What next with the revolving auditorium in Krumlov?

Before we get to the competition: what do you see as the main problem with the so-called rotating stage in the baroque garden of Český Krumlov?
Václav Girsa: It is an illegal construction, and in its placement, it represents a gross disruption of the integrity of a historically significant garden, a construction that contradicts the limits of Český Krumlov's inscription on the UNESCO World Heritage List. While it is not negligible that it represents a decline in architecture, no building belongs in this excellent location, in the parterre of the unique historic structure of the Rococo summer palace Bellarie. The quality of architecture cannot resolve this serious nonsense. In Europe, you will not find any historic garden inscribed on the list of world cultural and natural heritage with a monstrous construction permanently standing in the main axis of the garden, disrupting the delicate milieu of a thoughtfully composed natural environment. Additionally, let us remember that during the times when visitors can appreciate the qualities of the garden, from nine in the morning until evening, the rotating stage is a completely dead facility that produces no value but practically only destroys the views of the baroque garden or devalues the extraordinary monument. Only after dark, when the garden is practically invisible, does it provide two hours of enjoyment. Isn’t that a bit paradoxical?



However, the problem is perhaps that the theater in the Krumlov garden has become a tradition...
The significance of tradition in outdoor productions is undisputed. Such type of theater can take place essentially anywhere – however, unique gardens, unique structures, and vegetation cannot easily be relocated. Of course, celebrations or theatrical or musical productions also took place in baroque gardens. The technology was usually conceived as very temporary or removable – unless a special garden area was designated for these activities as a natural theater, like at the Rundale Palace in Latvia, where there is a generous baroque palace complex designed by architect Rastrelli. In addition to the monumental palace, he envisioned a generous garden: something like a small Versailles with typical components such as tridents with distant lines and views of the landscape, etc., and he also incorporated a natural theater. Thus, playing there is no problem at all.

It is worth mentioning that there once stood a modern, small theatrical element in the Krumlov garden...
That is how the whole trouble began. You mean the theater auditorium designed by Joan Brehms, a significant scenographer incidentally of Latvian origin: in the late 1940s, he designed something like a small and very temporary, hence removable wooden rotating stage on a human drive in front of the Bellarie building. It was for about fifty spectators, and its height was negligible. However, the idea was appealing, and thus the process of swelling this facility began in the place of the parterre of Bellarie. Each subsequent rotating stage was larger, more capacious, technically demanding, and above all, more insensitive to its surroundings. The Rococo summer palace became a poor backdrop, and its interior spaces became servants during occasional theatrical productions in the summer months. However, the popularity of the rotating stage gradually increased, as did the very volume of the stage, which became more and more fixed here, and in its current version, it represents a multi-ton giant, even surpassing the Bellarie building itself. I knew architect Brehms personally, the author of the original minimalist facility; you know – he was sincerely disgusted by the abuse of his idea and the monstrosity of the latest version of the theater stage, which he had the chance to see.

The monstrousness of the stage, as you say, and its aesthetics are evident. Could you summarize the critical argumentation – especially architecturally?
Allow me to remind you of the essential context: the Krumlov garden has been divided since the Renaissance by a regular arrangement of squares measuring 60 x 60 meters. The baroque concept was based on this older foundation. There followed other style transformations, but they always respected the basic compositional layout of the original garden. This cohesive and exceptionally rare whole has been fatally impacted by the rotating auditorium in at least three respects. First, the free parterre of the Bellarie summer palace has been destroyed. Thus, a fatal destruction of one of the important principles of the baroque concept has occurred. Second, the construction interrupted the main visual axis of the castle garden. That is about the same as if you built a tall apartment building in the middle of Old Town Square. We must realize that the most important and impressive effects of the baroque garden represented distant views and vistas into the landscape. The Krumlov garden is also based on the effect of distant views. And these are fundamentally damaged; the important view from the terrace and higher parts of the Bellarie towards the landscape through the existing wall is destroyed... Let me remind you that the main view in the axis of the garden, culminated by an effective perspective closure – point de vue – was here over half a kilometer long. When a visitor climbed the stairs by the cascading fountain from the flower garden to the upper, main part of the garden, they had to be impressed by the monumental effect of the aforementioned axis, which was completed by the fountain installed in the middle of the enormous water surface at the end of the garden. However, this elementary, key effect was completely eliminated by the construction of the rotating stage. The mammoth auditorium, positioned on the main axis of the garden intersecting the axis of the summer palace, makes it impossible to understand the aforementioned garden principles and perceive the irreplaceable beauty. It has reached the point where the construction of the auditorium has completely paralyzed the entire, larger western part of the castle garden.
Third: every theater, even of a seasonal nature, requires certain facilities. Specifically, dressing rooms for actors, rehearsal rooms, but also sanitary facilities for the public, refreshments, etc. Currently, the Bellarie summer palace, one of the peak Rococo architectures in Europe, is being severely devastated by this and other operations. There is a complete forgetfulness that this is an extraordinary building; its decoration, original details, and facilities preserved in Bellarie practically have no equivalents on the continent. Let us recall, for example, the famous dining elevator with the "table set" effect, the authentic kitchen and preparation room, or the damaged grotto. It is paradoxical that the Rococo dining elevator, which tourists visit as a unique attraction in the Petit Trianon at Versailles, is here in Krumlov closed to the public and deteriorating – undermined and often even destroyed by the most banal functions, such as actors' dressing rooms, rehearsal spaces, storage, etc. The fact that the immediate surroundings of Bellarie are often littered with residential trailers of visiting celebrities, temporary barriers, portable technology, and litter is truly the least of the evils.

