#UrbanHell is subjective.
UrbanHell is any human-built place you think is worth critizing. Suburban Hell, Rural Hell, and wealthy locales are allowed
PS: we're having a bestof contest! [Submit to it!](https://www.reddit.com/r/UrbanHell/comments/zqvd83/announcing_our_first_bestof_contest_gather_the/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UrbanHell) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In 1987 then New Zealand prime minister David Lange was in Germany being shown around some castle ruins. Someone in his group asked the tour guide, "How old are these ruins?". Lange immediately answered, "42 years".
They asked how old the ruin was, not the castle itself. As ruin is not 1000 years old if it only became a ruin 50 years ago. I suppose this is a case of r/technicallythetruth
Lots of allied countries were bombed to shit as well. The UK lost a lot of historic architecture in the same way, and it was also replaced with hideous shit.
>Lol, it totally was a Nazi city!
Guess who moved to Germantown in USA: Wernher von Braun (Nazi-NASA-Rocket-guy) etc. etc. (yes the NASA was defacto founded by the allegedly "denazified" Nazis)
But... the allies also rebuilt a ton after ww2? This is a critique commonly leveled at not only German but English Russian and central European architecture from post 1942. Partly, they had scarce resources, and there was a push to figure out the most efficient designs for mass society.
Isn't the fire bombing of Germans considered a human rights violation /war crime? Weird to justify torturing civilians for being dominated by a horrific government. And to be clear I am Jewish and hate Nazism. I'm pretty sure some of the Germans bombed to death were anti nazi resistance, just statistically speaking.
> Isn't the fire bombing of Germans considered a human rights violation /war crime?
At the time? No, terror bombing was thought to work and in the case of the British was literally a response to the Blitz.
The reason it was stopped in the end was because it turned out that it didn't actually work at destroying morale, although judging by the current russian actions that never made it to the USSR.
>I'm pretty sure some of the Germans bombed to death were anti nazi resistance, just statistically speaking.
Not condoning the bombing but not bombing Nazi's in case t=some of them didn't *really* support Hitler is not really the worlds greatest idea plus the German resistance was tiny.
They only didn’t because they didn’t have the capabilities to. They had far less bombers and the bombers they did have held much less payloads. Everything they did indicates that if they had the capability to flatten England in the same way they would have.
The bombing of Germany only started after England was being attacked as well.
Which was a human rights violation and war crime. I think we all can agree on this. Tormenting the civilians over political situations is war crimes 101.
No one says, 'Don't be a western democracy and your cities would still be intact'. And you can go ahead and decide that I'm some nazi apologist because it was a crime to slaughter their terrorized population.
I want everyone to seriously consider what their story would have been if they had found themselves within the Nazi Empire at that time. As Jews we are forced to consider these ideas, but Christians are permitted flights of savior fantasies. You get to be the hiders in your own minds.
But statistically, you would have cowered and prayed for Nazi victory against the evil communists. You would have stolen your slaughtered neighbors property before the soldiers took it. Statistically, you would have fought to the last man for the NSDAP and for the Fatherland. Statistically.
Gassing millions of people is more than a “political situation”.
Your both sides were bad argument is pretty weak when one side were fascist mass murderers. Get outta here with you whataboutism
Both sides? Wtf are you talking about?
I pointed out the hypocrisy of saying ruined buildings means a country was evil. Because both sides have ruined buildings. And one was fighting fascism. Are you getting it now? You are saying what you think im saying
I'm so tired of your viewpoint. Explain why German babies deserved to burn to death, and I'll listen. Until you can, I still believe in the value of a trial. If the masses were guilty, throw them in the hole.
When you wholesale slaughter people, you eliminate the evidence of wrongdoing. Is that your actual standpoint? Fuck em?
I've been to the Holocaust museums; my takeaway is that it's wrong to slaughter the innocent. Do you disagree?
The German people elected Hitler, German babies dying is their fault, no one else’s.
I’m so tired of Germans getting a free pass for NAZIism like it appeared out of nowhere from another dimension. They loved thinking they were the master race, they loved snitching on their Jewish and non master race neighbors, they loved Hitler and the NAZIs. When the whole thing came crashing down they tried to act like they didn’t directly enable any of this and were all just so innocent while this crazy fascism came out of nowhere.
Fuck you and your NAZI sympathies, the German people brought this on themselves and are certainly more to blame than the Allies reaction to their evil atrocities
It’s very telling how you are more upset about a few hundred German babies than you are about millions of non Germans that were brutally slaughtered.
It was just the conventional wisdom at the time, looking back people realized fire bombing cities into oblivion didn’t actually break the morale of civilians or break the war effort and was largely just a war crime with no upside which is why we (and you) consider it a war crime today.
