetic quality that the conservation team were aiming to achieve meant it was acceptable to wipe any existence of this eras intervention from the building? Perhaps. Although this is still a part of the museums history. Another example of consistency would be the fire damaged columns at the top of the stairs. Due to incendiary attacks during the war a lot of the building, especially the central hall were fire damaged. The bricks were seared black along with the columns. However the conservation team cleaned the bricks to bring them back to a how they might have looked originally. This was not done with the columns however which still remain seared from the fire. The columns do have an aesthetic appeal as the damage has brought out a romantic character within them. Yet this consistency of conservation has rested on aesthetic appeal with selected parts chosen to be exhibited.

3.2

D E TA I L E X A M I N AT I O N Look into conservation techniques

With the building standing as a ruin from destruction and decay it was primary for the building to be restored to a state of recognition (mainly for safety reasons) before work could begin. Although the entire building received treatment to be brought back to a working state it can be seen that different elements of the building were in worse states than others. Chipperfield’s subtle intervention and tone is seen throughout yet is less prominent in certain rooms. To maintain Stüler’s design some of the rooms have been rebuilt with only small flares of Chipperfield’s intervention. The next part of this dissertation will explore some of the technical details of the conservation to further define the extent of work undertaken to deliver such a successful building.

3.2.1

F O U N D AT I O N S Accessing the current condition The ground conditions below the museum varied resulting in the subsoil level falling from 5m to 25m below the building. Due to the limited technology when building the museum the buildings foundation system consisted of 20m deep wooden pile foundations. The system worked well until reaching the most north-east of the building where it ‘floated’ on pile foundations. The museum in its time as a ruin became volatile to cracking. Some of these issues were investigated during the GDR era and partially resolved by installing steel tension rods into the foundations. (Ziesemer and Newton, 2009) GDR repairs included the insertion of block connectors and prestressed steel ties to transfer the loads from the masonry to the new piles. However this placed high peak loads on the historic masonry. The new piles consisted of steel pipes and reinforced concrete i.e. tubular piles. Deemed a ‘high-tech’ design in East Germany at this time. (‘Engineering History And Heritage: Referees 2011) Ground freezing Because of the gradual sinking of the building, the first task of the conservation was to focus on the foundations. Having the area declared as a world heritage site by UNESCO placed added pressure on any intervention. The original wooden piles had rotted effectively rendering them useless in stabilising the building. The injection piles from the GDR era couldn’t have been inserted at a better time. However they were only acting as temporary stabilisation and for the building to become functional it was decided that the pile cap on the south façade would be removed and rebuilt as a foundation slab at a lower depth to correspond with the change in subsoil levels. This meant the injection piles had to stay although they would act as obstacles during the construction. Because of the added strain of the effects of WWII on the buildings structure it seemed unsafe to excavate and underpin. To stabilise the building it was suggested to use ground freezing as a method of connecting the underside of the foundations to stable subsoil via a body of frost. Initially this system was rejected on the grounds of cost and limited research however a German Research Foundation backed this up with a series of studies. One hundred and twenty three refrigeration pipes were used supplying liquid nitrogen to run circuits through the 55

Page 52-53. Above fig.27. Longitudinal section a. Chipperfield, D. (1997) Page 52-53. Below fig.28. Longitudinal section b. Chipperfield, D. (1997)

3.2.1 rows of piping successfully freezing the ground allowing work on the underpinning to take place. This unusual construction method used in this unique condition meant the building suffered very little deformation.(Ziesemer and Newton, 2009)

3.2.2

RESTORING STRUC TURE Structure The trend at the time was to use cast-iron components, however as part of the manufacturing process the tensile strength can become weak. Damage to the building and exposure to the elements worsened the structure. With worry that the structure had become brittle it was essential to determine how stable the structure was. Wrapping a thin carbon fibre sheet (CFRP) around the structure reinforced the framework. (â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Engineering History And Heritage: Referees 2011) Columns One of the most prominent features of the Neues Museum is the colonnades that extend around the base. Varying degrees of damage meant some columns were left standing whilst others needed rebuilt. Due to the brash decisions made after the war some of the rubble was lost although a large collection of stones were kept and stored away later in the 1950s. The philosophy Chipperfield followed could have meant rebuilding the lost columns in a new material. Instead, to show the scars of the war it was decided they would be rebuilt stone by stone as they would have been. Essentially this meant the team were tasked with fixing together a giant three dimensional puzzle. The stones that inherited no stability risk were put together as they were however stones that were at risk of producing an unstable column were stabilised with steel anchors. (Ziesemer and Newton, 2009) The ideology behind the conservation can be questioned when the column structure is held together with steel anchoring. The idea of hanging the stone on steel gives the illusion of false structure. What the architect is trying to show is questioned, is it an aging ruin or is the building a ruin frozen in time. The columns that had no archived stones were rebuilt following a similar principle to the abstract concrete material found inside the museum. These columns were built of a sandstone sourced to appear tonally equivalent yet were placed within the colonnade as blocks. The abstracted basic form stands out between the fluted columns.

