1

Albert Speer; champion of temporality.

Bas Lewerissa

1. Abstract.

Mnemonic architecture.

The Spanish architect and theorist Ignasi Solà-Morales distinguishes in post war

architecture two different groups: those who bases themselves on a strict retoric line

by focusing themselves on specific elements of the current city, as a starting point for

redevelopment, isolation or confrontation, and those who perceive architecture as a

bearer of memory. For this second group the values of the city are worth to be

preserved, which he defines as: mnemonic architecture1. In remembrance of the city,

which lives on in the memory, they find a basis for an attempt of representation (of the

city). One of their advocates is Aldo Rossi. For him monuments are tangible signs of

the past.2 Together with routes and maps they form the durable parts of the city. For

him they are either pathological or impelling monuments. The first category

monuments are isolated and without connection to the city. By contrast, the second

category is constantly able to integrate new functions and to play a vital role in the

public space.3

Albert Speer.

Also in the history of conservation of monuments, has there been awareness about the

issue of the mnemonic. The traditional mode of linear procession of past, present and

future is being questioned in the 20th century and focused around the issue of

temporality. To reveal the complexity of a term like temporality the architecture of

Albert Speer will be used as a case study.4 Speer’s role in the discourse about modern

architecture is just very marginal. Apart from that, Speer’s theory is only a mere

paragraph in his 600 pages autobiography ‘Memories’ (Erinnerungen), and something

that has been completely overshadowed. Some obvious reasons are: the megalomaniac

appearance of his buildings together with his desire to let Berlin undergo a

Haussmanniana5 retrofit, and the limited realisation of his projects, due to regime

change and destruction during WWII. Taking this in account, one could easily put his

buildings in Rossi’s category of pathological monuments. Nevertheless his architectural

theory implicates a unique vision towards both architecture and conservation. Instead

of analysing Speer from the obvious historian or art historian point of view, in which

1 De Solà-Moralez, I., ‘Mnemonia of retorica’, in: Heynen, H. et al., Dat is architectuur. Sleutelteksten uit

de twintigste eeuw, p. 591 2 The term Monument that Rossi uses does not refer so much to the building as an object that is subject to architectural conservation, but as an object that possesses certain inherent qualities. 3 Rossi, Aldo, ‘De architectuur van de Stad’, in Heynen, H. et al., Dat is architectuur. Sleutelteksten uit de

twintigste eeuw, p. 382 4 If in this thesis is referred to the architecture of Albert Speer, not so much his actual buildings are meant, but his architectural theory or concept. 5 The term was used to, both underline the fanatical and zealous work of Hausmann and the enormous

amount of secondary literature about his work. Cercat, E., Our architectural heritage: f rom

consciousness to conservation, p. 135

2

the route is full of pitfalls like his morality, the visual appearance of the buildings and

his use of the classical language, a different approach is used in this thesis. Four

indirect but specific routes are taken, in an attempt to reveal the mnemonic side of his

architecture.

1. Speer’s theory has been unfolded in the book: The Ruin-builder (De Ruïnebouwer) of

the Dutch author Bernlef. Bernlef analysed Speer, both as an architect and as a

technocrat. We will see how Bernlef uses specific literary techniques to do so.

2. Speer’s architectural theory and concept will be subject to the context of temporality

based on the ideas of the Mexican architect and philosopher Fidel Meraz, supported by

the framework of the French philosopher Paul Ricoeur;

3. The classical division of values of conservation by the Austrian art historian Alois

Riegl, which can be linked to the context of temporality, is used as a blotting-pad to

position Speer’s theory from the custodian’s point of view;

4. Speer’s intentions will be mirrored with the concept of Transgression by Bernard

Tschumi, which (as we will see) can be defined as a specific moment of temporality.

The outcome of these analyses throws a different light on the architect Albert Speer

than we might expect and shows us that the subsequent practical realisation can be a

remote ref lection of the initial theory.

2. The narrative

In his book De Ruïnebouwer6 (The ruin-builder), Bernlef uses literary schemes in his

attempt to unravel Speer; the architect and the technocrat. Speer functioned as Chief

Architect and later as Minister of Armaments during the Nazi regime. When the

Erinnerungen and the Spandauer Tagebücher, did not reveal the intentions of Speer,

who according to Bernlef had carefully constructed an image of himself without

revealing his moral intentions’7, Bernlef uses fiction instead to analyse Speer. He uses

the technique of the story and travel journalism (the visit of the architectural sites),

but comes to the conclusion that Speer can only be explained via the theatrical route.