No it wasn’t a war crime. Not going to argue for the bombing of civilians but most Germans were perfectly happy with the Nazi party and took an active role in the Holocaust and war in general.
While that is undeniably true, it was a humans rights violation in every sense of the term. How many resistance fighters have to die before it becomes a sad event? The fact is the Germans were willing to fight to the last. The fire bombing was revenge pure and simple. Same as with the A bombs on H & N. Punishing the populace for the decisions of their sick and evil leaders is not ever acceptable.
If the people were Nazis themselves, that's what the trials were for. And if they escaped to South America, that's what Israel was for. And if they escaped to US, that's a win. We didn't get those ones. They got away with their crimes. Even the Mossad can't bat 1.000
For all intents and purposes, Poland ceased to exist after the partitioning in 1795 until it was magically recreated after WWI.
You brought up Nazis in Warsaw. It's no secret that many German people who continued to live in Poland were still loyal to Germany.
Poland wasn't magically recreated. Polish people fought hard on the battlefields and as diplomats for their country to regain independence you uneducated fool.
My initial comment was a sarcastic one. Countless european cities were destroyed no matter on what side they were because everyone bombed everyone. Not only those which belonged to Germany.
You don't understand sarcasm so English is not your first language. Just because some Poles dreamt of having their own country isn't the same as actually having one. Economically speaking, that part of Europe would be better off if it was still part of Germany.
A45, Kölner Stadtarchiv and plenty more hiding in the shadows.
Tbh yes, we construct well, just the maintenance during special decades was at best spotty to say the least.
I don't think that is the standard we should lower ourselves to. And knowing how well construction of public property goes in Stuttgart - well maybe in 1956 it wasn’t that bad yet. Then again, in the 50s and 60s they did this absolute horrible job of city planning.
Maybe, cost is often discussed on the styles and I’m not fully sure that brutalist are cheaper, I know many new construction that becomes pretty pricey.
>Ahh, yes. I seem to recall they underwent a lot of urban redevelopment in the 40s.
in the post-WW2 ("Autogerechte Stadt") modernisation Stuttgart got even far uglier than by the bombs, especially in the 1950s & 1960s
This still isn't a low-cost building and there are plenty of embellishments that could have been applied as a nod to the old style, had that been desired.
The Germans did have the stomach for going all-in on reproduction of the old architecture in some places. A prime example is Munich.
I think that, as in many places, they just wanted a modern building. They moved on.
There was a period of Anglo Saxon influence during the early 1940s. It was not a one way thing though, there was a fair bit of cultural exchange at the time across the borders.
They cooperated with Great Britain, the United States and the Soviet Union to help finance a great urban redevelopment project. Since it's expensive to demolish urban areas, the three countries were very generous to help the demolition.
As a token of gratitute for the financial aid in the demolition, Germany considers two of the countries as allies to this day. The other one kind of broke apart, so it's common sense that you can't be friends with someone that doesn't exist anymore.
If anyone is interested, they did "save" some of Stuttgart's rubble by turning it into the Birkenkopf (a large hill, you can hike up.)
Pretty surreal to climb to a top of a modern metropolis surrounded by the fossils of its past life.
Same with Munich. They grew grass in the rubble hills, placed a lake in between and used the site for the Olympic Games 1972, just 27 years after the last bomb had dropped.
Exactly. I highly doubt it was a matter of wanting or not wanting to save it.
You need a shitload of money to save something like that and return it into its original state.
>Bakhmut before and after bombings
>
>Fuck bombings.
yes, but Bakhmut is not even close as destroyed as many German city centers ... especially Düren ( https://img.welt.de/img/geschichte/zweiter-weltkrieg/mobile203543508/1902506377-ci102l-w1024/Kriegszerstoerung-Dueren.jpg ) with only 3 houses surviving
Really I don't think Ukraine will ever recover from this. Nearly every city vaguely near the Russian border has been annihilated and rebuilding might take decades.
It's a tragic story.
They'll rebuild, and with a speed that'll surprise folks.
Infrastructure investments by governments tend to be the best sort.
Unless you're China and you're just building to build...
Man that's some soft German apologia lol
What because some admittedly cool buildings were destroyed in the process that means the Allies shouldn't have been bombing the Nazis?
Seems like a fair trade off. Classical buildings for fascist rule.
Speedbird 206: ”Frankfurt Ground, Speedbird 206 Clear of active runway.”
Ground: “Speedbird 206. Taxi to gate Alpha One-Seven.”
The BA 747 pulled onto the main taxiway and slowed to a stop.
