The Reichstag Building – Images inside and Out

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Maps showing The Reichstag Buildings location

• 

• 

• 

• 

Identifying what it’s function is/was

The Reichstag building houses the Bundestag – which is the national parliament of The Federal Republic of Germany

It was originally completed in 1894 built to house the Parliament of The German Empire. In 1933 a fire broke out soon after Hitler became chancellor and the establishment of a Nazi Dictatorship in Germany. The building obtained further damage during World War II and was then left to deteriorate further until it was restored, in part, in the 1970s to become a museum of German History. After the reunification of Germany in 1990 architects Norman Foster & Partners undertook further restoration and renovation of the building for it to once again house Germany’s Parliament.

Identify what might have driven the redesign of the space

Germany was split into East and West after the defeat of Hitler in 1945, the Western Allies; USA, Great Britain and France controlling the Democratic West and The USSR controlling the Communist East. After the decline of the USSR in 1989 East Germans were fleeing, crossing into West Germany through Hungary’s newly opened border with Austria. This saw the beginning of East Germans entering West Germany. Through a mistaken announcement on a broadcast news conference East Germans were given passage into West Germany through crossing points of the Berlin Wall, which in turn saw the downfall of the German Democratic Republic, leading to the rise of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU). In 1990 The CDU in a coalition with the Social Democrats initiated the negotiations for the unification of Germany. In June 1991 the Bundestag voted that Berlin should become the capital of Germany once again. Later that year it was voted that the Reichstag Building should be refurbished to house a united Parliament. In 1992 a competition was run to undertake this project, of which Norman Foster won in 1993.

Bibliography

Encyclopedia Britannica. (1995). Reichstag | building, Berlin, Germany. [online] At: https://www.britannica.com/topic/Reichstag-building-Berlin-Germany [Accessed 12 Feb. 2019].

Encyclopedia Britannica. (1995). Bundestag | German government. [online] At: https://www.britannica.com/topic/Bundestag [Accessed 12 Feb. 2019].

Foster, N., Jenkins, D. and Baker, F. (2000) Rebuilding the Reichstag. London: Weinfeld & Nicholson.

My sketches often portrayed the shapes, lines and height changes within the galleries. I tried to represent this is in model 1, although perhaps I little too representational?

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

I wanted a way of illustrating the tension the angled walls and sharp corners provided and how these corners drew me in.

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

The changing light throughout the galleries had a big effect on how I felt about the spaces and the different atmospheres it created. I wanted to represent the different amount of light that was let into the galleries, using the shadows created to help depict atmosphere.

• 

• 

For this exercise I must refer back to exercise 2:2. In exercise 2:2 I discussed materials quite fully as I did not feel it was possible to discuss touch and emotion without mentioning materials. I believe the materials used played a large part in how I felt about the spaces I observed, the emotions they generated in me and the atmosphere created.

There is however one material I can explore further here, which played an important part within the spaces observed, which is glass. Although I have mentioned the use of glass for display cabinets I did not discuss it’s use in the large doors which lead into Galleries 1, 2, & 3 and the huge panes of glass which make up the window in gallery 4.

The glass doors allow light to travel into the galleries and when this is not wanted they are covered over as was done in gallery 2. Being able to first peer through the doors and get sight of what is inside can work to entice some in and for others they might not like what they see and decide it’s not for them. Covering the glass could also be enticing, curious to know what is behind the glass and intrigued to go inside. Again for others this can be off putting. At first instance I thought gallery 2 was closed as it appeared in darkness, it was not until I read a notice close to the door that I knew the public were welcome to go in. For the less curious or concerned this covering over of the glass could be a barrier to walking through and experiencing what is inside.

• 

• 

For me the best use of glass was the huge window. It played a large part in creating the feeling of openness, freedom and space to breath in gallery 4. The seats at this window provided viewers a place to sit and enjoy an expansive view of the gallery but it also permitted viewers to look out and get a view of the city where old and new buildings can be viewed, trams fly past and the weekday cross is in direct vision. The glass provides an element of protection, viewers can sit for a time and watch the world go by. Behind the glass and within the gallery this does not appear strange or out of place, sit at the other side of the glass outside on the pavement and this could be viewed quite differently by passers by.

The large glass pains also put the gallery on display, another way of showing people what is being exhibited and stating ‘come in’ ‘you are welcome’ ‘you are accepted’. It portrays an element of friendless. There will always be times when it’s an individuals first time entering a gallery, some may feel it is not for them, that they do not fit or they will not understand what is inside? The large glass window aims to elevate these apprehensions and provides an invite to all.

