THE POSITION OF THE LATE MODERN MOVEMENT IN THE GERMAN CULTURAL HERITAGE ACT. A Comparison with the Questions in Slovakia Cover Image
  • Price 2.50 €

POZÍCIA ARCHITEKTÚRY NESKOREJ MODERNY V NEMECKOM PAMIATKOVOM ZÁKONE. Porovnanie s problematikou na Slovensku
THE POSITION OF THE LATE MODERN MOVEMENT IN THE GERMAN CULTURAL HERITAGE ACT. A Comparison with the Questions in Slovakia

Author(s): Alexandra Rumanovská
Subject(s): Cultural Essay, Political Essay, Societal Essay
Published by: Historický ústav SAV, v. v. i.
Keywords: German monument protection law; evaluation methodology of late modern architecture; age category; place of interest

Summary/Abstract: At the end of the 1980s, the German art historian and expert on architectural theory Norbert Huse adopted the term “Unbequeme Denkmalpflege”, best translated as “uncomfortable cultural heritage protection”. This phenomenon was a reaction to the highly lax approach of heritage institutions towards specific architectural works of the 20th century, of which a wide range of examples exists in Germany. Until today, this term can be taken to mean primarily the response of politically influenced architecture of the Nazi or the GDR regimes. As currently much in use, the term perfectly describes all arguments, discussions and emotions that occur in connection with this architecture, and is applicable as well to architecture in Slovakia. Is this kind of architecture worth preserving? If yes, what should be the criteria to evaluate it? The main aim of the discussions is to find a reasonable way to treat the architecture of the previously mentioned regimes, as well as the architecture of 60s and 70s, which is usually wrongly qualified as socialistic architecture. In Germany, a lot of buildings are in danger of being pulled down, since they do not fit with contemporary esthetic views and historical concepts still present in Germany, still aiming towards revitalization and innovation of the cities. Nonetheless, German experts are increasingly concerned about the question of to what extent should cultural heritage protection concern itself with this type of architecture? Much as in Slovakia, it is a commonplace in Germany as well that the objects of cultural heritage protection are historical monuments and buildings – the elementary condition for listing being the age of the building. Nonetheless, the status that the date of the origin of the building is not a legally binding heritage value in Slovakia, is supported by The Declaration Of the Slovak National Council on Cultural Heritage Protection No.49/2002, §2 Basic Definitions, article 1 and 2. According to this Act, every building could be possibly integrated into the system of heritage protection if it complies with at least one of the values given, which are evaluated by the experts and the Monuments Board of the Slovak Republic – without considering the age of the building as a criterion. Many deputies of responsible bodies have provided the argument that this or that building is not “old enough” to be considered as a monument. Even though a monument should first of all be a witness or a source of knowledge for some particular development (historical or human), based on a clear analysis of the Slovak Register of Monuments, we may allege that this architecture is not a priority of the Monuments Board. Even despite the major elapse of time between the 1960s and the year 2013, we can clearly note that for the era after 1945, the Register of Monuments contains 847 objects, out of which only 2 objects were completed after 1960. In the field of cultural heritage and monument protection in Germany, post-194

  • Issue Year: 47/2013
  • Issue No: 3-4
  • Page Range: 170 - 181
  • Page Count: 12
  • Language: Slovak