DOI article:
Martyn, Peter: The brave new-old capital city: Questions relating to the rebuilding and remodelling of Warsaw’s architectural profile from the late-1940s until 1956
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.23901#0218
Peter Martyn
a „second-rate" historic monument and
spared, apparently by default, the standard
BOS treatment of having its burnt-out upper
levels ripped down to leave only the ground-
floor intact, the palace was reconstructed
from the beginning of 1948 under the super-
vision of engineer-architect Bruno
Zborowski. While the outbuildings were
demolished, parts of the surviving palace
construction were subjected to architectural
rectification: side galleries linking the corner
alcoves were partly removed and original dec-
orative elements, including a frieze, bas-
reliefs and crowning cornice, destroyed as
superfluous 19th-century accretions (fig. 9).
The mansard roof and hipped lanterns
crowning the alcoves are pure inventions that
prior to that time had never existed on the
Warsaw skyline33. Stepinski had already
revealed this same penchant for high
mansard roofs when, much to the amuse-
ment, as he himself freely admitted, of the
teams of builders with whom he was work-
ing, he overexaggerated the ridge height of
John's House and had to have it lowered. In
this case, the final effect was at least harmo-
nious. On the other hand, there was no
excuse for placing a Baroque roof on the
restored walls of a neo-Classical town house,
as occurred on the corner of Bednarska and
Sowia streets during the rebuilding" of
Mariensztat34.
Kuzma and Stepinski collaborated on
a large array of prestigious reconstruction
projects. They supervised the restoration of
one of Warsaw's finest monuments of archi-
tecture, the Krasihski residence, known also
as the Palace of the Republic (i.e. the Polish
Rzeczpospolitd). In his short monograph, S.
Mossakowski suggested that confused inter-
pretation of a text accompanying the
palace's oldest inventory is the likeliest expla-
nation for introducing a loggia to the garden
facade where, in historic reality, one had
never actually existed". Although the visual
effect was far from a bad one, this was either
architectural correction carried out by men
who really should have known better than to
try and improve on Tilman van Gameran, or
there exists a more down-to-earth explana-
tion: in their proverbial haste, perhaps the
builders had, quite simply, begun to raise
33 A. SARATOWICZ, Patac Przebendowskich, Warszawa 1990, p. 115-118.
34 J. ZIELINSKI, Atlas dawnej architektury ulic iplacdw Warszawy, vol. I, Warszawa 1997, p. 128. The author vents
his spleen by concluding that, in the wake of their partial or even complete demolition, a series of town houses
fronting Bednarska Street „were reconstructed in a way which went against all the principles of conservation". The
cornerhouse is currently being redeveloped in what Zielihski believes will accord with something he defines as
„good Warsaw tradition" (dobre tradycje warszawskie). Although in the case of this modest cornerhouse there is no
particular reason to regret the recent extension, the grounds for believing that such traditions are being propagat-
ed in current times are at best spurious. As regards the fate of Mariensztat's late-18th- and early-19th-century
townhouses after March 1948, here is the work schedule under which Jankowski, Knothe and Stepinski had to
operate from 13th June to 21st July 1949; i.e. to the last day before the Thoroughfare, of which this /housing/
district formed an integral part, was opened to the „toiling masses" of Poland:
midday to 2pm: on-site inspection (mornings were spent at the BOS studios);
2 — 3.15 pm: lunch (obiad);
3.30 - 5 pm: in the studio. Directing of work and helping with drawing of plans, elevations etc;
5 - 7.30 pm: further on-site inspection or in conference at the studio;
7.30 - 10 pm: designing (at that time they were working on plans for a [new?] City Hall and the Home
Office).
Matters relating to management and finance or so-called ..special work"; e. g. writing arti-
cles for the press, incl. Stolica, or attending meetings. STEPINSKI 1984, p. 64.
UPDATE: the storm-in-a-teacup drama on Bednarska is continuing to unfold; refer to my statement in an article
published in the ..Capital City" supplement (Gazeta Stoleczna) of Gazeta Wyborcza on 23rd February 2001. The
moves taken by members of the Society for the Protection of Historic Monuments (TOnZ) to have this house
removed from the list of monuments under the chief conservator's protection is a reckless one, and may well have
very serious consequences for any number of other buildings reconstructed in the city under similar circumstances
during this period.
