Community hub
0 subscribers8 pages, 0 posts
Recent from talks
All channels
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Welcome to the community hub built to collect knowledge and have discussions related to Ruin value.
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Ruin value
View on Wikipediafrom Wikipedia
 | This article needs additional citations for verification. (March 2011) |
Ruin value (German: Ruinenwert) is the concept that a building be designed in such a way that if it eventually collapsed, it would leave behind aesthetically pleasing ruins that would last far longer without any maintenance at all. The idea was pioneered by German architect Albert Speer while planning for the 1936 Summer Olympics and published as "The Theory of Ruin Value" (Die Ruinenwerttheorie), although he was not its original inventor.[1][2] The intention did not stretch only to the eventual collapse of the buildings, but rather assumed such buildings were inherently better designed and more imposing during their period of use.
The idea was supported by Adolf Hitler, who planned for such ruins to be a symbol of the greatness of the Third Reich, just as Ancient Greek and Roman ruins were symbolic of those civilisations.
Albert Speer
[edit]
In his memoirs, Albert Speer claimed to have invented the idea, which he referred to as the theory of Ruin Value (Gr. Ruinenwerttheorie). It was supposedly an extension of Gottfried Semper's views about using "natural" materials and the avoidance of iron girders. In reality it was a much older concept, even becoming a Europe-wide Romantic fascination at one point.[when?][3] Predecessors include a "new ruined castle" built by the Landgraf of Hesse-Kassel in the 18th century, and the designs for the Bank of England built in the 19th century produced by Sir John Soane.[3] When he presented the bank's governors with three oil sketches of the planned building one of them depicted it when it would be new, another when it would be weathered, and a third what its ruins would look like a thousand years onward.[3]
Speer's memoirs reveal Hitler's thoughts about Nazi state architecture in relation to Roman imperial architecture:
Hitler liked to say that the purpose of his building was to transmit his time and its spirit to posterity. Ultimately, all that remained to remind men of the great epochs of history was their monumental architecture, he remarked. What then remained of the emperors of the Roman Empire? What would still give evidence of them today, if not their buildings […] So, today the buildings of the Roman Empire could enable Mussolini to refer to the heroic spirit of Rome when he wanted to inspire his people with the idea of a modern imperium. Our buildings must also speak to the conscience of future generations of Germans. With this argument Hitler also underscored the value of a durable kind of construction.
.jpg)
Hitler accordingly approved Speer's recommendation that, in order to provide a "bridge to tradition" to future generations, modern "anonymous" materials such as steel girders and ferroconcrete should be avoided in the construction of monumental party buildings wherever possible, since such materials would not produce aesthetically acceptable ruins. Thus, the most politically significant buildings of the Reich were intended, to some extent, even after falling into ruins after thousands of years, to resemble their Roman models.
Speer expressed his views on the matter in the Four Year Plan of 1937 in his contribution Stone Not Iron in which he published a photograph of the Parthenon with the subscript: "The stone buildings of antiquity demonstrate in their condition today the permanence of natural building materials." Later, after saying modern buildings rarely last more than fifty years, he continues: "The ages-old stone buildings of the Egyptians and the Romans still stand today as powerful architectural proofs of the past of great nations, buildings which are often ruins only because man's lust for destruction has made them such." Hitler approved Speer's "Law of Ruin Value" (Gr. Ruinengesetz) after Speer had shown him a sketch of the Haupttribüne as an ivy-covered ruin. The drawing pleased Hitler but scandalised his entourage.[4]
However, due to the onset of the Second World War, Nazi German architecture made extensive use of concrete.
Modern planned ruins
[edit]A more modern example of intended ruins were the planned warning signs for the proposed nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain (see Human Interference Task Force), which were intended to endure for 10,000 years, and yet still convey an enduring (if negative) impression on future generations: "Keep out. Don't dig here."[5]
Architect Charles Jencks mentions "Ruins in the Garden", a section of the Neue Staatsgalerie, as a postmodern subversion of ruin value.[6]
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ Aygen, Zeynep (2013). International Heritage and Historic Building Conservation: Saving the World's Past. Routledge. pp. 92–. ISBN 978-0-415-88814-1.