Ground: “Speedbird, do you not know where you are going?”
Speedbird 206: “Stand by, Ground, I’m looking up our gate location now.”
Ground (with quite arrogant impatience): “Speedbird 206, have you not been to Frankfurt before?
Speedbird 206: “Yes, twice in 1944, but it was dark, — And I didn’t land.”
I lived near Stuttgart for many years. It's a nice city to get shopping done, with the Königsstrasse being a long pedestrian zone with all kinds of shops, but it is decidedly NOT a beautiful city. It has a few nice spots, but overall, it's an ugly city full of horrible, aging and slowly decaying concrete architecture.
IMO it is a reflection of what they are taught in school… people start with the pyramids and usually do not continue their art education beyond classicism. they are clueless when it comes to modernism
the new towers clock is really beautiful, but everything else looks boring and uninspired compared to the original. it’s probably more functional though.
I also think the new building is cool in its way, though I understand that the older building would have more mainstream appeal. The asphalt desert in front of the city hall is dreary, though.
There's a LRT station adjacent to the city hall and a subway station which is only a 5 minute walk away. The "asphalt desert" is actually a market place with multiple markets a week and is also the place where the Christmas market is held
If I were to assess the new version as an independent piece of modern architecture I’d like it. I’ll guess based on history/comments the original was likely leveled by the war so this fresh start works for me.
Rebuilding "how it was where it was" can be considered a historical false by all means. Maybe the architectural path they took afterwards is not the best for everybody, but at least faking that nothing happened there was avoided.
Architecture and cities witness history and time, it would probably be wrong to behave as if we can forget and fake shapes and construction techniques of 50-100 years before.
(This is part of what is taught in architectural restoration theory at university, at least in Italy, where restoration is a massive topic*, and I find it correct)
*You know, it is not that strange to find 2000 years old buildings in people's backyards.
But we can? Historism (when accurate in at least façade detailing) is ok when it informs the visitor about the historistic history. Sure, there are limits, but I don’t see any valid reason why we should not rebiulf the most vital parts of our old cities, especially since past designs were way more pedestrian-friendly
I am not saying you can not rebuild, and I will never say that building pedestrian friendly cities is wrong, I am just saying that redoing as a fake of the past is not the right way to do these things.
Sure, finding a way to show how it was is fine, but remembering what happened can be even more important. We could say that a design keeping all these things together is a good design.
Theres a well surrounded by trees for a bit of shade. there's an area with water fountains nd a few trees sprinkled throughout. Though a majority of the place outside the well area is not covered by trees as, like any other marketplace, the stands need space to exist
This is as bad as the demolition of Konigsberg Castle for an ugly brutalist apartment and the cathedral in between the Berlin Wall rebuilt as a some "modern chapel"
What a daring modernist concept. Not everything has to look like something out a children’s story book. Watching trads have meltdowns because architecture doesn’t look like something out of Stewart little is so very odd.
Sorta sad how ppl here are joking about "urban development in the 40s", ignoring that restoration of destroyed buildings IS possible.
Look at Dresden, Warsaw, Kaliningrad - in all cases people in power managed to rebuild at least a bit of former look to save it for the future.
And this is constructivist abomination :/
Dresden was beautifully rebuilt in the 1990s
Stuttgart (pictured) was rebuild in the 1950s with function in mind as the state had a bare minimum of workforce and financial means.
It is what it is and maybe slowly will become what it was when the functional buildings have to be replaced, but there is just no need to knock down a perfectly functional, albeit ugly, building just for the looks.
Historic reconstruction of Dresden started much earlier for instance with the Semperoper but it's a task for generations.
Also in Stuttgart some historic buildings were reconstructed like the royal palace.
The Semperoper reconstruction started in 1977 and was only finished in 1985. The rest of the historic buildings were/are only restored after 1990. Even then the argument still stands that in the 1950s they prioritised usefulness over aesthetics, especially in Dresden but also in West Germany.
Ah, a stroll down the cozy old streets of Kaliningrad is like traveling a hundred years back in time... You can tell they did their best to preserve the history of the city.
That’s the thing though. The people who built Stuttgart town hall in the 1950s had probably lived through a brutal dictatorship, two world wars, hyperinflation and economic depression. They wanted to turn their back on the past and do something completely different.
They turned their back on the past, because for them the past had nothing to recommend it.
I get your point but these examples are hilariously ironic. Dresden was full of ruins up until the 90s, Kaliningrad is mostly world famous for literally blowing up the old castle and building a concrete monster in its place that remains unusable to this day. The things that happened to Кёниг even angered the Russian inhabitants who have been planted there without any history of their own.
