Olympic Stadium Munich

Building design
A bird's eye view of the Munich Olympic Stadium. Photo: Pxhere

A bird's eye view of the Munich Olympic Stadium. Photo: Pxhere

Munich’s Olympic Stadium with its striking tent roof is now one of the modern landmarks of the Bavarian capital. It was built in 1972 for the Summer Olympics. In 1974, the German national team won the soccer World Cup here and the Olympic Stadium was the home ground of FC Bayern Munich until 2005. You can read all about the famous stadium here.

Munich’s Olympic Stadium with its striking tent roof is now one of the modern landmarks of the Bavarian capital. It was built in 1972 for the Summer Olympics. In 1974, the German national team won the soccer World Cup here and the Olympic Stadium was the home ground of FC Bayern Munich until 2005. You can read all about the famous stadium here.

Even after the First World War, there were plans to build a large stadium in Munich for the increasingly popular sport of soccer. However, the city initially opted for Teutonia-Platz, a large open sports ground built in 1921. At the beginning of the National Socialist era, a stadium for 60,000 to 80,000 spectators was discussed, which was to be similar to the Reichssportfeld in Berlin. However, these plans did not come to fruition, and even in the post-war period, ideas for a large stadium met with little approval – even though Munich was the only German city with two Bundesliga clubs at the time.

It was only the city’s bid for the Summer Olympics in 1972 that led to the decision to build a large and modern stadium. This was built on the largely undeveloped Oberwiesenfeld, which was to become the centerpiece of the sports facilities. Thanks to its proximity to the city center, the city was able to advertise with the motto “Olympia of short distances”, which contributed to the awarding of the games to the state capital.

In 1964, the city of Munich announced an architectural competition for the planning of a large stadium. The offices of Henschker from Braunschweig and Deiss from Munich won with their stadium design for 100,000 spectators. The plans were part of an overall concept that also included a multi-purpose hall and swimming pool. In 1966, the IOC announced that Munich would be awarded the Games.

However, the original plans for the construction of the stadium were criticized for their lack of urban cohesion. It was important to the Association of German Architects to avoid monumentality due to Germany’s National Socialist past. The plans were therefore rejected and a new architectural competition was held in 1967, with one of the designs coming from Behnisch & Partner. Due to the tent roof construction, the jury initially classified it as too daring, but the juror Egon Eiermann passionately supported it.

In the end, Behnisch & Partner won the competition to design the Munich Olympic Stadium. It was designed for around 80,000 spectators, impressed with its landscape architecture and was characterized by its tent roof construction. It thus fulfilled the Games’ leitmotif of “human scale, lightness, bold elegance and the unity of landscape and nature.”

To make room for the new arena, workers first demolished the terminal buildings of the old Oberwiesenfeld airfield. In the summer of 1969, construction work began on the Werner-von-Linde-Halle, a volleyball hall, the Olympic cycling stadium, the Olympic village and the Olympic stadium itself. Stations for the underground and suburban trains were also built.

During this time, there was a spirit of optimism throughout Munich. In preparation for the Olympic Games, a new pedestrian zone was created in the city center between Marienplatz and Stachus. Subway visions were realized and many other construction sites were created to prepare the city for the Olympic Games.

Architect Behnisch and Lord Mayor Hans-Jochen Vogel wanted the Munich Olympic Stadium to be a “democratic sports venue”. They wanted to create a contrast to the Nazi-influenced 1936 Olympic Games in Berlin and at the same time improve Munich’s reputation.

The Munich Olympic Stadium was completed in spring 1972 and was immediately used for test competitions. The official opening took place on May 26, 1972 with the international soccer match between the Federal Republic of Germany and the Soviet Union. The hosts won 4:1 in the sold-out stadium. Just one month later, FC Bayern became German champions in a match against FC Schalke 04 in the Olympic Stadium.

The 1972 Summer Olympics began on August 26, 1972 in Munich’s Olympic Stadium. The main users of the stadium during the games were the track and field athletes and the footballers. However, the festive atmosphere came to an abrupt end on 5 September 1972 with the hostage-taking in Munich: the Palestinian terrorist organization “Black September” murdered two members of the Israeli team and took nine others hostage. The failed rescue operation took place 18 hours later. The next day, a memorial service was held in the Olympic Stadium. After the attack, many called for the Olympic Games to be canceled. Although the competitions were postponed for a day, they continued.