- ^ Petropoulos, Jonathan (2014). Artists Under Hitler: Collaboration and Survival in Nazi Germany. Yale University Press. pp. 282–. ISBN 978-0-300-19747-1.
- ^ a b c Spotts, Frederic (2003). Hitler and the Power of Aesthetics. New York: The Overlook Press. p. 322.
- ^ Scobie, Alexander (1990). Hitler's State Architecture: The Impact of Classical Antiquity. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press. ISBN 978-0-271-00691-8.
- ^ Cruickshank, Douglas (May 10, 2002). "How Do You Design a 'Keep Out!' Sign to Last 10,000 Years?". Salon.com.
- ^ Jencks, Charles (1987). "Postmodern and Late Modern: The Essential Definitions". Chicago Review. 35 (4): 36. doi:10.2307/25305377. ISSN 0009-3696. JSTOR 25305377.
Ruin value
View on Grokipediafrom Grokipedia
Conceptual Foundations
Definition and Principles
Ruin value (German: Ruinenwert), also known as the theory of ruin value (Ruinenwerttheorie), is an architectural doctrine that emphasizes designing monumental structures to produce visually imposing and symbolically resonant ruins after centuries or millennia of decay. Formulated by Albert Speer in 1936, the concept posits that buildings should employ materials and construction techniques ensuring that partial collapse yields picturesque remnants akin to ancient Roman or Greek ruins, rather than the chaotic debris typical of modern edifices using steel, concrete, and glass. Speer articulated this to Adolf Hitler as a means to create a "bridge of tradition" linking contemporary works to future generations, countering the ephemeral nature of industrial-era architecture.[5][6] Key principles revolve around material selection prioritizing natural stones like limestone, granite, and marble, which patinate and erode gracefully without the rusting or shattering associated with ferrous metals or brittle composites. Structural engineering must incorporate statics principles allowing for progressive, non-catastrophic failure—such as thick masonry walls and simple geometric forms that can lose sections while retaining overall mass and silhouette. This deliberate planning for decay aims to evoke a sense of eternal power and cultural continuity, drawing implicit inspiration from the sublime appeal of antiquity's weathered monuments, though Speer framed it as a pragmatic response to observed postwar rubble in Europe.[5][7] The theory rejects ephemeral modern innovations in favor of timeless durability, insisting that true monumentality demands foresight into posthumous aesthetics: "By using special materials and by applying certain principles of statics, we should be able to build structures which even in a state of decay over a period of a thousand years would more or less retain their symbolic significance." This focus on longevity underscores a causal view of architecture as a vessel for ideological permanence, where the ruin's form perpetuates narrative beyond the structure's functional life.[5][6]Influences from Romanticism and Antiquity
The Romantic movement of the late 18th and early 19th centuries fostered a deep aesthetic appreciation for ruins, portraying them as poignant emblems of time's inexorable passage and the sublime interplay between human creation and natural decay. Artists such as Caspar David Friedrich and J.M.W. Turner depicted architectural remnants overgrown with vegetation, evoking melancholy and the fragility of civilizations, as seen in Friedrich's Abbey in the Oakwood (1809-1810), where Gothic ruins symbolize spiritual and temporal transience.[8] This cultural preoccupation extended to landscape architecture, particularly in the English picturesque style, where designers like Humphry Repton incorporated artificial ruins or follies—deliberately weathered stone structures—into gardens to heighten emotional resonance and simulate antiquity's patina, as in Repton's designs for estates circa 1790-1810.[9] Such practices reflected a broader Romantic valorization of imperfection and erosion over neoclassical ideals of pristine symmetry, laying groundwork for theories emphasizing buildings' post-collapse aesthetics by prioritizing durable, elemental forms that age into evocative silhouettes rather than rubble.[4] Classical antiquity provided empirical precedents through its surviving monumental ruins, which demonstrated how robust, unadorned stone construction could endure environmental and historical assaults while retaining an aura of power. The Parthenon, constructed between 447 and 432 BCE from Pentelic marble blocks weighing up to 10 tons each, exemplifies this resilience; despite partial destruction by fire in 267 CE and Venetian bombardment in 1687, its Doric columns and pediments persist as a testament to proportional harmony and material permanence, influencing observers from the Renaissance onward.