Operative and Cooperative Mediality. The Planning History of the University Architecture in Regensburg 1962-78

从建筑史的角度来看，20世纪60年代和70年代的德国大学基金会可以用一个悖论来描述：它们巨大的建筑体量起源于没有客户，没有建筑师，最终没有建筑任务。更准确地说，各自的机构以及建筑办公室和建筑师团队只在规划和建筑过程中出现。大学的定义一直是争议的主题。在建筑和政治话语中，不同群体之间复杂而漫长的过程和谈判中，通常不会出现检查设计操作历史的机会。然而，这种情况存在于1962-78年雷根斯堡大学的第一个决定性规划和建设阶段。成千上万的照片和文件，以及数百个模型（以照片记录）和概念图纸被保存下来，特别是在“雷根斯堡国家博物馆”的档案中。因此，有可能详细研究新野兽主义建筑的设计过程和建筑系统的思想。更准确地说，我们要问的是，概念和形式是如何发展和交流的，从建筑师到大学委员会，从政府部门到媒体和研究机构，无数的主角和机构扮演了什么角色。国际间的思想交流是通过通信和考察旅行记录下来的。该项目的背景应该追溯到政治和社会环境，其特点是在人造卫星冲击，“教育灾难”和学生激进主义之间的几年里充满活力。关于建筑媒介，方法论在近几十年来得到了扩展，重要的类别是操作图像和操作媒介，主题范围从图像、模型和可视化作为设计过程和沟通工具的意义，从认知过程到媒介作为行动者的地位。在雷根斯堡，草图和概念、图表和平面图、模型、照片和图式之间的各种混合建筑表现形式出现了新的理解方法。有必要询问每种表现形式在设计、决策和交流中所起的作用：如何在不危及中心或与历史城镇中心的联系等关键思想的情况下，为连续设计开辟可能性？如何在长时间内保证连续性和一致性，并包括各种不同的利益？设计艺术品如何在建筑、媒体和政治领域成为可操作的、最终合作的媒介？

From the perspective of architectural history, the German university foundations of the 1960s and 1970s can be characterised by a paradox: Their enormous building volume originated without a client, without an architect - and ultimately without a building task. More precisely, the respective institution as well as the building offices and teams of architects only emerged during the planning and building processes themselves. And the definition of a university is the subject of ongoing controversy. The opportunity to examine the history of a design operation that is embedded as well in complex and protracted processes und negotiations between heterogeneous groups of people as in architectural and political discourse, does not often arise. However, such a case exists regarding the first and decisive planning and construction phase of the University of Regensburg 1962-78. Thousands of photographs and documents as well as hundreds of models (documented in photographs) and conceptual drawings have been preserved, especially in the archive of the ‘Staatliches Bauamt Regensburg’. Thus, it is possible to investigate in detail the design process of the architecture of new brutalism and the idea of building systems. More precisely we have to ask, how concepts and forms were developed and communicated, and what roles played the countless protagonists and institutions involved, from architects to university committees and from ministries to the press and research institutions. An international exchange of ideas is documented through correspondence and study trips. The context of the project should be traced in the political and social environment, which was characterised by great dynamism in the years between the Sputnik shock, the ‘Bildungskatastrophe’ and student activism. Regarding the media of architecture, the methodological apparatus has been expanded in recent decades, important categories are operative imagery und operative mediality, the topics range from the significance of images, models and visualisations as tools for design processes to communication, from epistemic procedures to the status of the medium as an actor. New approaches emerge to understand the diverse and hybrid architectural representations that evolved in Regensburg between sketch and concept, diagram and plan, model, photograph and schema. It is necessary to ask about the role that each representation played in design, decision-making and communication: How was it possible to open up possibilities for successive designs without endangering crucial ideas such as the centre or the connection to the historical town centre? How were continuity and coherence guaranteed over a long period of time and including heterogeneous interests? How do design artefacts become operative and finally cooperative media in the fields of architecture, media and politics?