ABSTRACT
More than anything, Norman Foster’s renovation of the Reichstag as the seat of the Bundestag casts doubt upon German transparency ideology and its near mystical association with democracy (Figure 7.1). Unlike the Behnisch building, whose glazed outer skin is as transparent as possible, the Reichstag is clad in solid stone. With the exception of the West Portal, whose large glass plates are obscured by the massive columns standing in front, transparent glass figures minimally on the Reichstag’s exteriors. Even interior transparency is limited to parts of the circulation areas and the plenary chamber’s enclosure. In fact, the competition brief seemed to recognize the challenges, if not utter impossibility, of trying to implement architectural transparency in the existing stone structure by prescribing a transparent plenary chamber rather than a transparent building. Nevertheless, transparency figured prominently in many of the competition design schemes, including the three runners-up for first prize, Santiago Calatrava’s design with a new glass cupola, Pi de Bruijn’s glass saucer-shaped plenary chamber
situated next to the old Reichstag, and Foster’s glass “umbrella.” Since the initial competition, transparent ideology has been present in the debates about the renovation and in the literature about the project written by Foster and others. The New York Times announced the opening of the Reichstag in 1999 by writing,
The new Germany, exquisitely sensitive to its past, informally welcomed back its Parliament to a refurbished Reichstag in Berlin. Topped with glass to symbolize the political transparency on which the country has based its postwar revival, the building was restored at a cost of $330 million by British architect Sir Norman Foster.2