[1] Similarly, Roman structures like the Colosseum (completed 80 CE), built with travertine limestone and concrete, have withstood millennia of decay, their arched forms and massing conveying imperial scale even amid fragmentation. These ancient exemplars informed 19th-century architects and theorists, who noted that simple geometries and high-durability materials—such as limestone and marble—facilitated controlled degradation into "noble" configurations, contrasting with the rapid disintegration of iron-and-glass modern edifices.[4] This observation from Greco-Roman vestiges underscored the causal link between initial design choices and long-term visual legacy, prefiguring explicit ruin-value doctrines by highlighting ruins' capacity to project eternity through scaled simplicity.[2]Historical Development
Albert Speer's Formulation
Albert Speer, appointed as Adolf Hitler's chief architect in 1934, developed the theory of ruin value (Ruinenwerttheorie) during the planning of monumental structures for the Nazi regime, particularly in anticipation of the 1936 Summer Olympics in Berlin.[7][10] The core principle held that buildings should employ durable, traditional materials such as natural stone masonry to ensure that, after centuries of decay, the resulting ruins would retain an aesthetic dignity and convey the enduring power of the state, mirroring the evocative remnants of ancient Roman and Greek architecture.[1][4] Speer argued against modern reinforced concrete and steel, which he observed weathered poorly—concrete cracking and exposing rusting rebar—producing undignified debris rather than harmonious forms.[3] Speer first articulated the concept to Hitler as a deliberate design strategy to bridge the present with a mythic future, where the Third Reich's structures would symbolize eternal greatness even in ruination.[2][5] In practice, this entailed selecting unadorned, block-like geometries that could erode gracefully without superfluous elements prone to haphazard collapse, thereby preserving a sense of scale and proportion in decay.[11] Hitler approved the approach, seeing it as a means to emulate the "bridge of tradition" formed by classical ruins, which he believed imparted a romantic allure of lost civilizations to future generations.[6] In his postwar memoirs Inside the Third Reich (published 1969 in German, 1970 in English), Speer reflected on the theory's origins, stating that he envisioned structures whose "ruin value" would affirm the regime's legacy after a millennium, prioritizing visual impact over functional longevity.[3] This formulation contrasted with transient modern construction techniques, emphasizing instead a fatalistic acceptance of entropy as an opportunity for perpetual ideological resonance.[1] Speer's writings post-Nuremberg Trials, where he was convicted in 1946, have been scrutinized for self-exculpation, yet the theory's consistency across contemporary accounts and his designs underscores its premeditated role in Nazi aesthetics.[2][12]Application in Nazi Architectural Projects
Albert Speer, as General Building Inspector for the Reich Capital from 1937, applied the ruin value theory to the ambitious redesign of Berlin into Welthauptstadt Germania, intended as the capital of a Nazi-dominated Europe.[13] This project, initiated following Hitler's January 1937 directive, envisioned a north-south axis over 5 kilometers long, featuring colossal structures like the Volkshalle—a domed assembly hall with a 250-meter diameter and 320-meter height, inspired by the Roman Pantheon—and a triumphal arch 117 meters high to commemorate 1.5 million German deaths in World War I.[14] [4] Structures were constructed using durable natural stones such as limestone and granite, selected for their ability to develop a weathered patina over time, while avoiding steel reinforcements that would corrode and mar the aesthetic decay, ensuring ruins evocative of ancient Roman imperial remnants.[14] [5] The theory also informed earlier projects, including the Nuremberg Rally Grounds, where Speer oversaw construction of the Zeppelinfeld grandstand between 1934 and 1937 to host annual Nazi Party congresses for up to 400,000 attendees.[15] This massive stone platform, resembling a granite ship prow, incorporated simplified classical forms and materials chosen to gracefully erode into monumental fragments, aligning with Hitler's vision of architecture enduring as symbolic ruins for posterity.[4] [14] Similarly, the 1936 Olympic Stadium in Berlin, designed by Speer and completed in 1934–1936 with a capacity of 100,000, employed limestone facades and robust concrete cores engineered to withstand centuries, producing picturesque decay rather than abrupt collapse.[7] These designs prioritized long-term visual impact over functionality, embedding Nazi ideology of eternal grandeur into the built environment through planned obsolescence into noble ruination.[16] [17]Technical and Design Aspects