3.2.2 Vaulted Ceiling As it is known Stüler needed to make the construction as light as possible. Creating barrel vaults and shallow domes using clay pots and lightweight bricks meant the construction could be kept fairly light whilst producing some visually striking spaces. Like most of the museums structure some were lost and the parts that remained needed work. To keep the work as authentic as possible Chipperfield reinstated original craftwork techniques. (Ziesemer and Newton, 2009) Five new clay pot floors were to be reconstructed. To ensure they matched mechanically and in appearance they needed to be put through laboratory testing. The current vaults could not be tested incase they were damaged. Instead a full scale replica was produced that allowed for testing to be carried out. Generating the 3d model of the vaults helped assess the generated loads as well. Old structural requirements meant the floors only needed to withstand 2kN/m² loads whilst current requirements needed 5kN/m². A lot of ceilings were found to still be in a good structural condition as clay pots which are only 7-10mm thick have a low weight to area ratio. The results found the vaults provided structural stability greater than current requirements. (‘Engineering History And Heritage: Referees 2011)

Page 58 fig.29. Medieval Room. Höfer, C. (2009).

3.2.3

MAIN EXHIBITIONS

Bacchusaal hall & The Egyptian Courtyard Bacchusaal hall At the centre of the plan and the tripartite section is Bacchusaal hall which has been reconstructed with a broken down abstract form of Stüler’s staircase. Although this feature is something Stüler had designed in his original building it is worth commending Chipperfield for the reconstruction. That lost experience of walking up a grand staircase aided by the glow of the double story windows into a room filled with exquisitely painted murals and decoration has been rectified by Chipperfield’s conservation. Although the settings have changed the experience still remains. The user is still guided up the stairs by tall windows directly in front only now the room is peeled back to the raw material that reveal its scarring which in its own way paints a picture of the museums history just like the murals depicted the history of mankind. The decoration now exists within the bones of the building.

Page 60. Above fig.30. Original Bacchusaal hall. (n.d.) Page 60. Middle fig.31. Destroyed Bacchusaal hall. (n.d.) Page 60. Below fig.31. Bacchusaal hall. Chipperfield, D. (2009)

3.2.3 The Egyptian Courtyard The Egyptian Courtyard held one of the most spectacular displays almost stealing the stage from the Bacchusaal hall in grandness. As tribute to the Ramesseum a miniature replica was made along with galleries extending out on four sides showcasing a number of ancient works. The frosted glazed roof that was later installed was first of its kind in Berlin. Due to the size of the exhibition and its grounded nature in the museum it had to remain during the war. Unfortunately the display was so badly damaged that in 1992 the committee decided to remove it in turn for a new solution. Chipperfield’s design bares resemblance to Friedrich Gilly’s sketches of Egyptian structures which were significant in inspiring Schinkel [see fig.4]. The design takes the abstracted forms of the columns that held the Ramesseum yet are far more slender. Only two walls remained, the other two were rebuilt in the reclaimed brick. (Bizley) The platform separates the space yet allows the light from the skylight above to brighten the basement space. By using the concrete to soften the light helps create a bright and inviting room. By keeping the platform offset to the courtyard walls it is possible to tell of the architects intervention. The 3m high glass balustrades create intimacy for the user. It could be perceived that the columns still hold the tripartite system from Stüler’s section. Although the columns remain the same 500x500mm cross section as they rise through the floors they are broken down horizontally by the intersecting floors. These give the columns ratios of 1:1, 1:2 and 1:3 with the shortest at the base and the tallest stretching upwards towards the glazing. This subtle nod to the past attributes to the multiple layers that make such a strong conservation.

