Urban Development or Erasure? Gentrification and the Changing Face of Berlin

Where does the identity of a city lie? And to what extent is it ethically correct to pursue progress if the price to pay is the bond between social fabric and urban fabric? These are just some of the questions hovering around a debated and historically controversial topic: the urban development projects of the city of Berlin. The ultimate goal of this governmental and social debate, which has been proceeding intermittently for over 30 years, is to harmonize the architectural language of the German capital, which developed along two different directions after World War II.

Ascending over 200 meters high on the sphere of the Fernsehturm, the famous Television Tower, and taking a 360-degree turn around the windows, it is possible to glimpse the face of the city of Berlin: a face dramatically marked and divided by History. Indeed, it is impossible not to notice the drastic change in architectural language between old West Berlin and East Berlin. In front of that view, history speaks to us, making us feel on our skin the wound of division, now turned into a scar. Few experiences can be so meaningful.

Taking a step back in history, it must be remembered that even before the historic fall of the wall in 1989, Berlin was already subject to strong innovative impulses in the urban-architectural field, due to the serious damages suffered during World War II. Between the '50s and '60s, in the period of the two Berlins, the federal and the socialist one, both governments committed themselves to the reconstruction of the city, using, however, two markedly different architectural languages, expression of the radical ideological difference of the two governments. If the symbol of West Berlin was the majestic and monumental Brandenburg Gate, the symbol of East Berlin was and remains the so-called Plattenbauten, at the border between buildings and industrial products, erected by assembling prefabricated panels in reinforced concrete. The Plattenbauten, realized according to the brutalist architectural style, are today a true historical remains, a symbol of the Ostalgie and of a bygone era. These buildings, realized quickly and with rough material to meet housing needs, have long shown signs of decay. The truth is that no one knows well what to do with them, because the estimated budgets for the redevelopment of these buildings have made many heads spin, and this is where Western mentality comes in: destroy to rebuild from scratch. Buildings like the Plattenbauten, in fact, do not at all encourage the gentrification process that is affecting the major European capitals.

This discussion is actually much broader and does not only concern the Plattenbauten: it would be enough to widen the spectrum and remember the protests against the demolition or sale of other urban spaces once considered spaces of social sharing. One of these is the famous Palast der Republik, the old governmental seat of the DDR, now the prestigious Humboldt Forum. After the end of the German Democratic Republic, there was a bitter debate about the fate of the palace. In 1990, the government decreed the closure of the building due to heavy asbestos contamination. The decision met dissent from a large part of the Germans, who demonstrated to defend the historical and artistic value of the palace. Many still believe today that asbestos was just a pretext to eliminate one of the symbols of Soviet socialism. A similar case emerged in 2012 with the International Congress Centrum, but in that case the outcome did not involve complete demolition. Between 2004 and 2006, the structure was temporarily reopened as a social space, giving young artists the opportunity to exhibit and create various cultural events and debates. This was enough to rekindle spirits and hope, so much so that in 2005 the artist Lars Ø Ramberg put an installation at the top of the building, synthesizing in a single word - "Zweifel" (doubt) - all the controversy surrounding the matter.

‍

All this was not enough to save the palace, because the following year work began on the definitive demolition of the building. The outcome of the matter therefore entailed not only the demolition of a real historical trace in architectural form but also the impossibility of transforming that place in relation to its own history, or, in other words, the impossibility of flourishing the art of a free people from the symbol of a dictatorship.

Another case worth remembering is that of Kunsthaus Tacheles, the old headquarters of the most famous social and cultural center in Berlin, located in the Mitte district. After the fall of the wall, the space was occupied by Berlin artists, renaming it "house of art". The term "tacheles" instead derives from Yiddish and can be translated as "speak clearly, speak frankly". The choice is once again significant, as it aims to denounce the censorship imposed during the years of the DDR government. Once again: The development of a place in relation to its historical past. For decades the House of Art was a hub of artistic expression and a reference point for many artists who used to meet in the renowned Cafè Zapata, an integral part of the structure.

Between 1997 and 1998, the space was put up for sale on the real estate market. The Tacheles association managed to negotiate ten years of lease, continuing its self-managed and self-financed creative project. The artistic activity of these talents attracted over the years many art lovers and tourists who recognized in Tacheles a symbol of the most authentic Berlin. In 2012, the association was definitively evicted from its space, giving up what had been its home and creative laboratory for over twenty years. The space was then purchased in the same year by the large American company Perella Weinberg Real Estate and since then has been undergoing renovation and re-functionalization.