Reconstructing Urban Life

Reconstructing Urban Life Rebecca M. Choi In 1977, the U.S. National Science Foundation published a study called “Reconstruction Following Disaster,” which suggested that almost all postdisaster recovery models fol- low a predictable, temporal path. Interestingly, three of the four stages in the recovery process imply a functional role for architecture. As outlined in the report, the four stages were “an emergency response, restoration of the restorable, the reconstruction of the destroyed,” and a final phase of “commemoration, betterment, and development.” 1 The last stage is generally thought to be the most logi- cal point of entry for architecture. But in the aftermath of catastrophe, architects may also respond in ways that transcend an exclusively restorative and commemorative function. In doing so, they may expand their role beyond utilitarianism, to integrate a program of communication and participatory action. The temporary structure known as the INFO BOX, built near Potsdamer Platz during its reconstruction fol- lowing the demolition of the Berlin Wall, aspired to this condition. Although tethered to corporate development, it signified urban rebirth. It was a progressive work of archi- tecture that guided redevelopment and engaged the public in an important healing process. A Form of Healing Immediately following the attacks of September 11, 2001, debate emerged across America as to how to rebuild the World Trade Center site in Lower Manhattan. One initiative involved the Pratt Institute Center for Community and Environmental Development, which assembled a group of architects and planners to examine the redevelopment of Berlin’s Potsdamer Platz. 2 The rebuilding challenges there seemed to resonate with New York’s dilemma. Most identifiable were the emotional scars both cities carried as they reckoned with the recon- stitution of emblematic spaces. But it was also hoped that an investigation of Potsdamer Platz would preempt the possibility that rebuilding at Ground Zero would become a spectacle of large-scale development, as in Berlin. Above top: Before World War II, Potsdamer Platz was Berlin’s transportation hub and a vital core for its economy. It was heralded as the principal crossroads of Europe. Above bottom: Following the destruction of war and the clearing of a zone of death near the Berlin Wall, the site regained prominence in the reconstruction of the unified city. Initially, however, only the INFO BOX stood amid the chaos of redevelopment. Opposite: Meeting of Berlin’s past and future. Photo by Christian Pohlert. The architect Lebbeus Woods has written that post- disaster recovery starts with the forming of a “scab.” For Woods, the scab is a first layer of reconstruction, which shields an exposed interior space or void and protects a space during its transformation. 3 In Berlin, the dis- course of rebuilding began with such an understanding, and unlike Ground Zero, where a sense of emptiness remained as reconstruction efforts lagged, the renewal of Potsdamer Platz was primed by a physical form: the INFO BOX. Critics have rarely recognized the importance of this work, which provided a physical scab and created a responsive, participatory environment that communicated a message of progress and hope. From Hitler’s rise to power in 1933 until the fall of the Wall in 1989, Potsdamer Platz endured multiple cycles of collapse and regeneration. Before World War II it was recognized as the point where “principal east-west and north-south routes in Europe” crossed; but it was Choi / Reconstructing Urban Life