The stage setting is that of a Roman amphitheatre.

In his theatre act, which covers part of Speer’s time as an architect, minister of

armaments and prisoner of war, Bernlef uses the most direct form of narrative; the

dialogue. This forces the actors to speak up; to reveal to a certain extent their

intentions. Apart from writing the play, Bernlef also functions as director of the play,

when he describes the lighting, the movements of the characters and the stage

(visualized in drawings from the hand of Siet Zuyderland). So it seems that Bernlef is

in control and is pulling all the strings, not giving his subject a possibility to escape.

6 Bernlef, De ruïnebouwer

7 Roggeman, J. Bernlef, [online], available:

http://www.dbnl.org/tekst/rogg003bero05_01/rogg003bero05_01_0005.php, 2002, [Accessed 17 april

2010]

3

In act 2, scene 3, there is a conversation about Speer’s Ruin theory between him and

Hitler. Hitler states that Germans have to build like the Egyptians, Greeks and

Romans; out of an inner necessity8. Hitler accuses Speer of cheating a bit, when Speer

wants to combine modern techniques with classic material applications. Only when

Speer confronts Hitler with his own urge to realize a similar high cultural standard in

the near future, does Hitler embrace his concept. But for a moment he lingers on the

idea of ‘thousands of workers sweating, suffering while hauling enormous stones from

the quarry to erect constructions for their Führer’.9 The analogy with reality is obvious.

First the architect is unravelled in a scene in which Speer as a prisoner is helped by his

Russian guard to erect columns out of bricks for his ‘temple ruin’. The scene (act 2

scene 8) becomes hilarious, when the architecture of Speer is being ridiculed. The

guard steals the garden sculptures of Snow-white and the seven dwarfs (complete with

added Hitler’s moustache) from the American canteen, to symbolize ‘Maria

Magdalena’.10 So Speer’s attempt to tag low culture with high culture in this scene is

being presented as mere symbolism. In the meantime Speer states in the scene that the

German culture is in a state of deterioration, and is being washed away by the

Americans, whereas the Russian guard regrets he is not able to swap places with the

Americans. So there is no acceptance by Speer of the rapid decline of the Nazi-regime

and its cultural heritage.

In another scene (Act 2, scene 12), Speer as minister of armaments has a dialogue with

four businessmen (working for his ministry), about the problem of the armament of

the German troops (probably somewhere around 1943/44). These problems have arisen

due to the increased frequency and efficiency of the Allied bombardments. The

conclusion of Speer is that they need to demechanize the armament; the production

factories are constantly bombarded, so instead of mechanizing the industry, Germany

should mobilize the workers potential of the occupied territories and let them take

over the work of the machines to save energy and material. Machines are rare, but

human labour is abundant. This time it is one of the Businessmen, who make the

analogy with the time of the faros.11 So Bernlef makes a parallel between the work of

Speer as an architect and as a minister of armaments in which the value of the human

workforce is worthless. In the case of his architecture, it was only the necessity to have

the buildings realized within time to use modern technology, but in the case of the

war, human labour is a welcome substitute whenever the technology is not accessible.

8 This ‘inner necessity’ comes close to the German term Kunstwollen in art history. 9 Bernlef, op. Cit. pp. 108-110 10 Ibidem, pp. 123-127 11 Ibidem, pp. 136-138

4

3. Speer and Temporality.

To confront the architectural theory of Albert Speer with the subject of temporality it is necessary

to define temporality. According to Fidel Meraz, ‘the structure of the human being is comprised of

three co-equal moments: becoming, alreadiness and presence. Being human is a process of

becoming oneself, living into possibilities, into one’s future. The ultimate possibility into which

one lives is the possibility to end all possibilities: one’s death. … one’s becoming is the anticipation

of death. Thus to know oneself as becoming is to know oneself, at least implicitly as mortal.’12

Temporality means becoming present by what one already is. ‘The awareness of the ego of its own

streaming through time.’13

In a certain way Albert Speer theorized the subject of temporality when he unfolded his Ruin-

theory (Ruinwert-theorie). According to Speer:

‘Modern buildings, at least within their concept, were obviously not equipped to

come up with the possibility to close the gap of tradition with future generations as

demanded by Hitler. Unthinkable that rusting ruins, like the ruins of the past,

would be able to be of any heroic inspiration, something that was admired by Hitler.