Page 62. Above fig.ii Page 62. Below fig.33. Cutaway section through Egyptian Courtyard. Bizley, G. (2009) 1. 60mm concrete paving with sandblasted surface. 2. 150m precast concrete wall with 40mm cavity. 3. 500x500mm precast column with sandblasted faces. 4. 60mm concrete paving with 250mm void and 170mm concrete ceiling slab. 5. 775x500x235mm precast concrete edge beam. 6. Stepped face brick to concrete wall with cavity. 7. 1270mm deep with 315mm thick precast concrete jamb. 8. 500x495mm precast concrete beam. 9. 60mm concrete paving with void, 80mm precast concrete, 150mm concrete, 500x490mm precast concrete edge. 10. 80mm thick precast slabs with 120x150mm ribs between beams. 11. 279x49mm thick toughened glass with bronze finishing. 12. 3400x49mm thick toughened glass with bronze finishing. 13. Galvanized steel channel with 20mm thick cast bronze grating

3.2.4

I N T E G R AT I O N O F S E R V I C E S Air conditioning During the buildings occupancy up to the Second World War the requirements for dealing with the climates were to keep temperatures at a consistent 16-20째C through winter yet in the summer there was no way of cooling which meant the building could reach internal temperatures of 28-30째C. Humidity levels could vary between 20% and 70%. Climatic requirements for artwork today are very strict and usually require a constant temperature and level of humidity. Although heating already existed within the building prewar the challenge was the integration of new servicing. (Ziesemer and Newton, 2009) Heating For the majority of heating the conservation team decided to follow the 1915 heating layout. The plant rooms were housed in a separate underground extension. The old heating units are concealed by casing designed by Chipperfield. (Ziesemer and Newton, 2009) The heating units encased by Chipperfield stand as prominent features within the building that add an extra layer of depth to the building. The furniture and encasing all follow the dark teak and copper finishing which are rather prominent given the light tonal qualities of the interiors. Lighting To stay true to the museums original design the conservation relies on natural lighting. Diffused glazed courtyards and large windows on the facades help light the interiors. Fitting operable blinds that follow the sun path help filter sun glare. The task was to achieve ambient lighting across the whole museum. The only level this is not achieved in is the basement level. Due to the low level there would not be an even spread of intensity. However spotlights are placed at the corner of each pillar that project over the vaulting which produce dramatic lighting. (Ziesemer and Newton, 2009)

3.2.5

F I N I S H I N G M AT E R I A L S Concrete As already discussed the concrete is used as a bridging material to link the conservation with the bomb damaged museum. It has a presence in most rooms, some rooms see only small areas of concrete whilst more heavily damaged rooms see a greater use of it. It is used as a neutral material yet in areas has a strong physical presence. The Bacchusaal hall and the Egyptian courtyard have the most prominent use of concrete. The concrete constitutes of sand, white cement and marble aggregate. The concrete is finished in two ways: a rough matt finish to match the brickwork and a polished finish to stand more prominent. The concrete comes in precast elements with a tolerance of 5mm. The largest precast element is 10x4m which is determined by the height of motorway bridges as the panels were prefabricated near Frankfurt. The only place the join is visible is on the central staircase. (Bizley) â&#x20AC;&#x153;The architect sought a single approach that would work at various scales to promote continuity rather than contrast between old and new.â&#x20AC;? (Bizley, p.5) External Brick To minimise the use of concrete Chipperfield has used a light yellow pastel coloured brick which has been chosen to harmonise with the existing sandstone. Flooring Terrazzo floors make up the majority of the floor area. Areas such as passageways are broken up by mosaics or bare natural stonework. The floors in the original design were as decorative as the walls. As with the ceilings and wall art the floors would change room to room. The designs often echoed elements of the structure such as highlighting columns or mirroring roof trusses. The floors were all damaged either by war damage or by weathering. Water would seep down the cracks warping the floors. Conservation requirements meant the floor needed to be recreated with any cracks and discolouring made visible.

