The Architecture Exhibition in Munich 1926

Abstract

As an architect, Theo Lechner was committed to traditional Bavarian design languages and constructional techniques. In this article, a review of a building exhibition staged in Munich in 1926, he is very dismissive of the modernism promoted by the Bauhaus and of any hint of architectural internationalism, which he saw as a manifestation of Soviet communism.

Keywords:

• Architecture
• conservatism
• Heimatkunst
• Bauhaus
• modern architecture
• craftsmanship
• Joseph Wackerle

Notes

1 Translator’s note: Josef Wackerle, born in Partenkirchen in 1880, trained as a sculptor at the School of Applied Arts and Art Academy in Munich. His collaboration with the Porzellan Manufaktur Nymphenburg began in 1905 and lasted for over 50 years. He taught at the arts and crafts school in Berlin from 1909 until 1917, when Richard Riemerschmid, director of the Munich School of Applied Arts, brought him back to Munich as a teacher. From 1923 he was a professor at the Munich Art Academy. His monumental sculpture found great favor with the National Socialist Party, and in 1944 he was included in the list of so-called “Divinely Gifted” German artists, drawn up by Joseph Goebbel’s Propaganda Ministry.

2 The editorial team has on various occasions campaigned vigorously for standardization, which it sees as a means of effectively tackling our dreadful housing shortage. We are not of the opinion that the existential distress of our brothers should be made dependent on the implementation of imported artistic ideas. W. H.

3 Once again, we draw attention to the fact that precisely in those countries that favor small houses to fulfil the claim that my house is my castle [English in original], standardization is pursued much more ruthlessly than in Germany, with its cities of apartment barracks. W. H.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Theo Lechner

Translated from German by Iain Boyd Whyte

Originally published as “Die Baukunstaustellung München 1926,” in Wasmuths Monatshefte für Baukunst und Städtebau, 11, no. 2 (1927): 65–7.