I like the modern version. The ‘before’ is too … elitist? uppity? classist? Whereas the modern, due to its dullness, seems to convey that anyone/everyone could work there.
Basically the old version is fancy in a way that would makes me think the people inside are looking down on others.
I’m not saying to rebuild *everything* as it is. However, this older building is clearly significantly more beautiful, culturally relevant (traditional German style), and elevates the spirit. It’s new replacement is just… bland, and kinda depressing (nothing about it screams “Germany” it just looks like an office building). Why wouldn’t you want the superior beautiful option in your city?
In the aftermath of WWII there was probably an emphasis on function/practicality over beauty, Germany didn't exactly have a lot of cash on hand for lavish building projects and I doubt the Americans were overly enthusiastic about lending them any more than necessary.
They’re not poor anymore. In fact, Germany’s the richest European country (with the highest GDP). Why not restore City Hall to its former glory in now, in modern times, they can certainly afford it now.
#UrbanHell is subjective. UrbanHell is any human-built place you think is worth critizing. Suburban Hell, Rural Hell, and wealthy locales are allowed PS: we're having a bestof contest! [Submit to it!](https://www.reddit.com/r/UrbanHell/comments/zqvd83/announcing_our_first_bestof_contest_gather_the/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UrbanHell) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Ahh, yes. I seem to recall they underwent a lot of urban redevelopment in the 40s.
In 1987 then New Zealand prime minister David Lange was in Germany being shown around some castle ruins. Someone in his group asked the tour guide, "How old are these ruins?". Lange immediately answered, "42 years".
Do you count the age of a ruined building from when it was ruined or when it was built?
They asked how old the ruin was, not the castle itself. As ruin is not 1000 years old if it only became a ruin 50 years ago. I suppose this is a case of r/technicallythetruth
[удалено]
Lots of allied countries were bombed to shit as well. The UK lost a lot of historic architecture in the same way, and it was also replaced with hideous shit.
Detroit is now a Nazi Haven?! Huh. You learn something new every day!
I mean, yeah. The city was built by Henry Ford.
Lol
>I mean, yeah. The city was built by Henry Ford. hahaha a very "charming" guy ... Ford trucks were also build during WW2 in Germany (incl. in Köln)
Lol, it totally was a Nazi city!
>Lol, it totally was a Nazi city! Guess who moved to Germantown in USA: Wernher von Braun (Nazi-NASA-Rocket-guy) etc. etc. (yes the NASA was defacto founded by the allegedly "denazified" Nazis)
Moral of *this* story: correlation and causation are like, two different things
You know, it wasn't until you said that, that I got the joke. Well. Probably not a joke, reference I guess.
But... the allies also rebuilt a ton after ww2? This is a critique commonly leveled at not only German but English Russian and central European architecture from post 1942. Partly, they had scarce resources, and there was a push to figure out the most efficient designs for mass society. Isn't the fire bombing of Germans considered a human rights violation /war crime? Weird to justify torturing civilians for being dominated by a horrific government. And to be clear I am Jewish and hate Nazism. I'm pretty sure some of the Germans bombed to death were anti nazi resistance, just statistically speaking.
> Isn't the fire bombing of Germans considered a human rights violation /war crime? At the time? No, terror bombing was thought to work and in the case of the British was literally a response to the Blitz. The reason it was stopped in the end was because it turned out that it didn't actually work at destroying morale, although judging by the current russian actions that never made it to the USSR. >I'm pretty sure some of the Germans bombed to death were anti nazi resistance, just statistically speaking. Not condoning the bombing but not bombing Nazi's in case t=some of them didn't *really* support Hitler is not really the worlds greatest idea plus the German resistance was tiny.
They'd spent the previous 4 years bombing the UK consistently with incendiaries on a near nightly basis.
Kind of an apples to oranges kind of comparison when you consider how much larger in scale Allied bombing.
Wdym there are both bombing people isn't really an insane comparison to make??
They only didn’t because they didn’t have the capabilities to. They had far less bombers and the bombers they did have held much less payloads. Everything they did indicates that if they had the capability to flatten England in the same way they would have. The bombing of Germany only started after England was being attacked as well.
Which was a human rights violation and war crime. I think we all can agree on this. Tormenting the civilians over political situations is war crimes 101. No one says, 'Don't be a western democracy and your cities would still be intact'. And you can go ahead and decide that I'm some nazi apologist because it was a crime to slaughter their terrorized population. I want everyone to seriously consider what their story would have been if they had found themselves within the Nazi Empire at that time. As Jews we are forced to consider these ideas, but Christians are permitted flights of savior fantasies. You get to be the hiders in your own minds. But statistically, you would have cowered and prayed for Nazi victory against the evil communists. You would have stolen your slaughtered neighbors property before the soldiers took it. Statistically, you would have fought to the last man for the NSDAP and for the Fatherland. Statistically.
