Jewish Paths into Architecture. German-Jewish Architects in the First Half of the 20th Century

该项目探讨了犹太人在世纪上半叶寻求进入德国建筑专业领域所采取的道路，沿着19世纪的史前史，一直延伸到1933年后德国赖希内的迫害和移民时期。本研究的主要重点是犹太建筑师在20世纪20年代的培训和专业化的途径。出生于19世纪80年代的这一代人在德国帝国的最后几年完成了教育，对20世纪世纪的建筑发展具有特殊的重要性。当代人经常观察到许多具有犹太背景的建筑师发挥了显着的作用。该项目以关注该专业历史的问题为指导，同时也考虑了更普遍的建筑历史背景。希望成为专业建筑师的年轻犹太人选择了什么途径？他们的个人和家庭背景是什么，他们的目标是什么？他们在哪里学习和接受实践培训？犹太人与非犹太人的比例是多少？犹太建筑师之间是否存在特定的网络？他们与他们学习和培训的非犹太同事以及专业协会有什么联系？建筑师与犹太人和非犹太人的承包方和雇主之间的关系在私下或公开场合发挥了什么作用？犹太建筑师得到了什么样的合同，他们在当代建筑辩论中如何定位自己？非犹太同学和专业同事对他们的犹太竞争对手或合作伙伴有什么反应？最后一句：在德国赖希的边界内外存在着什么样的交流渠道，在1933年以后的迫害和消灭期间，这些关系产生了什么样的影响？对专业化、建筑和市场及其与政治文化的联系的研究需要一种考虑到传记和当代历史方面以及制度史和建筑史方面的方法。鉴于建筑领域的培训和职业轨迹的历史在很大程度上研究不足，对这一领域的犹太参与者的研究不仅将提供有关犹太建筑历史的新知识，而且还将为整个行业的更广泛的历史提供新的知识。然而，在犹太建筑师“群体”的情况下，另一个关键问题涉及这些建筑师自己或其他人对犹太身份的自我归属。这就提出了1933年以前的时期以及迫害和移民时期的问题。通过考察德国犹太建筑师移民的途径，我们可以对他们在1933年和1945年之后的持续活动得出结论。

The project explores the paths taken by Jews seeking to enter the professional field of architecture in Germany in the first half of the 20th century, along with its pre-history in the 19th century extending into the period of persecution and emigration after 1933 within the German Reich. The prime focus of this study is on the pathways of training and professionalization taken by Jewish architects during the 1920s. The generation born in the 1880s, who completed their education in the final years of Imperial Germany, was of exceptional importance for the development of architecture in the 20th century. Contemporaries often observed that numerous architects with Jewish backgrounds played a notable role.The project is guided by questions focusing on the history of the profession, while also considering the context of the more general history of architecture. What approaches were chosen by young Jews wishing to become professional architects? What were their personal and family backgrounds and what were their goals? Where did they study and receive practical training? What were the percentages involved of Jews to non-Jews? Did specific networks exist among Jewish architects? What were their connections to non-Jewish colleagues where they studied and trained, as well as to professional associations? What role was played by the relations between architects and contracting parties and employers, both Jewish and non-Jewish, privately or in public? What contracts did Jewish architects obtain and how did they position themselves in the contemporary debates on architecture? What were the reactions by non-Jewish fellow students and professional colleagues to their Jewish competitors or partners? Finally: what channels of exchange existed over and beyond the borders of the German Reich, and what was the impact of these relations during the period of persecution and annihilation after 1933?Investigation of professionalization, architecture and the market and its connections to political culture requires an approach that takes into account biographical and contemporary historical aspects, as well as aspects of institutional history and architectural history. Given the fact that the history of training and career trajectory in the field of architecture is largely under-researched, a study of the Jewish participants in this field will provide not only new knowledge on the history of Jewish architecture but also for the broader history of the profession as a whole. However, in the case of the “group“ of Jewish architects, an additional key question involves the self-ascriptions of Jewish identities by those architects themselves or such ascriptions of Jewish identity by others. This raises questions for the period before 1933 and for the period of persecution and emigration. Examination of the paths taken by German-Jewish architects into and within emigration allows us to draw conclusions on their continuing activity both after 1933 and after 1945.