New Royal Opera House in Berlin

About

The New Royal Opera House in Berlin was a project of the Prussian government and Kaiser Wilhelm II to build a new opera house in Berlin, which was prevented by the First World War and the financial shortage of the Weimar Republic. It was one of the most protracted and convoluted building projects of the imperial era. In 1924, the critic and journalist Paul Westheim described it as the "most grotesque architectural comedy of all time".

The plans for a new opera house were triggered by the Iroquois Theatre fire in Chicago on December 30, 1903. After the Berlin State Opera had previously been considered too small, with its 1,500 seats, its safety was now also in doubt. The Emperor sent a telegram to his Finance Minister Georg von Rheinbaben, suggesting a "speedy new building" and ending with the words: "I can no longer sleep peacefully at night". The Prussian government then began planning a new building for at least 2,500 spectators and demolished the old building.

The first choice for the new building project was the architect Felix Genzmer, who had worked as an architect for the royal theaters in Berlin and as a professor at the Charlottenburg Technical University after building the foyer of the State Theatre Wiesbaden. Genzmer was proposed by the General Director of the Royal Theatre Georg Graf von Hülsen-Haeseler and was also known and liked by the Emperor through his work in Wiesbaden. Between 1904 and 1905, Genzmer remodeled the interior of the Berlin Schauspielhaus, focusing on fire protection and a more representative interior. At the same time, he began plans for the new opera house.

Genzmer's commission was met with criticism, especially from the national associations of architects. The opera house was the only major project planned at the time, and the architects demanded a competition, while the Kaiser rejected competitions on principle. Genzmer himself was also criticized, for example by the publicist Maximilian Harden, who wrote in the Zukunft in 1906:

"Besides Messel, we have Gabriel Seidl in Munich, Fischer in Stuttgart, Wallot in Dresden, Behrens in Düsseldorf, Licht in Leipzig, and perhaps many others. Why must the most incompetent be appointed to a task that is the lifelong dream of every artist? Because the emperor does not find him unfit and likes to work with the comfortable man? Is that the only reason? Should that alone decide?"

— From: Maximilian Harden: Das neue Opernhaus. In: Die Zukunft, 55, 1906

In 1906, Genzmer presented his first plans, which the Emperor rejected, as he did not want to see "the simple but elegant architecture from Frederick the Great 's time, which dominates the area around the current opera house, damaged by a colossal building". Genzmer needed to develop a new project for the Königsplatz opposite the Reichstag building, where the Kroll Opera House had been converted into the "New Royal Opera Theater" in 1896 and considerably more space was available.

The plans presented by Felix Genzmer in 1909 called for the opera house to be built south of the east–west axis on Königsplatz, with a second building on the north side. This design was rejected by the Prussian Ministry of Public Works because:

- "The idea of erecting a building of the importance and size of the opera house to the side of the center line of Königsplatz must be described as misguided and unacceptable from a general artistic point of view."

— According to Döhl 2004, from the report of December 4, 1909

However, expert opinions were a task of the Prussian Academy of Civil Engineering, not the ministry itself.

The ministry also had a problem with the cost of the new building - mainly because the financing had not been clarified at the time. The main issue was the shares to be paid by the Prussian state and the Crown. The Crown did not want to make a significant contribution to the construction, although the Emperor considered the new building to be "his" opera house. Even the contribution of the Kroll Opera property by the Crown without compensation was questioned internally. The imperial advisor Count Philipp zu Eulenburg described the building as a cultural task of the state; on the other hand, the Prussian Ministry of Finance could find no reason to erect a building with rooms for the court without a contribution from the court. From the finance minister's point of view, it was almost impossible to explain this distribution of costs to the Prussian House of Representatives and to enforce it. After Genzmer's second plan had also been rejected, the view prevailed that he was not the right architect for the planned building, especially as external pressure from the architects' associations and the public increased. Graf von Hülsen-Haeseler, at whose suggestion Genzmer had already been chosen, apparently wanted to appoint another architect for the project first, and on January 11, 1910, he sent a non-binding request to the Berlin city planning commissioner Ludwig Hoffmann, who declined.