Material Selection and Durability
In Albert Speer's formulation of ruin value, material selection emphasized natural stone—such as limestone, granite, and travertine—to ensure structures could withstand millennia of decay while forming visually harmonious ruins reminiscent of classical antiquity.[1][14] These materials were chosen for their proven longevity, as evidenced by enduring Roman and Greek monuments, over ephemeral modern alternatives.[7] Speer argued that stone's inherent stability, when combined with classical static principles avoiding over-reliance on tensile reinforcements, would prevent catastrophic failure and promote gradual, picturesque erosion rather than abrupt collapse.[5] Reinforced concrete and steel were deliberately eschewed in key Nazi projects to avoid the corrosion that produces jagged, rusted protrusions, as Speer observed in bombed contemporary structures during World War II.[5] In the Nuremberg Zeppelinfeld, built from 1934 to 1937 for Nazi Party rallies, Speer implemented this approach by using massive, visible stone blocks without hidden girders or iron armatures, conducting load tests with concrete prototypes to verify foundational durability while prioritizing surface materials for aesthetic longevity.[7] This selection not only symbolized ideological permanence but also practical resilience, with stone facades designed to patina over time without structural compromise.[1] For the planned Welthauptstadt Germania redesign of Berlin, initiated in 1937, materials like granite from Sweden and domestic quarries were specified for monumental elements such as the Volkshalle dome and triumphal arch, aiming for a lifespan exceeding 1,000 years through thick, load-bearing masonry that would fragment into colonnaded remnants if destabilized.[14] Durability testing included scale models and geotechnical assessments to simulate seismic and erosive stresses, ensuring that even in partial ruin, the forms retained neoclassical grandeur without the detritus of industrialized decay.[7] This methodology reflected a rejection of functionalist modernism in favor of tectonically honest construction, where material permanence served propagandistic ends by evoking an empire's inexorable endurance.[5]Structural Engineering for Planned Decay
Albert Speer's implementation of ruin value in structural engineering emphasized the selection of materials and design principles that would allow buildings to withstand centuries of weathering while ultimately decaying into forms reminiscent of ancient Roman monuments. Central to this approach was the advocacy for stone over modern metals like iron and steel, which corrode rapidly and produce unsightly rust; Speer argued in 1937 for "stone instead of iron" to achieve durability akin to classical structures lasting millennia, rather than the mere decades of iron-based bridges and halls.[1] Structures were engineered using principles of statics to ensure stability, with massive, monolithic forms featuring thick load-bearing walls and minimal ornamentation, facilitating uniform erosion and partial collapses that preserve an imposing silhouette overgrown with vegetation.[1][2] To anticipate long-term behavior, Speer conducted practical tests, such as placing enormous concrete blocks on proposed sites for Germania to measure ground settling rates and foundation resistance under extreme loads, informing designs that avoided premature failure modes like uneven subsidence.[7] While concrete was employed for hidden structural cores in large-scale projects due to its compressive strength, exteriors were clad in stone to ensure visible decay mimicked natural processes—crumbling walls and ivy-clad arches—rather than the "dreary" disintegration of exposed modern reinforcements.[14] This deliberate avoidance of steel frameworks, which would leave protruding, rusted skeletons, prioritized aesthetic longevity in ruins over short-term functionality, aligning with the theory's goal of enduring monumental presence after neglect spanning generations.[2] In projects like the Zeppelin Field grandstand, engineering focused on simple vertical geometries and robust masonry to evoke recognizable ruins after slow environmental degradation, eschewing complex joints or materials prone to rapid breakdown.[1] Foundations were overdesigned for permanence, drawing from classical precedents to resist seismic or soil shifts, ensuring that decay proceeded gradually through surface weathering rather than catastrophic structural collapse.[4] These techniques, rooted in Speer's observations of demolition debris in 1934, represented a conscious rejection of industrial-era engineering norms in favor of archaic methods adapted for ideological permanence.[2]Ideological Context
