Theatre Design & Technology - May 1967 - 32

when such requirements were not made, the ceiling was
too high for a good vertical angle but a new design can no
doubt meet this requirement by incorporating such facilities
in the ceiling and the structural complex of the proscenium.
The most severe criticism on the basis of the modern
standard listed above is directed against the auditorium,
which is alsu totally destroyed.
(A thorough examination of the auditorium follows at this
point and a demonstration that a house with a capacity of
1564 or 1629 meeting modern standards can be enclosed.
Plans in two variations were included.)
The detailed examination of the auditorium reveals that the
preservation of the exterior appearance of the opera, the
box office area, the foyer and the side stair housings can
be combined with a modern and original solution of the
nine points discussed above. Another big advantage accumulates in the reworking of the remaining building material of
the destroyed auditorium which thereby retains its original
quality if not its form.

Fig. 1: Theatre square, seen from across the Elbe.

Once the extension and changes in the exterior of the shop
building is architecturally combined with the auditorium to
maintain its dominant horizontal lines and not extend beyond its walls, the exterior architectural requirements will
be met (Fig. 2 and 31. Such an extension follows the
earlier proposal of Prof. Kreis in 1938, based on the same
structure. This extended the building to the outermost
limits traffic would allow. A review and further examination
must establish the extent to which this plan needs to be
modified in the light of modern technical requirements.
However, the architecture of the main part of the building
is compatible with this extension even if the material demands should require a plainer design. This examination is
supported by a set of schematic plans, scale 1: 500, which
accompanied the proposal.
The rebuilding of the stage house is possible with the reuse of the walls which, for the most part, still are in position and with their enclosure at the same height as before
to maintain exterior silhouette lines (Fig. 3.). Because many
parts of the stage machinery are still usable, another precondition must next be examined.

Fig. 2: Art gallery and Opera House before the destruc·
truction

1. Survey of the Stage Areas. Use of the theatre in the
past has shown that the square arc;) amJ height of the
stage are large enouch even for grand opera. However,
side stages, necessary to change scenery, can be added
without extending their walls beyond the side stair housings of the auditorium (Fig. 3).
2. Survey of the Stage Building. It has long been recognized that production advances required extensive changes
in the stage house, but plans heretofore limited by an existing structure now provide more functional changes.
Fig. 3:
The 1938 plan was limited to the theatre shops; it developed space needed for workshops, production storage
and rehearsal areas. Excluded were administration (general
manager, accountant, etc.). the specialized workshops (painting room, carpenter's shop, etc.), and the large permanent
storage areas. Such a program was feasible because the
excluded functions were provided in other locations outside
the theatre (Taschenberg Palais, Marstall, Devrienstrasse\.
However, since these were also destroyed, is it not necessary to provide for these workshop areas anew in a second
location?
The Kreis Project revealed that an extension of the Opera
was impossible; the construction of a separate wing or con·
nected structure on the side of the Zwinger Museum cannot
be suggested because of certain civic planning considerations.

Ruins of the Opera House. Beginning of security
precautions, 1950. All three photos by Deutsche
Fotothek, Dresden, reproduction courtesy of
Maske und Kothurn.

However, the supervision and conduct of the workshop conditions and activities of both Dresden stages--opera and
legitimate theatre-·and particularly the control Iing conditions
in the latter are so laid out that it would be practical to
construct a new building between them, on the location of
the former Marstalls to house, in common, administration
workshop and storage facilities. With such a combination
the necessity for a double facility is avoided.

(The article will be concluded in the next issue. Editor)

THEATRE DESIGN & TECHNOLOGY

MAY 1967

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Theatre Design & Technology - May 1967