3.2.6

DOORS AND WINDOWS Doors Due to the bespoke nature of the rooms each room has a specific door type made for each one. The most noteworthy doors are the central ones on the first floor (Bacchusaal hall). These doors stand at 5.4m high. They are made of coniferous wood with a rosewood veneer, decorated with brass and silver. The materials on the doors reflect their importance within the building. Because the Bacchusaal hall received fire damage which consequently destroyed the roof, the hall has been open to all the elements until its placement in storage in the 1980â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s. Due to the war the door received damage from bomb fragments.The nickel handles and hinges were later looted and the doors were further damaged from weathering [see fig.34]. However due to the materials and craftsmanship the doors remained fairly intact. The restoration followed the same conservation principles of using the remains and restoring them within the building. To keep current with new fire regulations the doors required alterations, these were kept as subtle as possible so the doors remained as true to their original as possible. The gaps were filled in with a new wood and the colour matched by a process of wood stain. The metal parts were recreated based on similar doors and photographs. The end result sees the doors finished to a high standard of craftsmanship. [see fig.35] (Ziesemer and Newton, 2009) The doors much like the structure were repaired using what remained. The difference is that the structure has been restored to reflect damage, the doors seem to be restored to their original quality. The conservation technique of using a visibly different material for the newly repaired areas has not been used in this case. The doors look like they have been freshly plucked from StĂźlerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s original museum. Whether or not this was the intention by the architect is never noted however the grand quality of these doors still remain prominent. Looking towards them in the Bacchusaal hall it is obvious of their importance within the design. The doors are triple framed, each frame showing different layers of history: the fully restored doors inset the crumbled marble cemented frame surrounded by an equal proportioned amount of visible brickwork all of which framed in the new polished cement stairwell cast.

Page 66. Left fig.34 Stationary wing of entrance portal: initial state. Haelau. (1998) Page 66. Right fig.35 Moveable wing of entrance portal after restoration. Haelau. (2001)

3.2.6 Windows Much like the doors a large number of them were damaged during the war, later exposed to weathering and all metal facings were looted thereafter. The restoration followed the same philosophy as the doors and was reconstructed using historical techniques. The windows were improved to comply with current standards yet needed to appear as authentic as possible. The improvements consisted of doubling the one pane and coating them with a thermal insulation layer. (Ziesemer and Newton, 2009)

3.2.7

A R T A N D D E C O R AT I O N The extent of decoration in the Neues Museum far exceeded any other public building during the 19th century, this is because Wilhelm IV wanted an emphasis to be placed on the fine arts. Sculptural decoration surrounds the outside facades whilst the interior mainly consisted of figurative paintings and decorative castzinc decoration. During the 1920â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s museum modernisation parts of the art were covered over with false walls that were anchored into the paintings. WWII and the aftermath of weathering caused a lot of the paintings to be damaged or lost entirely, Kaulbachâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s murals for example. (Ziesemer and Newton, 2009) Decorative Tympanums The sculptural pieces above the gable ends were badly corroded. Up to the war the sculptures needed regular maintenance to protect from the weather. Since the war the sculptures received a treatment to stop the decay however the materials used were wrong and in fact sped the process up. This meant the first step in the restoration was to take this secondary layer off to take it back to its bare surface. Missing pieces were reconstructed from historic photographs and painted to adjust shading to match the original. (Ziesemer and Newton, 2009) It might appear strange that the decoration restoration follows a completely faithful replication compared to the philosophy applied to the rest of the building. The approach of leaving damage on the Tympanums was an option however it was dismissed due to the missing areas remaining open to the elements and further weathering. It seemed adequate to seal off the damage in terms of restoring the figures. Metal Structural Decoration Decorative cast-zinc pieces clad the exposed steel girders. Lost pieces were faithfully restored yet were painted in a neutral tone to explain the loss and set apart from the original pieces.

3.2.7 Wall Pictures As the damaged walls were rebuilt they were resurfaced with plaster to smoothly coincide with the remains of the paintings. The paintings were cleaned yet never retouched. The philosophy stood that the paintings would remain as they were with the broken state showing the damage and extent of the rebuild. However to reduce the contrast between the exposed plaster and artwork the plaster would receive a colouring to match tonally with the background of the paintings. Once that was reached the colour would be saturated to appear in harmony. Stüler’s highly decorative rich coloured rooms would be overpowering amongst Chipperfield’s neutrally toned conservation. Subsequently being war torn and weathered has made them more palatable for the contemporary. Well intact rooms such as the room of the Niobids appear artificially garish.

4.0

APPRAISAL The research so far can be viewed as biased as Chipperfieldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s methods have not been challenged. This is simply to engage with Chipperfield to fully understand the reasoning. Fragments of personal experience have been integrated as within the main body of text however outside parties that disagree with the conservation have not been accounted for. Before a conclusion can be drawn it would be beneficial to add a few selected reviews from neutral parties along with an insight from the traditionalists who have sparked a debate with the sanctuary of Museum Island and are still currently protesting.

