Example for a systematic international cooperative project to shape the "environment after industry" - indication of the beginning of a new culture of urban construction
 
On first sight, the Bauhaus and the Congress for the New Urbanism (CNU) seem to be like fire and water. The aesthetic worlds of "Bauhaus-Modernism" and the neo-traditionalist construction culture of NU are considered by the public as absolutely THE oppositions. Above all it is a historic opposition which has continued to be effective until the present. But this impression is deceptive. Both institutions have surprising correspondences, they have common roots, even more, they have common experiences: representatives of New Urbanism (NU) worked at the Dessau Bauhaus in the 1990s. The Bauhaus and CNU may not have founded the intercontinental exchange on topics of reforms in urban construction, but in any case they have clarified and intensified it by concrete contributions.
 
The Bauhaus of the 1990s, as the re-opened designing and cultural institution, turned to the discussion about the heritage of Modernism and the consequences of the Industrial Age by means of exemplary designing experiments "in front of its door" (analogously to the historical Bauhaus). The intention was to make the consequences of the industrial Modernism of the 20th century - visible at the "sins of Bitterfeld"- a theme of universal challenge, and to provide practical contributions by specific complex interventions, visible "structures" and international cooperative projects. So the Bauhaus changed its historical role as a promoter of the aesthetic Modernism on a large-scale industrial basis to a promoter of the cultural Post-Modernism on a radically changing industrial basis.
 
The starting point for this concept orientation arose from the upheaval in the GDR in 1989/90 and the subsequent radical change in all spheres of society. This upheaval was accompanied by a loss of identity, so that whole regions faced questions of mere existence. The beginning de-industrialization caused mass unemployment and a devaluation of cities and regions. But there was also a loss of cultural bases, of historical consciousness, mainly suffered during GDR times already, which became even stronger now and hampered the new development of specific identities of the cities and regions with an orientation for the future.
 
The Bauhaus in Dessau was newly founded as an institution in 1987 already - as the so-called "GDR Center of Design". But initially it did not have many opportunities for development. In fall 1989, just in the middle of the first tentative attempts to emancipate as a design institution, there was the "Wende" (radical change) - the Wall was removed. There were indications of a break. The Bauhaus held an international planning seminar on urban renewal in the week from 4 to 9 November 1989, which was later called a "historic" one. The participants came, among others, from Israel, Western Germany or the Soviet Union. During this "Walter Gropius Seminar", the idea of the "Industrial Garden Realm" was born. This idea arose from the impression of the political and economical changes. It described the historical and cultural foundations of a future shaping of the region, its cities and landscapes, and gave a vision of a humane life environment, which respects history and the existing, which is economically viable and returns a devastated environment to an attractive place of living and leisure activities. The first concrete proposals for projects are aimed at the renewal of the city of the Bauhaus, Dessau, which is characterized by gaps caused by war, a car-friendly development after the war, and dilapidation of the old buildings.
 
In September 1990, the Experimental Workshop of the Bauhaus, the institution in charge of the projects for the Industrial Garden Realm, presented basic propositions for the future work. Their inception had a very strong cultural and ecological orientation, criticizing the heritage of the Bauhaus but also praising its experimental potential. This was no program for action yet but the documentation of an attitude towards the future designing tasks. The program was "forged" on the basis of the development of first projects - that means first the creation of references for this attitude, this was the motto, and only then the elaboration of the program and leading it to large-scale realization. Here again we see references to the approach of the NU.
 
By this idea, which was developed to a large extent by Harald Bodenschatz, TU Berlin, important foundations were provided in the following time for the establishment of the Bauhaus as a new, international institution of design. The TU Berlin, together with universities from Poland, Great Britain or Brazil, belonged to the most important partners during the whole time of the projects' development.
 
Proposition: The Bauhaus of the 1990s and the movement of New Urbanism have a common basis: the break with Modernism because of the change of economic and cultural guiding principles ("Post-Fordism", development of the existing structures, cultural diversification…). The difference between the two lies in their regarding cultural contexts, historical references and design styles.
 
For the Bauhaus of the 1990s, this is represented by the projects "Ferropolis", "Piesteritz" and "landart-gardening" in the post-mining landscape, while examples of projects of New Urbanism could be Seaside, Civano or Milwaukee-Downtown. The objective was always the conversion of the urban, suburban and industrial environment evolved from the consequences of high industrialization. Thus both the institutions were no product designers in the narrow sense of the word, but orientated themselves to the extensive design spheres of social spaces: NEIGHBORHOOD, CITY and REGION. These common features come second to the differences in design and the social-economic references. The Bauhaus project was developed under the conditions of economic shrinkage, social tensions with an extremely high rate of unemployment and the radical closing-down of decisive industry, together with the growth of the cities and housing estates on their suburbs "without planning", the fallowing of complete industrial regions and the sudden change of land property conditions as a consequence of the German unification. CNU was founded and developed under the conditions of an unprecedented economic boom, enormous construction activities, a low unemployment rate and a high growth of population. On first sight, the design dimensions of the projects do not give raise to the assumption of any direct correspondence either. Just compare "Ferropolis" to Seaside.
 
Perhaps you may rejoin: But in Europe, there are Leon Krier, Rob Krier and others!. Actually the European Neo-traditionalism however (e.g. school of Prince Charles or "Vision of Europe") have little in common with NU, as such attitudes do not consider themselves as an urban construction movement, and the changes in the industrial society and their spatial/social consequences are no subjects of them. On the contrary, they are an architectural-stylistic attitude which tries to stand its ground within the range of others. But current urban construction in Europe knows a lot of projects which come very near to the attitudes of NU, much has even been realized already, which is being developed in the USA with strong efforts, to mention just the local public traffic. In Europe however, there is no systematic interweaving in the discourse on urbanism which has the power of a movement. Which would have the power to mediate European reform projects of urban construction for the US with programmatic prospects. For the prerequisites of such mediation have still to be created. This includes the knowledge on the state and the development of the culture of urban construction in Europe. The cooperative activities of the Bauhaus and representatives of NU have made a pioneering contribution to this.
 
The mediation of the "oppositions" - better the correspondences - between the Bauhaus of the 1990s and CNU is made through a reference basis: the Charta of CNU (1993) and the "congenial" propositions of the Bauhaus Workshop of 1990 (annex).