NAZI ARCHITECT  PAUL BONATZ
EARNS APPRECIATION & RESPECT
A dead Nazi architect has ignited a firestorm of criticism over the redesign of one of his masterworks, the Stuttgart Train Terminal. Redesigning the pre-war structure for the modern era has pitted preservation, architects, designers, urban planning and morality against one another. NY Times architecture critic Nicolai Ouroussoff argues against the sweeping Gehry-like flourishes proposed for the new station and finds the Nazi architect's morally compromised work worthy of defending. The brilliant piece offers historical analysis and goes to the heart of modern architectural theoretical discussions.

The echoes of some wars never end. In the curious case of Nazi architect Paul Bonatz we now witness a resurrection of appreciation for his work, moral considerations aside. Bonatz was an architect before the war years and constructed a number of structures that combine the clean lines of classical architecture with an enlightened sense of modernism. As political change swept Germany in the 1930's he became a favorite of Nazi leaders and was able to gain commissions for a number of buildings. His sensibility of pairing ancient Greek inferences with the coolness of stripped down modern design somehow struck a chord with the Aryan supermen and his career flourished. As the war years progressed however, he found himself targeted by the Gestapo for inappropriate remarks about another Nazi architect, Paul Troost. Bad luck for Bonatz, Troost was well loved by Hitler and he wasn't. Career possibilities crashed. The chance of ending up in a concentration camp or on the Eastern Front increased and Bonatz decided that better opportunities awaited him in Turkey. Which he fled to in the dead of night finding refuge for the remainder of the war.

Flash forward to 2009 and the New York Times piece by Nicolai Ouroussoff defending Bonatz's Stuttgart Train Station from a modern renovation. Plans for the station follow the typical line of modern reworkings which is to gut the original structure and build something thoroughly up to date while keeping the main architectural elements. In the case of the centrally located Stuttgart Terminal, the classic lines will be draped with a biomorphic skin that Ouroussoff calls "facadism". Tracks will be placed underground thereby freeing up badly needed urban space and the entire system upgraded for the 21st century.

The commentary threads a fine line and Ouroussoff offers one of the most nuanced pieces of architectural criticism ever offered. On the one hand we have the competing forces of Nazi architects and architecture, moral challenges, political and money interests looking to cash in, and the need for a new architectural rendering of a 70 year old relic. The New York Times master scribe offers that the  legacy of German architecture is being buried under showy flourishes that represent neither preservation nor a bold planning solution to modern concerns. The renderings of the proposed station definitely have that uber modern feel like a Calatrava or Coop Himmelbau structure might have and the arguments have great intellectual force.
LINK TO NY TIMES NICOLAI OUROUSSOFF STUTTGART COMMENTARY
LINK TO INGENHOVEN ARCHITECTS, CREATORS OF THE NEW STATION

TOUR THE STUTTGART TRAIN TERMINAL