By the way: You can read more about the 1972 Olympic Games here.

After the 1972 Summer Olympics, FC Bayern mainly played home games in the stadium. The club was based in Munich’s Olympic Stadium until 2005. The 1974 Football World Cup was also partly held in the Olympic Stadium, as were national team matches, athletics competitions, cultural and religious events and, since 1982, concerts. In 2002, the European Athletics Championships were also held in Munich’s Olympic Stadium.

When it was completed, the Olympic Stadium was the second largest stadium in Germany after the then outdated Olympic Stadium Berlin. It is one of the most important buildings of the post-war period and was the heart of FC Bayern Munich until the Allianz Arena was built. Even during the games, reporters around the world praised the special stadium architecture with its tent roof construction as “light and elegant”. To this day, the roof of the Munich Olympic Stadium is considered very modern and far ahead of its time. Art historians consider the construction to be the most significant building in Munich due to its shape, transparency and translucency. In 2015, Frei Otto, architect of the tent roof, received the Pritzker Prize for his life’s work. The Olympic roof is his best-known work.

The embedding of the stadium in the landscape architecture according to Günter Behnisch’s design is also still seen as positive today. The planners resisted the “danger of gigantism” and instead chose buildings that blended harmoniously into the Olympic Park. Due to the stadium’s earth structure, it doesn’t seem that big to visitors at first, but the view into the main stadium is all the more surprising.

The Munich Olympic Stadium with its tent roof construction has been a listed building since 1997, as has the Olympic Park ensemble. The arena is protected until 2080 by copyright, which is now held by Günter Behnisch’s son Stefan Behnisch. During this time, the stadium may not be demolished and may only be slightly altered.

Today, the Olympiastadion München is a multifunctional stadium in Munich with just under 70,000 seats. In addition to soccer and sporting events, many cultural events take place here, from Cirque du Soleil to music concerts and the German Chess League.

By the end of 2015, more than 50 million spectators had visited Munich’s Olympic Stadium. Since professional soccer moved to the Allianz Arena, there are fewer visitors to the Olympic Stadium, around 100,000 per year. An important attraction is the tent roof, which visitors can climb with climbing equipment. At the top there is a rope slide that leads into the stadium.

The Olympic Stadium is open daily from 9 am and closes at 5 or 6 pm depending on the month. Ticket reservations are not necessary. Admission without a guided tour costs 3.50 euros per person. Guided tours on the subject of sport and architecture, the tent roof tour as well as the flying fox flight and abseiling into the stadium can be booked on site or online.

You can find out all about the Olympic Stadium in Berlin here. We also present even more stadiums here.

POTREBBE INTERESSARTI ANCHE

What does rural life really look like today?

Building design

The Future

Is that really Stalin rolling towards you? Yes, the man-sized cardboard figure in the little electric trolley on the world-famous, sloping gallery of New York’s Guggenheim Museum is Stalin. Why is Stalin in the Guggenheim? Because the Soviet leader reshaped large parts of the Soviet Union after the Second World War, and that’s exactly what the exhibition “Countryside, The Future” is about.

The exhibition “Countryside, The Future” at the Guggenheim Museum in New York aims to show the real country life: more futuristic and smarter than any big city. Rem Koolhaas, AMO (the research department of OMA) and many other participants examine the causes of radical change in the world’s rural regions.

Is that really Stalin rolling towards you? Yes, the man-sized cardboard figure in the little electric trolley on the world-famous, sloping gallery of New York’s Guggenheim Museum is Stalin. Why is Stalin in the Guggenheim? Because the Soviet leader reshaped large parts of the Soviet Union after the Second World War, and that is exactly what this exhibition is about: the reshaping of rural areas.
The exhibition “Countryside, The Future” covers a broad arc from the countryside to the landscape, agriculture and villages through world and human history. The path up the Guggenheim rotunda leads the visitor from the ancient Romans and Chinese to Marie Antoinette and her country houses to the conquest of the American prairies by white settlers; from Hitler’s highways to Chile after Pinochet, from nuclear fusion to the mammoths in Siberia, which can now be bred because the soil freed from permafrost releases their DNA – but unfortunately also releases toxic methane gases. The spiral-shaped gallery is filled with photos, maps, tapestries, video projections, paintings, explanatory panels and screens, and it doesn’t help the overview that some of the information panels are placed on the floor and can only be read in the opposite direction.
read in the opposite direction.