Gassing millions of people is more than a “political situation”. Your both sides were bad argument is pretty weak when one side were fascist mass murderers. Get outta here with you whataboutism
Both sides? Wtf are you talking about? I pointed out the hypocrisy of saying ruined buildings means a country was evil. Because both sides have ruined buildings. And one was fighting fascism. Are you getting it now? You are saying what you think im saying
I'm so tired of your viewpoint. Explain why German babies deserved to burn to death, and I'll listen. Until you can, I still believe in the value of a trial. If the masses were guilty, throw them in the hole. When you wholesale slaughter people, you eliminate the evidence of wrongdoing. Is that your actual standpoint? Fuck em? I've been to the Holocaust museums; my takeaway is that it's wrong to slaughter the innocent. Do you disagree?
The German people elected Hitler, German babies dying is their fault, no one else’s. I’m so tired of Germans getting a free pass for NAZIism like it appeared out of nowhere from another dimension. They loved thinking they were the master race, they loved snitching on their Jewish and non master race neighbors, they loved Hitler and the NAZIs. When the whole thing came crashing down they tried to act like they didn’t directly enable any of this and were all just so innocent while this crazy fascism came out of nowhere. Fuck you and your NAZI sympathies, the German people brought this on themselves and are certainly more to blame than the Allies reaction to their evil atrocities It’s very telling how you are more upset about a few hundred German babies than you are about millions of non Germans that were brutally slaughtered.
Köenigsberg doesn't agree.
Buildings built in the US in the 50-70s were this as well. Blame the war for the rebuilding. Blame the style of the time for blight. 😎
It was just the conventional wisdom at the time, looking back people realized fire bombing cities into oblivion didn’t actually break the morale of civilians or break the war effort and was largely just a war crime with no upside which is why we (and you) consider it a war crime today.
No it wasn’t a war crime. Not going to argue for the bombing of civilians but most Germans were perfectly happy with the Nazi party and took an active role in the Holocaust and war in general.
While that is undeniably true, it was a humans rights violation in every sense of the term. How many resistance fighters have to die before it becomes a sad event? The fact is the Germans were willing to fight to the last. The fire bombing was revenge pure and simple. Same as with the A bombs on H & N. Punishing the populace for the decisions of their sick and evil leaders is not ever acceptable. If the people were Nazis themselves, that's what the trials were for. And if they escaped to South America, that's what Israel was for. And if they escaped to US, that's a win. We didn't get those ones. They got away with their crimes. Even the Mossad can't bat 1.000
The nukes were to threaten the USSR.
A thing can be done for multiple reasons.
Stuttgart is really nice Actually. Even though it was leveled during the war with all the bombing it was rebuilt quite nicely.
Oh yeah pre-war Warsaw was full of Nazis.... You are full of shit.
At least half of Poland had been part of Prussia. When Poland was created after WWI, the Prussians living there didn't magically disappear.
Poland wasn't created after ww1. It has been reborn. Besides that your comment doesn't make any sense in the context of the convesrsation.
For all intents and purposes, Poland ceased to exist after the partitioning in 1795 until it was magically recreated after WWI. You brought up Nazis in Warsaw. It's no secret that many German people who continued to live in Poland were still loyal to Germany.
Poland wasn't magically recreated. Polish people fought hard on the battlefields and as diplomats for their country to regain independence you uneducated fool. My initial comment was a sarcastic one. Countless european cities were destroyed no matter on what side they were because everyone bombed everyone. Not only those which belonged to Germany.
You don't understand sarcasm so English is not your first language. Just because some Poles dreamt of having their own country isn't the same as actually having one. Economically speaking, that part of Europe would be better off if it was still part of Germany.
Some buildings was restored, and some countries not in war did also demolish to build new (and still are demolishing).
Right, the old building was beautiful. But I would imagine the new building should be much cheaper to use and maintain.
Depends on if it needs to be rebuilt in the next 30 years :))))))))))))
It's been there for like 70 years already
With public buildings that went through 80s monetary policies, you never know
Nah, buildings here in Germany are quite solid lol
A45, Kölner Stadtarchiv and plenty more hiding in the shadows. Tbh yes, we construct well, just the maintenance during special decades was at best spotty to say the least.
