The title alone says that conservation is out of the question. But how far should we go? Should the ruins only be secured or even partially reconstructed so that the architecture can be better understood? Or focus on the new use and also use the site for events and adapt it accordingly? Even in the first round of discussions on architecture and monument preservation, completely opposing views were irreconcilably opposed: Winfried Nerdinger, for example, argued for the site to be restored to its 1945 state; in other words, all signs, barriers and some of the trees should be removed so that the dimensions of the site can be surveyed and understood again – which is currently not possible. In contrast, voices were heard, especially from the audience, about how many fans the “Norisring” on the Zeppelinfeld now has for the car races or how popular the rock concerts there are. It also became clear how much the people of Nuremberg value the area as a park and local recreation destination, which was taken away from them in 1933, and how great the longing for an idyll is. One symbol of this is the traditional Park Café Wanner, which was already a popular excursion destination in the 19th century.
It’s best to see for yourself. There is currently another good reason to visit the site – an extensive exhibition on its appropriation after 1945 has just opened: “The site: Documentation. Perspectives. Discussion.” at the Documentation Center Nazi Party Rally Grounds Nuremberg. It runs until March 13.