This dilemma would make it difficult for my theory: the application of special

materials in combination with the demanding constructive necessities should make

it possible to create buildings, which would reveal after hundreds or (like we

calculated) thousands of years, their ruinous state like their Roman examples’. 14

So in designing his buildings (presence), with specific materials and building concepts, Speer

already foresaw their future role (becoming) as bridging the gap between today’s (WWII) and

future generations of Germans, when the buildings would have reached a state of ruin (alreadiness)

that could compete with Roman examples. So his architecture is intended to be ‘the present

moment emerging only from where our projected future is curled back into a past’. 15 Now to reach

this goal Speer is faced with a dilemma. On the one hand he needed to create structures, that

(because of their size and dimensions) needed to have a sound structural design and on the other

hand he wanted to apply certain materials, that had specific textural qualities, but might not be

the best of choice f rom an engineering point of view. 16 Speer foresaw in the distant future a decline

of the Nazi German regime. This was even acknowledged by Hitler himself. Speer claims to have

shown as an example to Hitler a romantic drawing of the Zeppelin Tribune in Nürnberg after

centuries of use 17. What is visible are: decayed brickwork and crumbled pillars overgrown with ivy.18

They both saw in architecture a means, by which the current time spirit could be transferred to

future generations. 19

12 Meraz Avila, Architecture and temporality in conservation philosophy: Cesare Brandi, p. 13. Meraz bases himself mainly on the work of the French philosopher Paul Ricoeur. 13 Ibidem, p. 19 14 Speer, Erinnerungen, p.69. The authors translation of the following original German text: Modern

construirte Bauwerke, das war ihr Ausgangspunkt waren zweifellos wenig geeignet, die von Hitler

verlangte ‘Traditionsbrücke’ zu künftigen Generationen zu bilden: undenkbar, dass rostende

Trümmerhaufen jene heroischen Inspirationen vermittelten, die Hitler an den Monumenten der

Vergangenheit bewunderte. Diesem Dillema sollte meine ‘Theorie’ entgegenwirken: Die Verwendung

besonderer Materialien sowie die Berücksichtigung besonderer statischer Überlegungen sollte Bauten

ermöglichen, die im Verfallszustand, nach Hunderten oder (so rechneten wir) Tausenden von Jahren

etwa den römischen Vorbildern gleichen würden. 15 N.a. [online], available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporality, [Accessed 2 May 2010] 16 It is the reverse of modern architects who used traditional building techniques that were plastered afterwards to give it a modern impression like the brick structure of Erich Mendelsohn’s Einsteinturm. 17 In the research for this thesis, no evidence has been found about the survival of this drawing. 18 Speer, op. cit. p. 69 19 Ibidem p. 68

5

So both temporality and cosmic time; ‘the time of the world that unfolds as a sequence

of uniform, qualitatively undifferentiated moments in which all change occurs’20, were

somehow immediately linked in Speer’s theory. Or to make a parallel with the concept

of time of the French philosopher Paul Ricoeur; Speer’s architecture is intended to

function as a device that cosmologizes lived time and humanizes cosmic. Cosmic time

is for Ricoeur, ‘the time of the world that unfolds as a sequence of uniform,

qualitatively undifferentiated moments in which all change occurs, in contrast to lived

time in which some moments are more meaningful than others’.21 This can be on a

family level like marriage and birth or a more global level like war and destruction. So

again the architecture of Speer is meant as a device which stages ‘a noteworthy present’

against an ‘anonymous background’.22 The architecture is made the beholder of

political and cultural events, and will bear its traces and scars through time. The

assimilation of these two particular notions of time is what Ricoeur calls historical

time.23 Taken a step further one could argue, that his architecture functions as a

narrative mode which makes the historical time, human time. So not only the architect

himself but also the beholder and users are constantly part of a (creative) process, or

talking about architecture: ‘its creation last long periods or in truth it never ends’.24

4. Temporality in conservation values.

The element of time also plays a major role in conservation values. By foreseeing

(designing) how future generations might view the past, Speer in a unique way bridges

the unbridgeable gap within Alois Riegl’s division of conservation values. As massive,

rigid and static his megalomaniac projects were in their appearance, as easy, f lexible

and indifferent are his buildings towards most of the conservation values. Riegl

distinguishes different values for which a building could be preserved for future

generations. These values not only differentiate from each other, they also clash and

often ask for a different set of solutions. Speer miraculously brings together some of

the most ardent values (age, historic, commemorative).