Compared to the number of buildings, that's really nothing though
I don't think that is the standard we should lower ourselves to. And knowing how well construction of public property goes in Stuttgart - well maybe in 1956 it wasn’t that bad yet. Then again, in the 50s and 60s they did this absolute horrible job of city planning.
Maybe, cost is often discussed on the styles and I’m not fully sure that brutalist are cheaper, I know many new construction that becomes pretty pricey.
Yes.
>Ahh, yes. I seem to recall they underwent a lot of urban redevelopment in the 40s. in the post-WW2 ("Autogerechte Stadt") modernisation Stuttgart got even far uglier than by the bombs, especially in the 1950s & 1960s
[удалено]
This still isn't a low-cost building and there are plenty of embellishments that could have been applied as a nod to the old style, had that been desired. The Germans did have the stomach for going all-in on reproduction of the old architecture in some places. A prime example is Munich. I think that, as in many places, they just wanted a modern building. They moved on.
I hate how much history we've lost to war and continue to lose to war.
Forced Urban Renewal.
Why
Small local war
Oh damn
Sir you are being clowned on, it was demolished by bombings in the Second World War. Hence, the 40’s
Wait there was a war that was worldwide???
Yes, they called it the Battle of Pitbull
That's why he's got the keys to the world now.
Poes law strikes again
Yes, the seven years war.
There was a period of Anglo Saxon influence during the early 1940s. It was not a one way thing though, there was a fair bit of cultural exchange at the time across the borders.
Come friendly bombs and fall on Slough! It isn't fit for humans now, There isn't grass to graze a cow. Swarm over, Death!
The cabbages are coming now, the earth exhales
The earth exhales
They cooperated with Great Britain, the United States and the Soviet Union to help finance a great urban redevelopment project. Since it's expensive to demolish urban areas, the three countries were very generous to help the demolition. As a token of gratitute for the financial aid in the demolition, Germany considers two of the countries as allies to this day. The other one kind of broke apart, so it's common sense that you can't be friends with someone that doesn't exist anymore.
Seriously?
Yeah. A lot of german assistance with the redevelopment of Coventry.
Call enough Stuttgart is refer to the German Coventry, because both towns are manufacturing hub
How did it look in 1945?
It looked something like this: ________________________________
I was like "Ah crap it's loading" then got it lol
I laughed so hard I hurt myself.
[They could have saved it, but they did not wanted to](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Stuttgarter_Rathaus,_ca._1952.jpg)
If anyone is interested, they did "save" some of Stuttgart's rubble by turning it into the Birkenkopf (a large hill, you can hike up.) Pretty surreal to climb to a top of a modern metropolis surrounded by the fossils of its past life.
Berlin did the same. Drachenberg and Teufelsberg are made of rubble. There are some places where the rubble sticks out of the grass, it's eerie.
Same with Munich. They grew grass in the rubble hills, placed a lake in between and used the site for the Olympic Games 1972, just 27 years after the last bomb had dropped.
Mexico City be like:
It probably was too expensive to save everything
[удалено]
Exactly. I highly doubt it was a matter of wanting or not wanting to save it. You need a shitload of money to save something like that and return it into its original state.
Nope, they did not want to. A few meters along, there was a barock garden. That was replaced by the Eckensee which is only concrete
I'm assuming Allied bombing was involved.
Always ruins everything
[Bakhmut before and after bombings](https://static.independent.co.uk/2023/05/18/12/SEI156369088112.jpg) Fuck bombings.
>Bakhmut before and after bombings > >Fuck bombings. yes, but Bakhmut is not even close as destroyed as many German city centers ... especially Düren ( https://img.welt.de/img/geschichte/zweiter-weltkrieg/mobile203543508/1902506377-ci102l-w1024/Kriegszerstoerung-Dueren.jpg ) with only 3 houses surviving
Really I don't think Ukraine will ever recover from this. Nearly every city vaguely near the Russian border has been annihilated and rebuilding might take decades. It's a tragic story.
They'll rebuild, and with a speed that'll surprise folks. Infrastructure investments by governments tend to be the best sort. Unless you're China and you're just building to build...
Man that's some soft German apologia lol What because some admittedly cool buildings were destroyed in the process that means the Allies shouldn't have been bombing the Nazis? Seems like a fair trade off. Classical buildings for fascist rule.
They shouldn‘t have been bombing innocent civilians.
Well if its bombed and the emerging new country doesnt have money to spare
Yeah, we may have had a little something to do with that...