The exhibition, which winds its way up six levels, was conceived by Rem Koolhaas, the Dutch architect, architectural philosopher, former journalist and screenwriter who now teaches at Harvard University, together with Samir Bantal, who runs AMO, and Troy Conrad Therrien from the Guggenheim Museum. Of course, numerous others were also involved: Architects from the Office for Metropolitan Architecture, founded by Koolhaas in Rotterdam, as well as students and academics from the Harvard Graduate School of Design, the University of Nairobi, Kenya, Wageningen University in the Netherlands, the Design Academy Eindhoven, Waseda University in Tokyo and the Central Academy of Fine Arts in Beijing. This large number of collaborators alone may explain the wealth of material.
Koolhaas, who has already designed the Guggenheim Hermitage Museum in Las Vegas, became famous in the USA primarily through his 1978 book “Delirious New York: A Retroactive Manifesto for Manhattan”. It is therefore somewhat ironic that a proven urbanist is now enthusiastic about country life. Koolhaas believes that it is not the city that has a future, but only the countryside, because that is where interesting changes are taking place. According to UN statistics from 2014, half of the world’s population lives in the countryside. In fact, 98 percent of the earth’s surface is non-urban. However, the exhibition organizers include a great deal: from the Sahara to the Himalayas to the Barrier Reef, from the university campus in Silicon Valley to the industrial park near The Hague.

The engine of the greatest change: technological progress

At the beginning of the museum ramp, visitors are greeted by a Swiss village near St. Moritz, where Koolhaas once spent his vacations. Here, the size of the medieval gates defines which vehicles can pass through. Today, wealthy city dwellers have moved in from Milan, and the doors of their new houses are based on the medieval design, but no longer on the dimensions. This is an example of how “gentrification” and technology are shaping the countryside – the rediscovery of the village as a place to live is based on technological progress.
The dramatic changes in the rise of Africa and China are also linked to the internet, a story that has remained untold to this day, says Koolhaas – at least from the perspective of city dwellers. To change this, the exhibition is packed with technical gimmicks: from the underwater drone and the movable tin toy to the high-tech tractor outside the door, which is controlled via a tablet, and, not quite so high-tech, Stalin on wheels. No wonder the “New York Times” is reminded of the aesthetics of a Soviet world exhibition pavilion.

Technical agriculture

The internet, robots and artificial intelligence have made it possible for people who are
who live alone and far away from the city to communicate and develop new social models. “We don’t have to fear technology,” says Koolhaas.
As the exhibition shows, in Tanzania, for example, banks are being replaced by a payment system using smartphones called M-Pesa; in China, farmers not only offer their products for sale via the Internet, but also sell and ship them.
The landscape in Africa, for example, is changing dramatically as a result of modern travel habits, where gorillas are now admired and photographed rather than hunted. In Qatar, technology (and oil money) has enabled the country to set up its own agriculture within a short space of time. For a long time, the only thing Qatar produced was camel fodder for races. Food was imported from the surrounding Arab states, above all Saudi Arabia. In 2008, however, the sheikhs cut off exports to the Gulf state. As a result, the Emir of Qatar switched to imports from Turkey and Morocco and also had 4,000 cows, including stables and milking machines, flown in. Today, Qatar can sell mozzarella to the US bases in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The new landscapes are also characterized by modern, tiny nano-robots. Vegetable and fruit cultivation in Holland, for example, is now computer-controlled and extremely effective: Dutch farmers are able to grow greenhouses the size of 23 soccer pitches. Some, on the other hand, are downsizing using pixel farming, where computer-controlled mini-drones nurture individual plants in tiny cells measured in square centimetres. The opposite is happening on farms in the USA, which have also been retrofitted; there, a single tractor can now cultivate a field that stretches as far as Canada.