To some extent the weather dictates the atmosphere within this gallery due to the glass window. The feel of the space will change as the temperature and light changes on the outside, providing a variation within the space even during the same exhibition.

Lighting and it’s intensity changed throughout the galleries due to light panels in the ceilings, the light could change with the weather or time of day, so often the atmosphere in the galleries would change without any man made intervention. The light panels could however be covered over – blocking out all natural light as was done in Galleries 1 & 2

• 

• 

Gallery 1 relied on artificial light, a little natural light would have worked it’s way through the glass door but it had no windows and it’s ceiling panels were covered. For me this felt harsh and likely another reason why this space did not feel so comfortable. The down facing strip lights however provided pleasant shadows on the floor and it’s directional spot lights illuminated exhibits and caused strong shadows on the walls. I noticed that peoples shadows did not appear to cover exhibits on the walls, which I thought was a clever aspect of the lighting design. The bright lights however bounced off the glass which to me felt glaring and although the temperature was pleasant within the room it provided me with a sense of coldness.

The shapes and forms is Gallery 1 however contrasted with some of the feelings I had about this space. The curving tables and metal structure were fluid, provided pattern and movement within the space. The honeycombed structure of the metal sheeting was organic and softened the feelings of rigidity and exclusion that a solid barrier would suggest.

• 

• 

Gallery 2s exhibits were varied; gentle curved walls, round stone structures, angular glass cabinets, large fluid exhibits and pointy weird exhibits. A plethora of forms and shapes which deserved a range of lighting and which created an abundance of visual and emotional experiences.

Blocking out natural light in gallery 2 worked to provide the dark, moody, captivating experience in this space. The artificial light was kept dim providing soft low shadows on the floor. Directional light illuminated exhibits, which against the dark walls lured you in and made strong shadows providing an almost matching object, which furthered the sometimes menacing feeling this gallery presented.

Gallery 3 had a mix of artificial and natural light. It’s ceiling panels were uncovered to allow in some light on what was a rather dull day. The room was well lit but had a softness, which felt gentle and calm. Spot lights accentuated works of art but not garishly, there seemed to be a subtlety in the directional lighting in this space.

• 

• 

• 

I have already commented how at ease and free I felt to walk around this space, of which I am certain the lighting contributed to. Gallery 2 however was where I felt a a greater sense of freedom a space to breath and enjoy the expanse of height. Forms within the room were spaced to allow ease of movement and the large ceiling panel and huge window allowed the room to flood with natural light. This natural light I am sure eased tension providing feeling of openness and a sense of being at one with ones self.

• 

• 

• 

In each of the galleries I stopped, closed my eyes and took deep breathes in to breath and smell the air. Strangely I could not note any smells in any of the galleries, not food, or materials, only the smell of scent which I brought with me from my own clothes.

The main surfaces throughout the galleries; walls, floors and ceilings are hard but I did not feel the space was cold and austere. Their qualities conveyed a different message.

The walls are a dominant structure within the building due to their width and height, they are covered in hard plaster but are lightly textured like watercolour paper, which provides a much softer appearance and did not make me feel they were an overpowering force. In the main the walls are void of colour, their whiteness allowing the exhibits to be the prominent features in the space and their mass to be compliant.

• 

• 

Hard wooden floors run throughout the galleries but when I took time to appreciate the floor I did not think of it as a hard stony material but quite the opposite, the honeyed coloured wood made me feel warm, its organic texture and pattern pleased me and I felt that it was a beautiful contrast against the white plain walls.

The fantastic ceilings come light instillation’s were made of a combination of materials. I could see metal painted beams on which the structure lay. The other materials may have been wood or MDF and the light panels I expect were perspex but may have been glass? There were also strip lights and spot lights attached. The design provided angles and depth and the natural light changed the colour and appearance of it’s textures.

I felt curious, welcomed and in awe of the main materials which I could see and sometimes touch in the gallery.

Moving through the galleries I was presented with different materials and feelings.

On first viewing I felt gallery 1 was hard and cold. The exhibits and additional structures in this gallery were mostly hard and the lack of additional sound effects made me feel vulnerable and exposed. Due to it being so quiet I felt that I had to be on my best behaviour or I would be told off. My sketching could be heard so I kept my head down trying not to be noticed.

The seating in the gallery was made of hard plastic. Hard glass protected the exhibits on the display tables and hard metal structures provided division in the gallery. The more I visited the gallery the more I began to see and feel differently about the items within this gallery. The hard seating was bright pink and some plastic tables were a royal blue colour, adding pops of attractive colour. The glass display cabinets felt appealing due to their smooth, shiny, reflective surfaces and which viewers were permitted to touch. The metal sheets within the metal structures were not solid but honeycombed, allowing light and sound to flow through, and not as rigid and dense as I had first perceived.

