Page 4 - AIT0517_Brenzkirche

SERIEN STUDENTENARBEIT • STUDENT WORK

Universität Stuttgart W hat is our knowledge of the past worth for the future? How do we preserve histo-
ry in the building fabric? Which is the role played in this by monument preser-
vation, cultural identity and present-day use? Every reconstruction, every conservation
www.uni-stuttgart.de or extension is based on the conviction that something is absolutely worth being shown
1829 Gründungsjahr because it manifests the attitude of an era which is past. The point is to make it possible
1200 Studierende in der Architekturfakultät for future generations to experience the connections between the architecture and the
history – to reconstruct them, to expose them or to extend them in such a way that they
are once again integrated into the urban structure. In the case of the Stuttgart
Brenzkirche, it is about a sacral building which is used by the Protestant congregation
yet, due to its façade which was modified in the course of its history, is neither seen nor
accept as a church by the parish. The church built according to plans by the Stuttgart
architect Alfred Daiber was inaugurated in 1933. The new building in the style of the
modern age was a striking presence, white plastered with a flat roof, bands of windows
and a rounded corner on the street side opposite the distinguished Staatliche Akademie
Veränderungen v.l.n.r.: 1933, 1939, 1947, Entwurf • Changes left to right: 1933, 1939, 1947, sketch der Bildenden Künste on Killesberg. Due to political changes at the end of the 1930s,
criticism among the parishioners became louder regarding the modern building. When
Zwischen Akademie der Künste und Wohnsiedlungen ... • Between the Akademie der Bildenden Künste and ...
the structure of the Reichsgartenschau was placed within direct sight of the Brenzkirche,
it was irrevocably decided to change the external appearance of the church. In 1939 and
under the construction supervision of Rudolf Lempp, the flat roof disappeared under a
saddle roof and the rounded corner at the entrance was bricked up with right angles.
Additional external conversion measures – such as the straightening of the stairwell gla-
zing at the north façade or the enveloping of the open bell tower – caused the original
style to disappear completely. In 1944, the Brenzkirche was severely damaged during air
raids but, already two years later, reconstructed in the modified state of 1939. For this
as well, Rudolf Lempp was in charge of the construction management and, this time,
he not only modified the external appearance of the church but also the community hall
itself. Lempp changed the asymmetrical orientation due to the incidence of light from
the west which Daiber had planned for the community hall with an equal row of wind-
ows at the east façade. When the Brenzkirche was included on the list of cultural monu-
ments in 1983, its redesigned state was made manifest. In the community, however, the
... könnte ein neues Gemeindezentrum entstehen. • ... housing estates a new community centre could develop.
question arose as to which historic part of the church should have been preserved.
Acceptance of its continuous change

Changes seldom follow smoothly in sequence – whether they are social, political or
architectural. On a building, for instance, the transition between the historic section and
a new addition makes this change clear. Whether this connecting situation is obvious
in a positive or in a negative way – it is always the special feature of the building. The
transition attracts attention since it is initially irritating and becomes interesting whene-
ver the observer focuses on what has happened. Whether the individual building com-
ponents merge seamlessly, stand out with a gap or whether the distance is deliberately
made obvious with a clear side-by-side arrangement is decisive for the emerging overall
appearance since it shows the attitude to the building’s history. The forms of the archi-
tecturally visible acceptance of history turn a historic building into a construction of the
present time. This idea which sees the perfection in showing this process was also the
approach taken in the project of converting and extending the Brenzkirche.

History produces layers
Der Gemeindesaal folgt der baulichen Asymmetrie. • The community hall follows the architectural asymmetry.

Only one temporal layer can today be perceived at the Brenzkirche which makes it more
difficult for our society to understand this building. A theoretical approach in the case
of the listed Brenzkirche is to narratively show to the future generations the events affec-
ting a building in equal measures for all periods. The reconstruction – the reassembling
– may in the case of the church mean the re-narrating of its historical layers. Each of its
construction phases has its justification and might be expressed in the temporal
sequence. In the first phase, the building for the parish was constructed which might
be possible to be reconstructed in the style of the modern age since the rounded corner
and the flat roof as well as the original window openings still exists. It would be a recon-
struction in the sense of a subtraction so that something lying underneath can be expo-
sed – like in an archaeological process. In the second construction phase, the rectory
was built. This part of the ensemble could thus be preserved with the added saddle
roof. The extension of the church into a community centre with a kindergarten, additio-
nal assembly rooms and a community library would meet the present-day requirement
of the grown parish. The sequence of reconstruction, preservation and extension would
be a comprehensible reproduction of the historical, seamless development.

070 • AIT 5.2017