4.1

REVIEWS AJ (Architects Journal) published 21st November 2014 The AJ published an article in 2014 titled ‘The Neues Museum: the craft of architecture in ruin and restoration’, writing about Chipperfield’s interventions author Andrew Ng complements the simplistic natural. “In an age where new architectures so often strive for ambitious abstract forms with attention-grabbing material choices, it is refreshing to be reminded of the simple beauty and powerful expression of a space made from a singular material and impeccably detailed.” (Ng, 2014) AR (The Architectural Review) published 1st May 2009 The AR published a review before the buildings official opening. The review highly acclaims the building with a concluding quote stating that the history can be easily read. “Now the Neues Museum creates reverberations of different degrees of time. These include the time of its original construction, revealed by the partial stripping of surfaces. Also that of its subsequent use, bombing, erosion by weather and finally, its slow restoration.” (Moore, 2009) Although the review praises Chipperfield for the conservation there are a few discrepancies that the writer feels need to be aired. “There are very few bum notes, although I don’t get Chipperfield’s faith in tall square pillars, which appear here and there. They let down the subtlety of the rest.” (Moore, 2009) Society of Ancient Berlin (Gesellschaft Historisches Berlin / GHB) Although the conservation has been well received from Architects and public alike there are some who are still adamant that the museum should be restored back to the original 19th century condition. The historical society of Berlin, an open society consisting of traditionalists determined to restore cultural buildings and spaces, place Museum Island at the centre of their dispute. Their policy is to bring awareness for the ancient Berlin, reciting back to Berlin’s original city ground plan. The GHB firmly believe that the GDR’s 1986 reconstruction was the only reasonable solution to 73

4.1 restoring the Neues Museum. Chipperfield’s philosophy is thought to only consider the structure as the monument, disregarding the original material. “The result is bare, flat materialism and at the same time the death sentence for the spirit and idea of the historic building and its creator.” (Wendland, 2009) Chipperfield has however taken the criticism in his stride responding that his architecture has taken the original building into account. “This is a complete reconstruction, and we took the original building very much into account… It was important for us to not destroy any of the remaining original fragments.” (Richter, 2015)

4.2

CONCLUSION To answer the question; ‘The effectiveness of the conservation of the Neues Museum’, the research has been concentrated in three areas; a brief study of conservation, the museum’s history and a look into the methodology and philosophy undertaken. To conclude this research it feels appropriate to reinstate the initial three philosophical questions of conservation mentioned earlier: Motive - Why do we wish to conserve? Monument - What are we trying to conserve? Manner and Means - How should it be done? Why we conserve is a matter of our heritage. We conserve to link the past and to show the adaptations of time. Conserving can be as simple as maintaining to preserve a quality or significance that we regard as important. What is being conserved in relation to the Neues Museum is a matter of analysing the history. The research started by looking into the history of the Neues Museum to establish how culturally significant the building is and what it has been through. Initially researching a building within Germany one would imagine the Second World War to play the most significant role in the buildings past however the Neues Museum has had a much more intrinsic one. It was built in a time of rapid development in Germany brought on by the industrial revolution. The museum can be seen as an example of early prefabricated construction. This advancement of technology plays an important role within the museum, the development is physically seen in section as the engineer was still discovering new ways of simplifying the structure even as the floors were being built. The attention to detail within Stüler’s design and the contribution from Wilhelm IV’s commissioned artists create a rich environment thoroughly thought out. The research has revealed that the museum could never really be described as complete as the building was always adapting. This has involved the introduction of glazed courtyards, changes of exhibitions and transitions of movements and trends. The changing exhibitions and modern envisagement had throughout time damaged the building yet this was nothing compared to the destruction caused during the Second World War. The real extent of 75