First there is the category of values which criticises any kind of restorations e.g. on the

ground of the historical value, ‘which emphasises the original state of creation:

distortions and partial disintegration are disturbing and unwelcoming ingredients.

The monument is seen as fundamentally inviolable.’25 For Speer this historical value is

not so much situated in the direct appearance of the building, but in its concept and

use through time. Even more stringent is the age value, which considers the 20 N.a. Ricoeur, [online], available: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ricoeur/#3.5 ed. 2005, [Accessed 17

april 2010] 21 Ricoeur, [online] 22 Ibidem 23 Ibidem 24 Meraz Avila, ‘Architecture and temporality in conservation theory: the modern movement and the

restoration attitude in Cesare Brandi´, in: Van den Heuvel, 10th International Docomomo conference.

The challenge of change: dealing with the legacy of the modern movement, p. 24 25 Riegl, ´The modern cult of monuments: its essence and its development´, in: Price, Historical and

philosophical issues in the conservation of cultural heritage, p.75

6

monuments as fixed objects of lawful production, that over time are subject to the

same lawful decay and destruction. Therefore the monuments may suffer neither

addition nor subtraction; neither a restoration of what was disintegrated by the forces

of nature in the course of time, nor the removal of whatever nature added to the

monument during the same period of time, disfiguring its original discrete form. This

will ultimately lead to destruction.’26 Exactly this was visualized by Speer as the

ultimate consequence in his Ruin theory. In this state the monument is a pre-

anticipated form of ‘backward utopia; if there is a utopia it will be found in the past

rather than in the future’.27

Of a different category is the Commemorative value. ‘It makes a claim for immortality,

an eternal present, an unceasing state of becoming. The fundamental requirement of a

deliberate monument is restoration.’28 As such it is a denial of temporality. In an even

more spectacular way this is also the fundament for the newness value. Every

monument, suffers to a greater or lesser extent the disintegrating effects of natural

forces. The monument will therefore simply never (again) attain the completeness of

form and color that newness value requires. Newness character can therefore only be

preserved by means that are absolutely contradictory to the cult of age value.29 All

preservation in the 19th century was based on the newness value. The work was to be

restored to a complete, unified whole.30 For Speer newness was relevant as long as the

Third Reich was still the dominant factor. After its foreseen decline no necessity was

there to keep the monuments preserved according to this value.

Use value. In general, one could say that use value is basically indifferent to the kind of

treatment a monument receives, as long as the monument’s existence is not

threatened. In a certain way this is a combination of temporality and immortality. It

takes benefits from both sides.

The final implication is that buildings designed according to Speer’s theory are

completely indifferent to the point of conservation values. During the course of time

their role change (or might change) and they will be appreciated from a newness value

(for the duration of the Third Reich), through a commemorative and historic value

into the age value. It is the use value, which makes the buildings constantly susceptible

to a different kind of perspective. So its shift towards these values comes close to

Rossi’s mentioned definition of the category of impelling monuments, in which the

monuments are constantly able to integrate new functions and play a vital role in the

public space. It is only for the artistic value (a subjective aesthetic value), that one

would hesitate to acknowledge Speer’s architecture. And this is exactly the point of

view of the art historian, which we wanted to exclude in this survey. But we got help

from the perspective of Paul Ricoeur:

26 Ibidem p.73 27 Meurs, Building in the stubborn city, Inaugural address, p. 19 28 Riegl, op. cit., p. 79 29 Ibidem, p. 80 30 Ibidem, p. 81

7

‘Each new building is inscribed in urban space like a narrative within a setting

of intertextuality. And narrativity impregnates the architectural act even more

directly insofar as it is determined by a relationship to an established tradition

wherein it takes the risk of alternating innovation and repetition. It is on the

scale of urbanism that we best catch sight of the work of time in space. A city

brings together in the same space different ages, offering our gaze a sedimented

history of tastes and cultural forms. The city gives itself both to be seen and to

be read. In it, narrated time and inhabited space are more closely associated

than they are in an isolated building’.31

So there are other equally valid values applicable to consider conservation, in which

isolated architecture plays only a minor role in the wholeness of the city.

