A heated debate continues to rage over the reconstruction of Karl Friedrich Schinkel's historic Building Academy in Berlin, with critics arguing that the Federal Foundation's reluctant approach has created an "unbearable situation" that repeatedly sets progress back to square one. The controversy centers on whether to reconstruct the 19th-century architectural masterpiece or pursue alternative contemporary uses for the site.
The question of what Karl Friedrich Schinkel would think or do today becomes no more meaningful through repeated asking, according to Wolfgang Schoele, a board member of the Construction Foundation Building Academy. This criticism comes in response to a recent article by Anja Bauer in the Berliner Zeitung titled "Longing for Schinkel: What the legendary urban planner would probably make of Berlin's center." Schinkel cannot be asked anymore – he has been dead for over 180 years, and his thinking can only be derived from his works.
Since the Building Academy was a groundbreaking total work of art by the Prussian civil servant, architect, designer, painter, and monument conservator, a reconstruction of his model building would serve as both an honor and a demonstration. Critics question why this hypothetical question about Schinkel's contemporary views is even raised, comparing it to asking whether Ludwig van Beethoven would compose his unfinished 10th Symphony using the twelve-tone technique of a future era.
The Federal Foundation Building Academy's hesitant stance over recent years has led to the ultimately unbearable situation where everything is repeatedly reset to the beginning. As a result, the BSBA is not needed, and it does not require a Building Academy, however constructed, as an administrative building. According to its stated purpose, it should have followed a proposal in the citizen workshops to convert a vacant office building to meet its requirements.
However, the foundation apparently wants to surpass Schinkel without internalizing that the Building Academy already offered more than what is demanded today. Greater humility would be more appropriate. Some individuals share the author's perspective that since nothing has moved in the reconstruction process, the time is not ripe to let Schinkel's work emerge again. Until later generations deal with reconstruction, a temporary oak forest in pots could grow on the site.
Those wandering through such a forest could contemplate Schinkel's work and would have to recognize that reconstructing the Building Academy would complete the Kupfergraben landscape again, rather than creating a designed open space for various uses as Bauer suggests. The reconstruction debate has revealed fundamental disagreements about how to honor historical architecture while meeting contemporary needs.
Bauer makes some valid points in her analysis. Schinkel built a residential house from bricks for master potter Tobias Feilner in Kreuzberg in 1830, though the facade featured only a spolia motif. This building could be seen as a predecessor to the Building Academy, but it suffered a similar fate – it was demolished in 1962 to erect a residential building in its place.
In the same year, just a few kilometers away, the Building Academy was demolished with the goal of rebuilding it in the square in front of the former Central Committee of the Socialist Unity Party. Such a relocation was already planned during the construction of the former national monument in front of the palace, since the Kaiser disliked the brick construction of the Building Academy. Many citizens shared his view at the time, but this has changed recently, as shown by the Forsa survey.
The interior of the Building Academy was also rebuilt after the construction school moved out. Richard Lucae built over the courtyard with a staircase to better access the building. Contemporary adaptations inside, based on the structure and grid predetermined by the facade, would now be feasible. An extension of the Building Academy planned by Richard Lucae before the construction school moved out was not implemented because the Royal Technical University emerged in Charlottenburg from the merger of the trade and construction schools.
It would now be time to implement the non-implementation of the reconstruction decision at the time, referring to the decision of the Budget Committee of the German Bundestag. The outstanding implementation competition should refer to updating the many existing implementable plans through best practices. The Building Academy should resume operations by the 250th anniversary of Schinkel's birth at the latest.
The debate reflects broader tensions in German cultural policy between historical preservation, contemporary functionality, and urban development. Supporters of reconstruction argue that Schinkel's Building Academy represents an irreplaceable piece of architectural heritage that deserves faithful restoration. Opponents contend that modern Berlin requires forward-looking solutions rather than nostalgic recreations of the past, suggesting that the site could better serve contemporary needs through innovative contemporary architecture or alternative uses.