The exhibition also lists how dictators repeatedly tried to reshape their country, often at the cost of thousands of lives. For example, after the Second World War, Stalin wanted to transform huge regions of the USSR – from Kazakhstan to Ukraine – to supply them with food. He sent a million students to the countryside, had “unreliable elements” deported to the gulags and rivers in Siberia diverted or even – in vain – turned back.
Following Stalin’s example, the Chinese party leader Mao also formed his “Great Leap Forward”, which cost the lives of up to 70 million Chinese. Libya’s ruler Muammar Gaddafi apparently also had similar megalomaniac ideas.
Koolhaas contrasts the Stalinist plans with the ideas of the German architect Herman Sörgel, who in the 1920s wanted to connect Africa with Europe to form the continent of “Alantropa” by lowering the level of the Mediterranean by a hundred meters and building dams at Gibraltar and Suez. This remained theory, as is further argued, unlike Hitler’s highway construction, which, true to the Nazi ideology of worshipping the country folk, was intended to raise life for the rural population to the level of city dwellers. This was followed by the Morgenthau Plan, a de-industrialization of Germany after the Second World War that was considered at short notice by the American Roosevelt administration and heavily exploited by Nazi propaganda. This would have been accompanied not only by a ban on tractors, but also a ban on weapons. At least there is no cardboard Hitler on wheels in the exhibition.

Immigration leaves its mark

Change in the countryside is often brought about by immigration. The exhibition aims to prove this with an Italian example: There are almost deserted Catholic villages there to which Muslims from the Middle East have moved, who are now taking over church services (for a fee), which are becoming too difficult for the ageing Catholics. This is revitalizing the country – the exhibition reports no problems.
More dramatic, however, according to another article, was the immigration to the west of America, where the land was supposedly given to the whites by divine will for colonization and an entire continent was conquered and “cleansed” of natives within less than a hundred years. And also turned the prairies into agricultural monocultures. However, these are fiercely defended by today’s inhabitants against the liberal city dwellers. However, you don’t see many country people in the pictures in the exhibition. There are hardly any olive-picking farmers, tomato planting migrants or shepherds tending sheep; one gets the impression that all agriculture is nowadays controlled from a cell phone in the office.
Some New York critics also take offense at this: they accuse Koolhaas of showing the country from the perspective of the naïve, astonished city dweller. The magazine “Metropolis” attested to Koolhaas’ neoliberal and at the same time sentimental view of the country. And: the show produced an overabundance of disorganized content without a common theme. The “New York Magazine” was even harsher: Koolhaas discovers people like himself all over the world and in history, and the exhibition is less an anthology of revelations than a childish wonder run amok.

Read the abridged version in G+L 05/2020.

Off to Weimar!

Building design

Welcome to Weimar for many restorers on March 29. The first joint conference of the VDR specialist groups Archaeological Objects, Ethnographic Objects, Folklore and Ethnology and Arts and Crafts Objects will take place there until April 1 under the motto “Curious, Rare, Strange”. The conference is being held under the patronage of the State Secretary for Culture and Europe in the Thuringian […]

Welcome to Weimar for many restorers on March 29. The first joint conference of the VDR specialist groups Archaeological Objects, Ethnographic Objects, Folklore and Ethnology and Arts and Crafts Objects will take place there until April 1 under the motto “Curious, Rare, Strange”.

The symposium is being held under the patronage of the State Secretary for Culture and Europe in the Thuringian State Chancellery, Dr. Babette Winter, and is being organized with the kind support of the Thuringian State Office for the Preservation of Monuments and Archaeology and the Bauhaus University Weimar.

Dealing with a variety of different material groups and their combinations is an elementary part of the job description in the field of object conservation. However, object conservators are very often confronted with complex issues that present them with major challenges. Especially when little is known or has been published about the type of object, material or production technique. Different materials, for example, may be rare in one specialist area but more common in another, or may exhibit very different states of preservation and damage patterns.

Sometimes the identification or investigation (documentation of damage patterns, material analyses, etc.) causes difficulties. Sometimes ethical issues call for new and creative approaches when developing a conservation concept. In a joint exchange and with the help of the experiences and different perspectives of colleagues from the three specialist areas mentioned above, suggestions and methods as well as new approaches are to be gained for one’s own area of work. RESTAURO reports.