Nazi & Post-WW2 German Architecture

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Genji

Registered Senior Member
As a communist it is abhorrant to admit but the architecture of the 3rd Reich was breathtaking in my view. An almost Roman/Gothic look but modern. I read of Nazi architecture years ago and drawings of buildings they planned were gorgeous. Does anyone have photos of this?
I'm thrilled the Soviets crushed Berlin and destroyed Nazism, but they truly thought they were the Chosen People and that pride showed in their architecture.
I wish I remembered the book that had all the photos in it.

[Moderator Note]
Thread title changed to reflect poster contributions since not all architecture depicted is "Nazi".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Neue_Reichskanzlei_exterior_color.jpg

Nice.

If it's photos you're looking for, Genji, try sifting
through these Google image search results.


​
 
Genji said:
I'm thrilled the Soviets crushed Berlin and destroyed Nazism, but they truly thought they were the Chosen People and that pride showed in their architecture.
Click to expand...
The 'master race' you mean...the jews were the 'chosen people'.

There was actually a big debate in Italy at the time of the renaissance about whether churches should adopt the old Roman architecture that was becoming popular again.

Not only was it pagan, it was also the embodiment of human pride...a grave sin in the eyes of the church.
 
It's all very cold, dull and sterile.
No personality.
No charm.
No character.
It reeks of bureaucracy and distant, reaching power.
Exactly what the Third Reich would have been aiming for, so I think there were truly successful, but I most certainly would not call it beautiful at all.

I did love, however, that in the Goodle image search for Nazi Architecture, this image came up...
MickeyMouseClubSetPins250.gif
 
Wasn't it the case that Hitler would have been an Architecture if he had not wanted to take over the world?
 
I always found it intriguing that Hitler chose a very pronounced Roman motiff, as opposed to any real semblance of Germanic Gothic architecture.

I think a combinational style would have reflected well the characteristics Hitler was invoking, as opposed to the pure Roman style that, though profundly evocative, nonetheless was lacking in connection to Germanic culture.

As far as I am aware, only Trier was a Roman city of importance in ancient Germany.
 
one_raven said:
It's all very cold, dull and sterile.
No personality.
No charm.
No character.
It reeks of bureaucracy and distant, reaching power.
Exactly what the Third Reich would have been aiming for, so I think there were truly successful, but I most certainly would not call it beautiful at all.

I did love, however, that in the Goodle image search for Nazi Architecture, this image came up...
Click to expand...

I think Genji is viewing the building as a work of unique futuristic appearance, whereas others may see a cold, sterile, power-centric and soulless architectural development. Culturally and socially, not to mention environmentally, it physically echoes the mentalities of the time, place.
 
Prince_James said:
I always found it intriguing that Hitler chose a very pronounced Roman motiff, as opposed to any real semblance of Germanic Gothic architecture.

I think a combinational style would have reflected well the characteristics Hitler was invoking, as opposed to the pure Roman style that, though profundly evocative, nonetheless was lacking in connection to Germanic culture.
Click to expand...
Trouble is, there is no Germanic architecture on a grand scale really.

The gothic style of the middle ages was a broad european and christian genre, not specifically germanic.

Obviously the fascist philosophy of the nazis has little to do with christianity.

It was also based on slow hand craftmanship, which doesnt fit the machine and tech based culture of the 20th century.
 
Carcano:

It is true that there is no explicitly Germanic architecture, yet at the same time, there was aspects of Gothic architecture that were found more prominently in Germany, as well as baroque architecture (see: Dresden) which was similarly Germanic-only in its characteristics.

However, you are quite right that Nazi Germany was heavily pagan in a Wagernian sense, so that the Romanesque characteristics fit heavily into this. Yet it would seem the Romanesque type of paganism is not the type he was going for. The German spirit is less classical, more Romantic.
 
G. F. Schleebenhorst said:
That's one of those buildings that would look great new, but in 100 years time would just look dingy and crap.
Click to expand...
As opposed to modern US buildings slapped together with glass cubes and demolished in 25 years, to be replaced with another square tower of glass cubes.
 
Nickelodeon said:
ger-Welthauptstadt_Germania.jpg


ger-81346290_edit.jpg


ger-soldiers_hall1.jpg
Click to expand...
Except for the rightwing flags this architecture is beautiful. Compare it to any US skyline today. Glass towers designed to be demolished every other decade to be replaced by more glass towers. Absolutely zero character or quality involved.
 
Agreed. They are beautiful buildings and modern American architecture is nihilistic garbage.
 
Prince_James said:
Agreed. They are beautiful buildings and modern American architecture is nihilistic garbage.
Click to expand...
And that is sad because it wasn't always that way. Old Chicago, NYC, Boston and a smattering of other cities have managed to preserve some great architecture, most was destroyed and made into parking lots or the ticky tacky beige and glass cubes that are void of anything pleasing to the eye. Kansas City had spectacular German inspired architecture until the start of the 20th century. I have a book on Lost KC Architecture.
Instead of glorious buildings with thought, history and character taken into account we have boxes sheathed in the cheapest material available: Glass. The Sears Tower, The WTC and all US high rises built after 1960 look hideous. At least the Petronas Towers have some design.
 
Genji:

Agreed. There are practically no beautiful buildings built post-1940.

I also agree that the Petronas Towers are rather nice. Dubai, too, has some interesting designs, blending well with the Arab foundation for their architectural style.
 
Prince_James said:
Genji:

Agreed. There are practically no beautiful buildings built post-1940.

I also agree that the Petronas Towers are rather nice. Dubai, too, has some interesting designs, blending well with the Arab foundation for their architectural style.
Click to expand...
Even Tokyo and Taiwan use some imagination. It all comes down to expense and profit. The architecture, along with our history and culture pay the price.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top