35 S. MOSSAKOWSKI, Patac Krasinskich, Warszawa 1972.
214
a „second-rate" historic monument and
spared, apparently by default, the standard
BOS treatment of having its burnt-out upper
levels ripped down to leave only the ground-
floor intact, the palace was reconstructed
from the beginning of 1948 under the super-
vision of engineer-architect Bruno
Zborowski. While the outbuildings were
demolished, parts of the surviving palace
construction were subjected to architectural
rectification: side galleries linking the corner
alcoves were partly removed and original dec-
orative elements, including a frieze, bas-
reliefs and crowning cornice, destroyed as
superfluous 19th-century accretions (fig. 9).
The mansard roof and hipped lanterns
crowning the alcoves are pure inventions that
prior to that time had never existed on the
Warsaw skyline33. Stepinski had already
revealed this same penchant for high
mansard roofs when, much to the amuse-
ment, as he himself freely admitted, of the
teams of builders with whom he was work-
ing, he overexaggerated the ridge height of
John's House and had to have it lowered. In
this case, the final effect was at least harmo-
nious. On the other hand, there was no
excuse for placing a Baroque roof on the
restored walls of a neo-Classical town house,
as occurred on the corner of Bednarska and
Sowia streets during the rebuilding" of
Mariensztat34.
Kuzma and Stepinski collaborated on
a large array of prestigious reconstruction
projects. They supervised the restoration of
one of Warsaw's finest monuments of archi-
tecture, the Krasihski residence, known also
as the Palace of the Republic (i.e. the Polish
Rzeczpospolitd). In his short monograph, S.
Mossakowski suggested that confused inter-
pretation of a text accompanying the
palace's oldest inventory is the likeliest expla-
nation for introducing a loggia to the garden
facade where, in historic reality, one had
never actually existed". Although the visual
effect was far from a bad one, this was either
architectural correction carried out by men
who really should have known better than to
try and improve on Tilman van Gameran, or
there exists a more down-to-earth explana-
tion: in their proverbial haste, perhaps the
builders had, quite simply, begun to raise
33 A. SARATOWICZ, Patac Przebendowskich, Warszawa 1990, p. 115-118.
34 J. ZIELINSKI, Atlas dawnej architektury ulic iplacdw Warszawy, vol. I, Warszawa 1997, p. 128. The author vents
his spleen by concluding that, in the wake of their partial or even complete demolition, a series of town houses
fronting Bednarska Street „were reconstructed in a way which went against all the principles of conservation". The
cornerhouse is currently being redeveloped in what Zielihski believes will accord with something he defines as
„good Warsaw tradition" (dobre tradycje warszawskie). Although in the case of this modest cornerhouse there is no
particular reason to regret the recent extension, the grounds for believing that such traditions are being propagat-
ed in current times are at best spurious. As regards the fate of Mariensztat's late-18th- and early-19th-century
townhouses after March 1948, here is the work schedule under which Jankowski, Knothe and Stepinski had to
operate from 13th June to 21st July 1949; i.e. to the last day before the Thoroughfare, of which this /housing/
district formed an integral part, was opened to the „toiling masses" of Poland:
midday to 2pm: on-site inspection (mornings were spent at the BOS studios);
2 — 3.15 pm: lunch (obiad);
3.30 - 5 pm: in the studio. Directing of work and helping with drawing of plans, elevations etc;
5 - 7.30 pm: further on-site inspection or in conference at the studio;
7.30 - 10 pm: designing (at that time they were working on plans for a [new?] City Hall and the Home
Office).
Matters relating to management and finance or so-called ..special work"; e. g. writing arti-
cles for the press, incl. Stolica, or attending meetings. STEPINSKI 1984, p. 64.
UPDATE: the storm-in-a-teacup drama on Bednarska is continuing to unfold; refer to my statement in an article
published in the ..Capital City" supplement (Gazeta Stoleczna) of Gazeta Wyborcza on 23rd February 2001. The
moves taken by members of the Society for the Protection of Historic Monuments (TOnZ) to have this house
removed from the list of monuments under the chief conservator's protection is a reckless one, and may well have
very serious consequences for any number of other buildings reconstructed in the city under similar circumstances
during this period.
35 S. MOSSAKOWSKI, Patac Krasinskich, Warszawa 1972.
214