How would you summarize the current objections of the UNESCO committee?
The position has been clear from the very beginning: a rotating stage does not belong in such a rare garden. This is the stance with which the Czech state is in agreement and which it respected during the inscription. The Czech professional public unequivocally identifies with this stance. To confirm the correct opinion, we do not need wise advice from outside; however, the attempts of our politicians to continually delay the matter, evade it, obscure it, and try to reverse our own commitments can create this impression.
The latest note from the UNESCO committee is already quite ultimatum. Not only does it set deadlines for removal, but it even expresses – candidly – distrust towards the Czech side by requesting that the committee be informed of all its steps so that they can ensure that the new solution will not contradict the values for which the town was inscribed on the list of world heritage sites. Personally, I perceive this case as a disgrace, a great disgrace to our country.

There is talk of removing Krumlov from the UNESCO World Cultural and Natural Heritage List – because of the rotating stage. Is this threat truly real?
Certainly, let us remember the recent case of Dresden. The endeavor to inscribe a particular locality on the list is a great ambition of every country. The preparation requires significant effort, the process is very complex, and it is not resolved overnight. I remember the first inscriptions of our country; I recall the demanding preparation, the number of experts involved in the preparation, and then the truly immense joy of everyone when Český Krumlov was placed among the elite. If the inscription succeeds, it is a great honor in any case, and adherence to the rules to which we have voluntarily committed should be a complete matter of course. I do not understand why anyone gambles with these sensitive matters.



COMPETITION

What was the motivation behind the recent student competition?
Firstly, as I said, I perceive the long-standing stance of the Czech side towards the UNESCO committee regarding the issue of the removal or preservation of the rotating auditorium in the castle garden as disgraceful.
If you ask about the motivation, the main driving force behind the competition was the agreement of three partners: the president of the Czech National Committee of ICOMOS, doc. Štulce, the National Heritage Institute of the Czech Republic, and our Faculty of Architecture at the Czech Technical University, on the need to unblock the rigid and demagogical view of the problem of the rotating theater. It was about enhancing the objectivity of public information and presenting a register of such possible solutions, each of which would be more acceptable than the status quo. It is clear that there are possible positive solutions for the summer stage in Český Krumlov.

How would you briefly characterize the assignment?
The goal was to obtain proposals for alternatives for the placement of a new summer stage outside the area of the castle garden. The solutions were to meet high demands in terms of integration into the landscape framework, as well as architectural and scenographic solutions. It was important to propose a functional whole at the level of today’s time with quality and adequately sized operational facilities and accompanying equipment: actors' dressing rooms, technical rooms, dignified sanitary facilities, a cultivated solution for refreshments, and other services for visitors, etc.

Could you briefly comment on the results?
I am glad that thanks to the competition, twenty-three remarkable proposals emerged – also due to the participation of architecture faculties in Liberec and Bratislava. The students participated in joint presentations throughout the process, defended their concepts, and responded to the comments of theater experts, and all of this provided them with very strong stimuli.
We were very satisfied with the enthusiasm of the students and the results.

What do you say about the two first prizes?
They represent remarkable directions, a meeting of two different yet very high-quality concepts. The design by Jan Harciník from architect Cikán's studio at this Faculty of Architecture departs from the concept of a classic rotating auditorium and emphasizes primarily the adjustments of the landscape. The theatrical space becomes a water surface on which a pontoon – the auditorium – floats, allowing various landscape backgrounds to alternate in front of the audience during the performance… The concept creates more than a one-purpose seasonal facility. In relation to the castle garden, it creates a sensitively conceived residential landscape: which has exceptional significance also for the period when no performances are held, i.e., off-season. It is witty, entirely new, and yet extremely sensitive to the values of the environment. The second proposal by Eliška and Marie Křížová from our studio is more traditionally based, with a link to the geometry of the castle garden. Their concept was inspired by the baroque garden to place another segment of the formal garden in its breadth; they position the rotating auditorium on its axis, complemented by greenery and other subtly inserted accompanying objects.
Other proposals are also remarkable, including the sensitive project by Radka Ježková from Prof. Suchomel’s studio at the Faculty of Architecture and Arts at TU in Liberec, the poetic solution by Barbara Fraňková again from architect Cikán's studio, and further projects from the Czech Republic and Slovakia that did not receive awards.

What will be the future of the proposals?
After the exhibition here at the Faculty of Architecture in Prague, the proposals have moved to Krumlov, where an exhibition of the projects was opened in the former mint building at the castle. The interest from the Krumlov public greatly pleases us. In collaboration with the administration of the state castle and chateau, discussions are planned here, where the broader public could get acquainted with the advantages of a more complex solution for the new Krumlov summer stage and the issue of the restoration of the unique castle garden. The rehabilitation of the garden is highly desirable but is only realistic after relocating the summer stage outside its footprint.
We are also pleased with the interest in student works from the South Bohemian Theater in České Budějovice. We have agreed that the exhibition of proposals will move to the theater foyer after the summer break. Hopefully, the ice will finally break...

Thank you for the interview.
Jiří Horský