4.2 damage however came after the war, within its 50 year period left to ruin in a divided Berlin open to weathering and looting, until the GDR’s savage attempts of restoration. The research has conceded in presenting a far richer history than initially presumed. This has also prompted the question of what point in time should the building be taken back to as a base for the conservation. To answer this it is important to consider the building as a restoration of architecture and not to become too attached to the archaeological ruin. Using Stüler’s original design as the base is therefore the most obvious. However the damage caused due to the alterations and war should still be prevalent yet be weaved within the new architecture. The hard question is whether the GDR restoration attempts should be shown. The philosophy can be challenged as this period of time was very influential and is as much a part of Belin’s history as WWII. The point of whether or not their restoration attempts should be shown is really a matter of aesthetics. The appearance of a neoclassical ruin touches upon a romantic quality that is easy to associate with. Recklessly placed red clinker brick and steel girders do not evoke the same feelings. Removing GDR’s alterations in favour of Stüler’s initial representation is a move I can sympathise with Chipperfield for taking. The end result is a saturated version of Stüler’s overly rich design which sits well within a contemporary setting as it tonally matches with the new installations in what seems like a chalky revisualisation of the most indulgent periods of history combined in an imaginary moment in time “To restore an imperfect building to a supposed once perfect state implies restorers’ superiority to its fallible builders, while an attempt to return it to its ‘original’ condition suggests that the building has not had a history – or that whatever history it had be ‘cut off’ at some arbitrary point in time, that there is some state (which must always be a hypothetical one) to which the building can revert.” (Chipperfield et al. 2009, p.32) How the conservation has been done is explored by researching and analysing Chiperfield’s philosophy and meth-odology. When historic fragments are no longer remaining Chipperfield has used a single palette of contemporary intervention to hold everything together. As Ruskin wrote, 76

4.2 “The architect is not bound to exhibit structure; nor are we to complain for concealing it” (Ruskin, 1913). From this it can be taken that the conservation is not directly driven by Stüler’s plan yet is not trying to insist a new architecture upon itself. Instead Chipperfield is simply paying homage to the fragmented nature of the historic remains. It is in the simplicity of the form, material and detailing that the power of the architecture comes across. To conclude it can be said that the conservation is very effective from both a space making and technical point of view. The remnants of Stüler’s museum have been beautifully exposed thanks to the sensitive interventions by Chipperfield. “The nature of the various challenges posed by the derelict museum, and how best to meet them, were discussed with a vehemence probably unparalleled anywhere in recent years. In its new form the museum will continue to excite controversy because no visitor can escape the fascination of a building that exudes an aura both historical and contemporary.” (Buttlar, 2010, p.95)

APPENDIX

Visit to the Neues Museum 27.02.15

Page 78. Above. Left fig.iii Page 78. Above. Right fig.iv Page 78. Middle fig.v Page 78. Below. Left fig.vi Page 78. Below. Right fig.vii Page 78. Above. Left fig.viii Page 78. Above. Right fig.ix Page 78. Middle fig.x Page 78. Below fig.xi

REFERENCES Books Balfour, A. (1990). Berlin. New York: Rizzoli. Baumstark, R. (2002). The Alte Pinakothek, Munich. Munich: C.H.BECK Beckmann, P. and Bowles, R. (2004). Structural aspects of building conservation. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann. Biscontin, G. and Graziano, L. (1993). Conservation of architectural surfaces. Venice: Il Cardo. Buttlar, A. (2010). Neues Museum Berlin. Berlin: Dt. Kunstverl. Chipperfield, D. (1994). Theoretical practice. London: Artemis. Chipperfield, D., Hofer, C., Frampton, K., Wolters, W., Nys, R. and Reichert, M. (2009). Neues Museum Berling. Koln: Konig. Earl, J. (2003). Building conservation philosophy. Shaftesbury: Donhead. Harrington, D. (2012). Berlin on the brink. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky. Jencks, C. (2011). The story of post-modernism. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley. Larkham, P. (1996). Conservation and the city. London: Routledge Lorenz, W. (1999). Classicism and High Technology - the Berlin Neues Museum. pp.39-55. Michalski, S. (1994). New objectivity. Köln: B. Taschen. Nehring, H. (n.d.). Politics of security. Nys, R. (2009). David Chipperfield Architects - form matters. Köln: König. Orbasli, A. (2008). Architectural conservation. Malden, MA: Blackwell Science. 80

Philippot,P. (1976). Historic Preservation. Rosenfeld, G. (2000). Munich and memory. Berkeley: University of California Press. Ruskin, J. The Seven Lamps Of Architecture. Boston: D. Estes, 1913. Print. Snodin, M. (1991). Karl Friedrich Schinkel. New Haven [Conn.]: Yale University Press in association with the Victoria and Albert Museum, London. Watkin, D. and Mellinghoff, T. (1987). German architecture and the classical ideal. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Weaver, M. and Matero, F. (1997). Conserving buildings. New York: Wiley. Ziesemer, J. and Newton, M. (2009). The Neues Museum Berlin. Leipzig: E.A. Seemann. Zilch, K., Niedermeier, R. and Finckh, W. (n.d.). Strengthening of concrete structures with adhesive bonded reinforcement.