On March 28, 1910, Graf von Hülsen-Haeseler cautiously suggested to Wilhelm II that several architects should compete in a closed competition (restricted competition) for the construction of the opera house. His argument was the importance of the building, which should be a monument to the glorious reign of Wilhelm II. He emphasized the architects' interest in the building and stressed that the competition should be a non-binding call for proposals (ideas competition), which should bring out the best ideas. The Emperor himself was to remain the final decision-maker. The Emperor finally agreed to the competition, but rejected a review committee (jury) and made it clear that he would not give the architects a free hand under any circumstances. He commented on the proposal accordingly:

"In the competition -ad informationem Regis- the point of view should be maintained that it is not a competition in the usual sense, but only the provision of ideas material for ME, the BUILDER, no matter to which man I subsequently entrust MY IDEA PROPOSAL for execution. The building should proclaim the glory of all those involved."

— Marginal remarks on a report by Count Hülsen-Haeseler to Wilhelm II. Capitalization according to source. After Döhl, 2004

The proposal also met with the approval of the Ministry of Public Works and the Ministry of Finance, which saw the competition as a way to solve the critical issue of financing. The Budget Commission of the Prussian House of Representatives had to be persuaded to approve the use of a tender to cover the costs.

On June 28, the ministries involved developed the framework conditions for the competition. The site of the Kroll Opera House continued to be considered, but the architects were also allowed to suggest alternatives. The opera itself was to have 2,250 seats, with an " amphitheater " as the final tier in addition to the stalls and four tiers. An entrance wing with a representative entrance hall ( vestibule ) and box offices as well as a staircase hall with access to the stalls and the first tier were to be built in front of the auditorium. Two foyers for the different tiers and the stalls were also to be planned. An important part of the planning included the area for the courtyard. This would include a large banquet box on the first tier with 80 seats, as well as additional seating in the stalls and on the first tier of the left stage vestibule ( proscenium ). The boxes were to be equipped with various lounges and a separate entrance was to be provided on the left side. All courtyard areas should be interconnected, but separated from the rest of the audience.

In August 1910, the selected architects were notified; in addition to Felix Genzmer, they were Eduard Fürstenau, Ludwig Hoffmann, Ernst von Ihne, Anton Karst, Max Littmann, Heinrich Seeling and Friedrich von Thiersch. The choice fell on architects who had already worked successfully for the Kaiser and whose work had impressed him. Anton Karst was consulted by the Emperor himself due to his new building of the Royal Court Theater in Kassel (predecessor of today's Staatstheater Kassel ). Max Littmann and Heinrich Seeling in particular were well-known theater architects. The designs submitted by the selected architects were to be transferred to the state as property with unrestricted right of disposal in return for payment of a fee. Ludwig Hoffmann did not take part in this tender, citing his various tasks for the city of Berlin and a development plan for the city of Athens, which he was currently working on.

The ministries justified the limited competition to the public by citing the particular technical difficulties of the building. However, this could not calm the criticism that was voiced by both the press and architectural associations. The latter called for an open competition, referring in particular to the construction of the Paris Opera. The lack of a jury and the lack of a binding contract award to the competition winner provoked further criticism, which violated the basic rules of competition postulated by the associations. As a result, the Berliner Tageblatt of September 2, 1910 reported:

- "If no better men were known at the top or did not dare to propose them to the emperor, then a general competition had to be held. Such a task is not for embarrassed and considerate candidates. And the general competition would hardly have cost more than the eighty thousand marks paid to the participants in this narrow competition, which was hardly fruitful in the higher sense. The decision, which, it seems, the ministries have reserved for themselves - no judges are named - will by no means be a final one. The state parliament still has a say, and the architectural community will certainly not miss the opportunity to inform it about the competition and its nature."