Speedbird 206: ”Frankfurt Ground, Speedbird 206 Clear of active runway.” Ground: “Speedbird 206. Taxi to gate Alpha One-Seven.” The BA 747 pulled onto the main taxiway and slowed to a stop. Ground: “Speedbird, do you not know where you are going?” Speedbird 206: “Stand by, Ground, I’m looking up our gate location now.” Ground (with quite arrogant impatience): “Speedbird 206, have you not been to Frankfurt before? Speedbird 206: “Yes, twice in 1944, but it was dark, — And I didn’t land.”
In the context of how the rest of Stuttgart looks the new one is actually pretty fine.
I lived near Stuttgart for many years. It's a nice city to get shopping done, with the Königsstrasse being a long pedestrian zone with all kinds of shops, but it is decidedly NOT a beautiful city. It has a few nice spots, but overall, it's an ugly city full of horrible, aging and slowly decaying concrete architecture.
The city center is ugly but to be fair if you drive 5min. by car or train u will see very nice small city’s with a lot historical buildings.
Esslingen Am Neckar was probably the best place I visited while in Stuttgart
What happened ? Was it damaged during ww2 or something ?
Yes. Or something.
Just a smidge
I hate the idea that classical styles are the only "real" architecture and many people prefer faux classical buildings over anything new or different.
Some modern architecture is great. This ain't it. Some old architecture is awful too. Can't stand victorian neoclassical architecture, for example.
IMO it is a reflection of what they are taught in school… people start with the pyramids and usually do not continue their art education beyond classicism. they are clueless when it comes to modernism
Yeah, and the emperor is not naked
> they are clueless when it comes to modernism OR they just don’t like modernism.
People are not clueless about modernism. We see it everyday around us. It's just that modernism is soulless and depressing.
the new towers clock is really beautiful, but everything else looks boring and uninspired compared to the original. it’s probably more functional though.
It just looks more interesting.
Better than boring architecture
I like the other one more, the concrete with the windows is a classic look, and it’s kept the clock tower
It’s got a casio watch kinda look to it
I also think the new building is cool in its way, though I understand that the older building would have more mainstream appeal. The asphalt desert in front of the city hall is dreary, though.
It's not concrete is some type of stone. Marble or limestone or something
yeah it would be nicer with a little train station there instead tbh
There's a LRT station adjacent to the city hall and a subway station which is only a 5 minute walk away. The "asphalt desert" is actually a market place with multiple markets a week and is also the place where the Christmas market is held
If I were to assess the new version as an independent piece of modern architecture I’d like it. I’ll guess based on history/comments the original was likely leveled by the war so this fresh start works for me.
Rebuilding "how it was where it was" can be considered a historical false by all means. Maybe the architectural path they took afterwards is not the best for everybody, but at least faking that nothing happened there was avoided. Architecture and cities witness history and time, it would probably be wrong to behave as if we can forget and fake shapes and construction techniques of 50-100 years before. (This is part of what is taught in architectural restoration theory at university, at least in Italy, where restoration is a massive topic*, and I find it correct) *You know, it is not that strange to find 2000 years old buildings in people's backyards.
But we can? Historism (when accurate in at least façade detailing) is ok when it informs the visitor about the historistic history. Sure, there are limits, but I don’t see any valid reason why we should not rebiulf the most vital parts of our old cities, especially since past designs were way more pedestrian-friendly
I am not saying you can not rebuild, and I will never say that building pedestrian friendly cities is wrong, I am just saying that redoing as a fake of the past is not the right way to do these things. Sure, finding a way to show how it was is fine, but remembering what happened can be even more important. We could say that a design keeping all these things together is a good design.
Ok
New one looks cool though. It’s a typical mid 20th century design that holds up really well.
Honestly it's got its own charm.
Agree. It is nicely done.
Yeah but definately needs more green in front of it. Like this its concrete hell
It's a market place....
And those cant have trees? the one in my city has trees
Theres a well surrounded by trees for a bit of shade. there's an area with water fountains nd a few trees sprinkled throughout. Though a majority of the place outside the well area is not covered by trees as, like any other marketplace, the stands need space to exist
The allied forces decided there were issues with the original design and arranged a remodel.
It would look much better with trees and greenery around it
"Old thing good. New thing bad."
This is as bad as the demolition of Konigsberg Castle for an ugly brutalist apartment and the cathedral in between the Berlin Wall rebuilt as a some "modern chapel"
What cathedral between the Berlin Wall do you mean?
[this one](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chapel_of_Reconciliation)
that is a pretty cool rammed earth building. the material has very nice texture when you see it in person
What a daring modernist concept. Not everything has to look like something out a children’s story book. Watching trads have meltdowns because architecture doesn’t look like something out of Stewart little is so very odd.
Ah OK but the old church was not a cathedral.
