This Friday, the CSU, SPD and the Greens will appear together in front of the press in Nuremberg – a rare occurrence. You want to present a “joint course” for the renovation of the opera house and interim theater. A large majority has been announced for December 15, the day of the planned landmark decision in the city council. But only because the hotly controversial question – interim construction in the or just at the NS-Kongressbau – is postponed. Here is an overview of the central theme of the city.
The interior of the former Nazi congress hall in Nuremberg mainly consists of corridors and stairwells.
(Photo: Olaf Przybilla)
What does the Nuremberg city council want to decide on Wednesday?
Probably two basic things. First: The opera house, built at the beginning of the 20th century, is being renovated – the 650 employees will return there after the end of the interim period. Second: The alternative venue will meanwhile be “on or in the “Congress building, one of the largest Nazi legacies in Germany. Specifically, this means that the function rooms of the State Theater – fundus, mask, rehearsal rooms and other – are housed inside the 82,000 square meter NS horseshoe (consisting primarily of corridors and staircases) When the opera returns to the city center, these rooms could then be used by artists and creative people. The city councils want to leave this point open for the time being should be decided in 2022.
Which location on the former Nazi site would be suitable for the opera performances?
The interim construction should either in the The “interior” of the Nazi horseshoe, which has been deliberately kept desolate up to now, has been accommodated. The CSU advocate for this and greens. Or in one of several possible locations before that building, possibly with a view of the Dutzendteich. The majority advocated this was the SPD, the association “Geschichte Für Alle” – which organizes guided tours of the Nazi grounds – and the historians from the Documentation Center Nazi Party Rally Grounds, who have been housed in one of the two head buildings of the Torso Nazi congress hall for 20 years. The memorial director Axel Drecoll, a member of the site’s scientific advisory board, also expressed sympathy for a location in front of the Nazi building in an SZ conversation – i.e. not in the courtyard of the horseshoe.
Why is an alleged detail of the move so controversial?
In an open letter, dozens of members of “Geschichte Für Alle” described their experiences on the guided tours of the Nazi site. According to their descriptions, the striving for bringing the masses into line, the exclusion of those who think differently and “the intimidation of the tiny and powerless individual” can be better illustrated in the inner courtyard of the horseshoe than anywhere else on the Nazi area. It is precisely the ruinous nature of the scenery – in contrast to the view of the outer facade, which appears to be more perfect – tells of the failure of the Nazi ideology, “of its profundity, hollowness and emptiness”. When entering the inner courtyard, one can observe again and again how strongly guests reacted to the dimension of the empty space. This effect threatens to be at least severely impaired by an architectural intervention. The CSU and the Greens do not fear such an effect, especially since there are still no concrete plans for such a building. Last but not least, both emphasize the pragmatic reasons that speak for an interim building inside the courtyard. For ecological reasons, too, the Greens in particular consider the site to be particularly suitable, as it is already sealed.
And the monument protection?
Both sides argue with him. The CSU believes it is much more justifiable not to impair the external view of the torso by adding an extension. The SPD argues exactly the other way around and considers a building in the inner courtyard to be more problematic from a monument preservation perspective – because of the aforementioned solitary impression there. The city often emphasizes that it intends to pay close attention to the word “interim” – so the intervention is only temporary. Apparently a hint for the monument protection. This does not meet with much approval from the Greens. They considered the demolition of an interim venue for an estimated 40 million euros to be economically and ecologically hardly justifiable. Especially since the independent cultural scene is looking for venues. The city will have to hope that monument protection authorities do not listen to local radio. On Wednesday, Nuremberg’s Green Party leader Achim Mletzko said on the radio station “Radio F”: “I think we can only go one step further at the moment if we honestly assure the monument protection that we will tear it down again afterwards.” One could deduce from this that at least parts of the city council hope to be able to act differently after ten years – that is how long the opera interim should last – than initially announced.
Will anything be new about the city council’s decision?
Absolutely. There was a tendency for all three major parties to move the opera to the former Nazi site. Before that, however, there were numerous other alternative areas in the debate. Of these locations, only the “Schöller-Areal” in the north of the city was left, the former seat of the ice cream manufacturer. In contrast to the NS area in the south, this area would have been in private hands. The pure costs for the move should be a little cheaper when moving the opera to the south than to the north, the city reckons with more than 100 million euros. In addition, the city council’s decision should mean the end of all simulation games about a new opera house. The city council group “Politbande” advocates it, the Greens had recently at least expressed willingness to discuss. From a purely financial point of view, the return to an opera house on Richard-Wagner-Platz, which will then be renovated, is even the more weighty decision. We are talking about renovation costs of several hundred million euros, a multiple of the pure interim costs. And the renovation of the opera house is not without its explosions. 30 years after the opening, the interior had been rebuilt by the Nazis – they opened their Nazi party rallies with Wagner’s “Meistersingers” and had the house “cleaned” of the art nouveau elements that had been shaping up to that point. These interventions dominate the interior of the house to this day. A reconstruction of the Art Nouveau is considered hardly possible by experts. Others consider a renovation of the elements from 1935 to be problematic. As a whole, the house is a listed building.
How will the decision in the city council turn out on Wednesday?
All points should be decided with a large majority. The CSU, SPD and the Greens always emphasize aiming for large majorities on major issues. This time, of course, this only succeeds because the most contentious question – whether or not to build the Nazi inner courtyard – is being outsourced. If in 2022 the CSU and the Greens vote together for the inner courtyard and thus overvote the SPD, that would probably mean an end for the black-red town hall alliance. The Greens did not join this after the 2020 local elections.