Journals Bizley, G. ‘Bringing A Smooth Finish To A Turbulent History’. Concrete Quarterly 227 (2009) Moore, R. (2009). Neues Museum by David Chipperfield Architects, Berlin, Germany. AR (The Architectural Review). [online] Available at: http://www.architectural-review.com/buildings/neues-museumby-david-chipperfield-architects-berlin-germany/8601182.article [Accessed 3 May 2015]. Ng, A. (2014). The Neues Museum: the craft of architecture in ruin and restoration. Architects Journal. [online] Available at: http:// www.architectsjournal.co.uk/home/events/writing-prize/the-neuesmuseum-the-craft-of-architecture-in-ruin-and-restoration-by-andrewng/8672762.article [Accessed 6 May 2015]. Powell, K. (1999). finding god in the details. Architects Journal. Richter, C. (2015). Reconstruction of Berlin’s Neues Museum vexes traditionalists. Deutsche Welle (DW). [online] Available at: http://www.dw.de/reconstruction-of-berlins-neues-museum-vexestraditionalists/a-4796877 [Accessed 6 May 2015]. ‘Engineering History And Heritage: Referees 2011’. Proceedings of the ICE - Engineering History and Heritage 165.1 (2012) Websites Davidchipperfield.co.uk, (2014). David Chipperfield Architects. [online] Available at: http://www.davidchipperfield.co.uk [Accessed 1 Dec. 2014]. Glancey, J. (2009). Jonathan Glancey is dazzled by the Berlin’s newly reborn Neues Museum. [online] the Guardian. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2009/mar/16/neuesmuseum-berlin [Accessed 2 Dec. 2014]. Julianharraparchitects.co.uk, (2014). Julian Harrap Architects. [online] Available at: http://www.julianharraparchitects.co.uk/ [Accessed 3 Dec. 2014].

Lectures Niglio, O. ‘John Ruskin, The Conservation Of The Cultural Heritage’. 2013. Lecture. Schwarz, A. (2011). Strategies and seeing - Neues Museum, from ruin to museum. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=iOyNoYK6Lf4 Wendland, B. (2009). New Year’s Address. Interviews Chipperfield, D. (2008). A conversation between Wolfgang Wolters and David Chipperfield. Chipperfield, D. and Schwarz, A. (2007). David Chipperfield Stirling interview.

IMAGE REFERENCES fig.1 Bacchusaal hall. (2009). [image] Available at: http://www. davidchipperfield.co.uk/project/neues_museum [Accessed 4 May 2015]. fig.2 Site Plan. (2009). [image] Available at: http://www. davidchipperfield.co.uk/project/neues_museum [Accessed 4 May 2015]. fig.3 Wilhelm IV, Friedrich. (1841). Sketch for the ‘Freisattte for Art and Science’.[sketch] In: Neues Museum Berlin. Berlin: Dt. Kunstverl. fig.4 Gilly, F. (1796). Columned halls In: Neues Museum Berlin. Berlin: Deutscher Kunstverlag. fig. 5 Stüler, F. (1862). Neues Museum. [drawing] Available at: http://www.museumsportal-berlin.de/de/magazin/das-neuemuseum/zur-geschichte-des-neuen-museums/ [Accessed 5 May 2015]. fig. 6 Stüler, F. (1862). Section showing staircase hall of the Neues Museum with Kaulbach’s murals. [drawing] In: The Neues Museum Berlin. Leipzig: E.A. Seemann. fig.7 Stüler, F. Plans. In: Neues Museum Berlin. Berlin: Dt. Kunstverl. fig.8 Egyptian Courtyard. (n.d.). [image] Available at: http://www. german-architecture.info/BER-041.htm [Accessed 5 May 2015]. fig.9 Lissitzky, E. (n.d.). [image] Available at: http://www. designishistory.com/1920/el-lissitzky/ [Accessed 5 May 2015]. fig.10 Stüler, F. Plans. In: Neues Museum Berlin. Berlin: Dt. Kunstverl. fig.11 Klapsch, T. (1992). The war-damaged and derelict New Museum. [image] Available at: http://www.uncubemagazine.com/ blog/15160771 [Accessed 6 May 2015].