• 

• 

• 

• 

Although I became aware of the more engaging elements within the space I was always left with a sense of exposure in this gallery. The low hum was slightly eerie and the lack of additional sound effects amplified every noise each individual made, where a cough felt like a little explosion or high heels felt like a horrible irritating tap on the side of your head.

Gallery 2 was a whole different experience. The change from white walls to deep blue and greens felt so inviting and cosy. The bright child like colours of one art work jarred with the luxuriousness of the blue and green but it also made me smile and appreciate the happy feelings these colours bring. There was numerous objects in this space all with different colours and textures and although I could not touch them I could sense them. I knew the furry objects would feel soft and inviting in my hard, the bamboo ladders would be smooth as well as bumpy, the weaved woolen object was bright and interesting and I would sense the roughness of its texture.

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

The cinema space had a lowered ceiling, soft seating and walls which were covered in fabric, which were tactile and comforting. I expect these were also to dampen the blasting music and sound effects which were coming from the film being shown but which still managed to emanate into the surrounding gallery. The sounds were a mix of music, effects of water, scrapping and a jet engine type effect. At times the sounds were very menacing and monstrous but were completely captivating. This space heightened every sense, I felt more aware and I felt completely comfortable in this space. In contrary to Gallery 1 felt the sound encapsulated me, protected me and allowed me to feel more free within the space. I felt like an entity that no one else could see. The diversity of colours, textures, objects and sound effects in this space really turned my senses on and I left this gallery with a sense of enthrallment.

• 

• 

• 

 

Considering the course work text on phenomenology and further reading which I undertook on the subject I reflected on my concept of phenomenology and how I analysed the space which I have been observing – Nottingham Contemporary.

When designing the galleries it is doubtless that phenomenology was taken into account. Architects and designers had to ensure a wide and varied public could engage with the space and allow its exhibitions to provide sensory and emotional experiences.

The space provided me with numerous changing experiences which I sensed or felt as I moved through the galleries. Considering phenomenology I realise that my perception of the space would not necessarily be the same as those I was sharing the space with, due to my own life experiences.

When visiting my chosen space again and taking phenomenology into consideration it heightened my senses, made me think why I took the path I did, why I sat in areas for longer, why I had a sense of pleasure at aspects within the building, all things that I might otherwise have taken for granted but which I would have subconsciously felt.

Throughout most of my visits I tried not to focus too much on the current exhibition but on the structure of the building. Reflecting on this I however I realised that so much of what I experienced was due to the phenomena of the exhibition itself – it’s sounds, it’s textures, the different lighting effects it required. So much so that individuals who are sensory impaired would still be able to feel, experience and sense the exhibition in their way.

There are many elements of the space which will remain; the walls, the ceiling, the floor, it’s large window but with each exhibition the phenomenology will be altered.

The above diagram displays the many routes I observed whilst in the galleries. In gallery 2, 3, 4, there appeared to be a dominant route with viewers usually taking the room to the right. Within gallery 3 & 4 I don’t believe there was anything in particular that told viewers they must travel in this direction, so why did so many take to the right? Is it because we drive on the right, that many are right handed, was it the angled wall pulling viewers in that direction?

In gallery 2 however it did appear viewers were being guided to move to the right. This was partly due to the structures in the room and partly to allow viewers to take in everything the exhibition had to offer before being led to the exit and entrance of gallery 1.

Within gallery 1 I witnessed viewers take all kinds of routes. Perhaps because there was so much on offer, perhaps as some exhibits were articles with a lot of writing? For some this could be an attraction for others they come to view, to be given instant gratification and they may not have the time or inclination to read the small print. On a couple of instances I observed viewers enter, go straight to the video screens, put on the headphones, watch and listen for a short time then leave again without taking much notice of anything else in the space.

Within all galleries viewers tended to move slowly, taking in the art works. Viewers moved from art works on walls to exhibits on the floor, they peered in and stood back to look at a distance. Viewers tended to move with what appeared to be a mixture of ease and caution, casually taking their time but being careful not to get too close or touch the exhibits. Sometimes they held their hands to their face or tilted their heads to regard the piece and possibly reflect and when head phones went on to listen to and watch films there were giggles and smiles.

• 

• 

• 

Movement and pace

The previous diagram displaying the routes taken in the gallery giving a feeling of the gallery being too busy and being manic and rushed. This was far from how it was. Generally the galleries were fairly quiet, people moved slowly and with freedom to move where they wanted in what order they wanted. The diagram below is a way of expressing the gentleness and freedom of movement and pace.