Symbolism of Eternal Grandeur in Nazi Ideology
Albert Speer's ruin value theory, developed in 1934, symbolized the Nazi commitment to creating structures whose decayed forms would project eternal grandeur, ensuring the Third Reich's legacy endured for millennia. By employing durable stone and simplified geometries, Speer intended these monuments to produce ruins reminiscent of classical antiquity, thereby testifying to the regime's architectural and cultural supremacy long after their functional obsolescence.[1] This approach contrasted with modern construction techniques, which Speer criticized for yielding unappealing corrosion, opting instead for materials that facilitated a picturesque patina of ivy and erosion.[2] Adolf Hitler championed the theory, declaring that the core purpose of Nazi architecture was "to transmit his time and its spirit to posterity," with ruins serving as the ultimate medium for this transmission.[2] He mandated adherence to a "law of ruins" for major projects, viewing such designs as logical extensions of historical precedents like Egyptian pyramids or Roman forums, which had inspired awe across epochs despite their ruination.[1] In this framework, the anticipated ruins embodied ideological continuity, bridging the present Reich to distant futures and underscoring the anticipated permanence of its foundational principles.[2] The symbolism intertwined with Nazi conceptions of a thousand-year empire, where physical decay did not signify defeat but rather the inexorable triumph of Aryan essence over time's erosion.[1] Projects such as the redesign of Berlin into Welthauptstadt Germania incorporated these principles at immense scales, with Hitler envisioning edifices capable of withstanding "thousands of years of critical trials" to affirm the era's heroic vitality.[1] Thus, ruin value elevated architecture beyond utility, forging a mythic narrative of enduring ideological potency through evocations of sublime, timeless decay.[2]Criticisms of Monumental Scale and Authoritarianism
Critics contend that the ruin value principle encouraged excessively grand architectural scales to guarantee aesthetically pleasing decay, aligning with Nazi aims to intimidate and subjugate through overwhelming physical presence.[16] [18] Speer's designs, such as the projected Great Hall in Berlin capable of holding 180,000 people under a dome equivalent in height to a 72-story skyscraper, exemplified this by dwarfing human figures and evoking enforced awe.[18] [17] Hitler explicitly viewed such monuments as means to "fortify our authority," transforming architecture into a tool for mass manipulation and ideological domination.[16] The authoritarian character manifested in features like the New Reich Chancellery's extended corridors paved with slippery marble, intended to disorient and psychologically unsettle visitors, reinforcing the regime's absolute control.[18] Architectural historian Martin Filler describes Speer's output as promoting "control through intimidation," perverting classical influences into instruments of repression that symbolized the leader's unchallenged supremacy over the individual.[18] In the Germania project, these scales necessitated evicting thousands of residents, including targeted Jewish communities, and relied on forced labor from concentration camps, amplifying human suffering to sustain the facade of eternal grandeur.[19] [17] By prioritizing ruin value's long-term visual impact, the approach reflected totalitarian hubris, assuming the regime's cultural dominance would outlast its political existence while expending resources on non-utilitarian spectacles amid wartime exigencies.[18] [16] Critics like those in The New Atlantis highlight how this monumentalism embodied Nazi megalomania, using edifices like the "cathedral of light"—formed by 152 searchlights at Nuremberg rallies—to exaggerate power and suppress dissent through sheer sensory overload.[17] [18] Such designs, far exceeding functional needs (e.g., the Chancellery's gallery twice the length of Versailles' Hall of Mirrors), prioritized propagandistic intimidation over practicality, underscoring architecture's role as an affective weapon in authoritarian governance.[16]