Karl Friedrich Schinkel and the administration of architectural aesthetics in Prussia, 1810-1840. (Volumes I and II

To date, there is no substantial discussion of Karl Friedrich Schinkel's work as aesthetic evaluator in the Prussian Board of Works between 1810 and 1841. This position allowed Schinkel to influence architecture throughout the Prussian state, but it was also a forum in which architecture was related to the priorities of the administration.;The ramifications of Schinkel's administrative situation is traced in order to understand how it affected his designs, and the meaning attributed to his work. Aesthetics intersected with social and political issues in the Board of Works, and Schinkel's institutional affiliation provides a context for his architecture.;The first chapter deals with the history of the architectural administration, and the introduction of aesthetic controls with Schinkel's appointment. The resistance and acceptance of designs from Berlin illustrate the issues raised by institutionalized aesthetics.;The second chapter considers the debates surrounding Schinkel's Altes Museum (1823-30). Schinkel promoted his design on the grounds of emotional efficacy, and as an aesthetic model. This emphasis on emotional effect and aesthetic quality was adopted in 1828 as selection criteria for the collections. The museum building and collections within were to prepare the citizenry for the constitution promised in 1815, and give a moral purpose to private wealth by creating middle class art patrons.;The third chapter discusses the aesthetic models provided by the state with an emphasis on type plans. Schinkel rejected type plans in principle, but nonetheless employed an implicit standardization in practice. The consequences of implicit standardization for subordinate architects, and the relationship between the state and citizenry represented by the use of aesthetic exemplars are discussed.;The fourth chapter considers Schinkel's Bauakademie (1830-1832) in the context of his control over artistic architecture. This situation is related to the debates over the roles of practicality and aesthetics in architectural education. The administrative hierarchy of utility and art was represented in the construction and iconography of Schinkel's building. The rift between Schinkel's late classical designs and the Bauakademie is clarified by this hierarchy.