fig.12 Front Elevation of the Alte Pinakothek, (n.d.). [image] Available at: http://www.pinakothek.de/en/ kalender/2014-07-17/46620/good-cause-architecture-peacedivided-cities [Accessed 6 May 2015]. fig.13 Staircase of the Alte Pinakothek, (n.d.). [image] Available at: http://www.pinakothek.de/en/kalender/2014-07-17/46620/goodcause-architecture-peace-divided-cities [Accessed 6 May 2015]. fig.14 Chipperfield, D. (1997). Revised design, model of staircase. [image] In The Neues Museum Berlin. Leipzig: E.A. Seemann fig.15 Gehry, F. (1997). Revised design, model of staircase. [image] In The Neues Museum Berlin. Leipzig: E.A. Seemann fig.16 Chipperfield, D. (2013). Photo of David Chipperfield. [image] Available at: http://www.dezeen.com/2015/03/12/davidchipperfield-to-design-new-metropolitan-museum-of-art-wing/ [Accessed 6 May 2015]. fig.17 Chipperfield, D. (2006). Museum of Modern Literature. [image] Available at: http://www.davidchipperfield.co.uk/project/ museum_of_modern_literature [Accessed 6 May 2015]. fig.18 Chipperfield, D. (2007). Gallery Building ‘Am Kupfergraben 10’. [image] Available at: http://www.davidchipperfield.co.uk/ project/am_kupfergraben_10 [Accessed 6 May 2015]. fig.19 Chipperfield, D. (2010). Museum Folkwang. [image] Available at: http://www.davidchipperfield.co.uk/project/museum_folkwang [Accessed 6 May 2015]. fig.20 Sternberg, M. (2013). Photo of Julian Harrap. [image] Available at: http://www.bdonline.co.uk/julian-harrap [Accessed 6 May 2015]. fig.21 The Well and Bucket. (2014). [image] Available at: http:// westarchitecture.co.uk/#!projects-all-bethnal_green_road [Accessed 6 May 2015]. fig.22 Charles, M. (2009). No’s 12-14 Lincoln’ Inn Fields. [image] Available at: http://www.julianharraparchitects.co.uk/#/amc_john_ soane/ [Accessed 6 May 2015]. 85

fig.23 Williams, A. (2004). Completed Renaissance Galleries. [image] Available at: http://www.julianharraparchitects.co.uk/#/ amc_vic/ [Accessed 6 May 2015]. fig.24 Chipperfield, D. (1997). Concept Sketch. [image] Available at: http://www.davidchipperfield.co.uk/project/neues_museum [Accessed 6 May 2015]. fig.25 Chipperfield, D. (n.d). Model. [image] Available at: http:// www.davidchipperfield.co.uk/project/neues_museum [Accessed 6 May 2015]. fig.26 Chipperfield, D. (n.d). Façade model. [image] Available at: http://www.davidchipperfield.co.uk/project/neues_museum [Accessed 6 May 2015]. fig.27 Chipperfield, D. (1997). Longitudinal section a. [image] Available at: http://www.davidchipperfield.co.uk/project/neues_ museum [Accessed 7 May 2015]. fig.28 Chipperfield, D. (1997). Longitudinal section b. [image] Available at: http://www.davidchipperfield.co.uk/project/neues_ museum [Accessed 7 May 2015]. fig.29 Höfer, C. (2009). Medieval Room. [image] Available at: http://www.davidchipperfield.co.uk/img/projects/484/b/346_10_ choe_090205_n13.jpg [Accessed 7 May 2015]. fig.30 Original Bacchusaal hall. (n.d.). [image] Available at: http:// www.davidchipperfield.co.uk/project/neues_museum [Accessed 7 May 2015]. fig.31 Destroyed Bacchusaal hall. (n.d.). [image] Available at: http://inhabitat.com/extraordinary-renovation-of-berlins-neuesmuseum-wins-2011-mies-van-der-rohe-award/neues-museum-8/ [Accessed 7 May 2015]. fig.32 Bacchusaal hall. (2009). [image] Available at: http://www. davidchipperfield.co.uk/project/neues_museum [Accessed 4 May 2015]. fig.33 Bizley, G. (2009) Cutaway section through Egyptian Courtyard. [image] In: ‘Bringing A Smooth Finish To A Turbulent History’. Concrete Quarterly 227 86

fig.34 Haelau. (1998) Stationary wing of entrance portal: initial state. [image] In: The Neues Museum Berlin. Leipzig: E.A. Seemann. fig.35 Haelau. (2001) Moveable wing of entrance portal after restoration. [image] In: The Neues Museum Berlin. Leipzig: E.A. Seemann. Own photography 27/02/15 fig.i fig.ii fig.iii fig.iv fig.v fig.vi fig.vii fig.viii fig.ix fig.x fig.xi