5. Transgression as part of temporality.

On another level the architecture of Speer implies the metaphorical rot of Bernard

Tschumi; the point which modernity so ardently tried to avoid, by shaping their sun

white plastered buildings, their shiny steel constructions, made for eternity. This lack

of ruin-value which according to Speer was embedded in the use of the applied

materials is, according to Tschumi, based on the concept of architecture: not so much

as objects meant for eternity, but in the acceptance of the mnemonic side of

architecture; its temporality. So in the view of Tschumi ‘the villa Savoye has never been

more beautiful as when the plaster fell off its concrete blocks’.32 So Tschumi comes

close to Speer when he admires the part of architecture, that comes close to death, ‘…

decaying constructions, the dissolving traces that time leaves on buildings’33 This is the

moment when, what Tschumi calls, transgressing takes place; ‘the point where concept

architecture and reality of its use meet. The place where the limits of space are, both

by users and nature, exceeded beyond the concept of the architect. One of the

consequences are: ‘the meeting place becomes the memory of life between death, the

rotten place where spatial praxis meets mental constructs, the convergence of two

interdependent but mutually exclusive aspects.’34

This transgression is a temporal state which changes constantly. The two necessary

parameters are on the one hand the (concept of the) building itself and on the other

the ‘spatial stories’35 and human interactions, that take place in or around the building.

When both parameters are constant we arrive at a dead point, an unchangeable

condition. When both are subject to change we can achieve transgression. The

consequence or example of the first possibility is, when a building is being conserved

according to the newness value and leaves the city in a state of stagnation or ‘a frozen

state’36 and the function of the building is reduced to an example of artist or historic

value. To a certain extent Rossi’s pathological monument is created. The second 31 Ricoeur, Memory, history, forgetting, pp. 150-151 32 Tschumi, Architecture and disjunction, Cambridge (Mass.), MIT Press, 1994, p. 74 33 Ibidem, p. 74 34 Ibidem, p. 77 35 De Certeau, The practice of everyday life, pp. 115-130 36 Meurs, ‘Vormgeven aan de herinnering, restauratie en bewaarzucht’, De Architect, pp. 52-59

8

possibility is the consequence, when the building is being conserved according to the

use value and the building is given a new value, a new destination in which: ‘the

adventure of humanity is being fed by the memory of the mental and material life,

which every society should appropriate in order to move forward’.37 This creates the

possibility of transgression which can be defined as an added value.

It was the intention of Tschumi to use the folly in his most known architectural and

urban realisation: Parc la Vilette. Speer on the other hand uses more conventional

architectonical typologies, like the stadium, the office building (Reichskanzelei) and

the tribune. The folly, which by its fantasy and valour upsets the standard rules. The

folly, which only exists by the grace of its human contemplator and by human

interaction. The folly is the champion of perishableness and temporality and the

architectural object to which the age-value adapts itself so easily, requiring a minimum

of human interference when it comes to conservation. So transgression for Tschumi is

immediate at the moment the building is in use. By contrast Speer’s building due to its

size and appearance almost dehumanizes. Transgression for him is slow and will only

take place over centuries of time.

6. Conclusion.

The four different routes have shown that although certain architecture might not be

of ‘high culture’ or even condemned on moral grounds, their function could be

important on a completely different level. It seems, when Speer’s architecture is

evaluated from a narrative and theatrical point of view, that holes are punctuated in

his meticulously made armour. Of the four routes, the narrative came closest to his

morality. Bernlef's conclusion was, though, that Speer had no moral, only emptiness.38

It also questions the way Speer was (or would be) able to realize his ideas. Supposedly

it was based on enormous human sacrifices.

In the cases of both temporality and conservation values, we saw that the architecture

of Speer showed a remarkable vitality and f lexibility. It combined elements of both

temporality and eternity (cosmic time for that matter). In the case of conservation

values it almost anticipated and antedated any future use, addition or subtraction,

whether it is conservation or restoration. Finally, parallels can be drawn with

Tschumi’s concept of Transgression. Speer’s architecture one could say was meant,

time and again, for these moments in which transgression would take place. Not so

much as with Tschumi an immediate transgression, but a transgression which slowly

develops itself and which might not even be visible to the beholder or user, but only

perceptible over centuries of time.

37 Francoise Choay is cited in: Tilman, ´Herontdekking van de ruimtelijke potenties. Vier

architectonische benaderingen van hergebruik’, in: De architect, p. 44 38 Roggeman, Bernlef [online]