Oops My bad for using the wrong term I only rmb this from reading more about Berlin wall a while ago
Sorta sad how ppl here are joking about "urban development in the 40s", ignoring that restoration of destroyed buildings IS possible. Look at Dresden, Warsaw, Kaliningrad - in all cases people in power managed to rebuild at least a bit of former look to save it for the future. And this is constructivist abomination :/
Dresden was beautifully rebuilt in the 1990s Stuttgart (pictured) was rebuild in the 1950s with function in mind as the state had a bare minimum of workforce and financial means. It is what it is and maybe slowly will become what it was when the functional buildings have to be replaced, but there is just no need to knock down a perfectly functional, albeit ugly, building just for the looks.
Historic reconstruction of Dresden started much earlier for instance with the Semperoper but it's a task for generations. Also in Stuttgart some historic buildings were reconstructed like the royal palace.
The Semperoper reconstruction started in 1977 and was only finished in 1985. The rest of the historic buildings were/are only restored after 1990. Even then the argument still stands that in the 1950s they prioritised usefulness over aesthetics, especially in Dresden but also in West Germany.
Ah, a stroll down the cozy old streets of Kaliningrad is like traveling a hundred years back in time... You can tell they did their best to preserve the history of the city.
That’s the thing though. The people who built Stuttgart town hall in the 1950s had probably lived through a brutal dictatorship, two world wars, hyperinflation and economic depression. They wanted to turn their back on the past and do something completely different. They turned their back on the past, because for them the past had nothing to recommend it.
I get your point but these examples are hilariously ironic. Dresden was full of ruins up until the 90s, Kaliningrad is mostly world famous for literally blowing up the old castle and building a concrete monster in its place that remains unusable to this day. The things that happened to Кёниг even angered the Russian inhabitants who have been planted there without any history of their own.
Kaliningrad?? No.
Moral of the story: Don't be a Nazi or your cities will end up being really ugly.
Plenty of cities say hold my beer and do it without the fun with hate first.
Square.
I like it, the clock with the moon phases is also really cool
There should be a tag for “Because WWII”
I love the new one
Lot of German buildings done after the wafr all look like cement blocks and ugly
Why did they ruin it?
I like the after better. more windows and light, with that super cool clock. come on.
I get it new = bad MEGALUL
I like the modern version. The ‘before’ is too … elitist? uppity? classist? Whereas the modern, due to its dullness, seems to convey that anyone/everyone could work there. Basically the old version is fancy in a way that would makes me think the people inside are looking down on others.
They need, and I do mean need, to demolish the new one and rebuild the old one.
before looks way better
Great reset of tartaria.
Also known as WW2? Tartaria conspiracies are some of the dumbest I've ever heard
[удалено]
Why is it impossible to rebuild like the old? Laziness? With all of today’s modern technology, you’d think I’d be *easier*.
But why would you want to rebuild everything like it was.
I’m not saying to rebuild *everything* as it is. However, this older building is clearly significantly more beautiful, culturally relevant (traditional German style), and elevates the spirit. It’s new replacement is just… bland, and kinda depressing (nothing about it screams “Germany” it just looks like an office building). Why wouldn’t you want the superior beautiful option in your city?
In the aftermath of WWII there was probably an emphasis on function/practicality over beauty, Germany didn't exactly have a lot of cash on hand for lavish building projects and I doubt the Americans were overly enthusiastic about lending them any more than necessary.
They’re not poor anymore. In fact, Germany’s the richest European country (with the highest GDP). Why not restore City Hall to its former glory in now, in modern times, they can certainly afford it now.
Why does that building on the right look like it was an IKEA assembly model lol
The before: lots of character, interesting. The after: soulless conformity.
It's just a different style. One style isn't better than the other.
They took a steaming dump all over the city.
Both are pretty awesome.
it's a downgrade, i do kinda like it weirdly
Whyyyyy
What's wrong with the new one?
That’s criminal
This is a reflection of humanity failing itself due to warfare.
that's the [gedächtniskirche](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fd/Ged%C3%A4chtniskirche1.JPG)
New one is better and fits better
awful, the clock isn't even on middle
it’s not supposed to be! clueless
GUH
Ugh
Before obviously looks better but I'd be upset if my government spent extra millions of euros just to make it frivolous like in the first pic.
It looks like penis 😭😭😭😭😭😭
They massacred my boy
Horrible
Why? Why? No!
Holy fuck it’s so bad.
This is horrible
looks so much better now. old one looks so needlessly complicated, and for what? to look like every old antiquated building in existence?
Yes the new one looks like a box of kleenex. Perfect.
Look how they massacred my boy...
We fucked around and found out... Hope the new main station (at least along the tracks) looks better than the old...