Ïîïóëÿðíûå ñîîáùåíèÿ

четверг

Berlin is an on-again, off-again capital with a darker history than most cities in Europe.

It served as the epicenter of Hitler's Third Reich and was nearly wiped off the map at the end of the last World War. Berlin was also the flashpoint of the Cold War between the United States and Russia. Their conflict split the city into two, leaving residents on either side cut off from each other in every way imaginable for a generation.

Still, visitors hoping to relive a John le Carre Cold War spy novel today are likely to be disappointed. Most traces of the Berlin Wall and other landmarks delineating East and West have been torn down or moved since Germany reunited nearly a quarter-century ago.

German planners have made a concerted effort to erase the divisions between the two Berlins. But here's the catch: These costly changes — especially the ongoing removal of communist-era architecture — have fostered resentment among many residents in the eastern part of the city. Many feel the buildings are an important part of Berlin's history that are worth protecting.

i i

Annalie Schoen stands in front of the German parliament building in Berlin. She is a West German transplant who helped create a seamless capital after lawmakers moved the government from Bonn back to Berlin in 1991. Soraya Sarhaddi Nelson/NPR hide caption

itoggle caption Soraya Sarhaddi Nelson/NPR

Annalie Schoen stands in front of the German parliament building in Berlin. She is a West German transplant who helped create a seamless capital after lawmakers moved the government from Bonn back to Berlin in 1991.

Soraya Sarhaddi Nelson/NPR

A Blank Canvas For A Unified Berlin

During the Cold War, most of Berlin's subways served the West. Its trains would slow down — but never stop — in the dimly lit stations in the communist eastern part of the city, where guards with machine guns kept watch. East Berliners, on the other hand, rode above-ground trains, streetcars and buses that steered clear of West Berlin.

These days in Berlin, people can use any mode of public transit they wish.

Changes like these are by design, says municipal planner Annalie Schoen, a West German transplant to Berlin. Schoen is part of a team that has helped create a seamless capital since lawmakers decided to move the government from Bonn back to Berlin in 1991.

I met her in the federal government quarter, which is called the "Band des Bundes," suggesting a place connecting the former East and West and binding the new federation. Schoen says the buildings here, with their modern facades and welcoming public spaces both indoors and out, symbolize Germany's evolution into a democratic and peaceful society.

"When we started, none of the streets were here, none of the buildings were here," she says.

The blank canvas made the task of creating a unified government quarter here easier, Schoen adds. Architects from around the world competed to design it, as German officials sought international input to prevent any appearance of nationalistic pride.

A key element was the redesign of the former Reichstag building, which now serves as the main German parliament building. It was one of the few existing structures in the quarter, one that was rich in history but in terrible shape, Schoen says.

"You know that our Reichstag was renovated by a British architect, Norman Foster," she says, adding that she doubts Britain or France would have allowed an outsider to do that. "But you know our history, so that forces us to be a bit more open."

The renovated building, which runs on solar power, is a huge draw for German and foreign tourists alike. They get not only a 360-degree view of the city, but can peer into the legislative chamber below.

Architect Thomas Krueger, another West German transplant who runs an agency offering architectural tours of Berlin called Ticket B, is one of the many fans of the new design.

"Now, there is a new monumentality," he says. "It's also showing pride. Now we are 85 million [people], peaceful, reunited."

i i

During the Cold War, streetcars were found mainly in East Berlin, while people in West Berlin generally used subways. Now anyone can use any mode of transport they want to get around the city. Soraya Sarhaddi Nelson/NPR hide caption

itoggle caption Soraya Sarhaddi Nelson/NPR

During the Cold War, streetcars were found mainly in East Berlin, while people in West Berlin generally used subways. Now anyone can use any mode of transport they want to get around the city.

Soraya Sarhaddi Nelson/NPR

Palace Of The Republic Goes Baroque

But a short bus ride away is another project Berlin has undertaken to reinvent itself that Krueger says misses the mark.

Called the Humboldt Forum, the project, which is to be completed by 2019, is a partial reconstruction of a Baroque palace that traces its roots back to the 15th century. The palace was badly damaged in World War II and then completely torn down by the East German communists, who built their parliament building there in the 1970s.

In 2006, the German parliament ordered the East German building with bronze-mirrored windows to be torn down, which took about two years.

These days, the site is hovered over by cranes and workers assigned to the nearly $800 million project. When it's finished, Krueger says, it will house a library, university facilities and Berlin's African and other non-European art collections.

"The museum for non-European art will be presented behind a Baroque facade, which does not really make any sense," he explains.

Nor did it make sense to remove every trace of the East German building that was here, Krueger adds. Called the Palace of the Republic, it housed not only the communist legislature, but also a bowling alley, concert hall, restaurants and even a giant dance floor on hydraulic lifts.

"Every East German I know told me a story about his connection to this Palace of the Republic, and to demolish it is really an act of violence," Krueger says. "Colleagues of mine made a lot of suggestions how to renovate the old Palace of the Republic, and there was still cultural life in it. That is really unbelievable. All what Berlin is representing was still here."

The Palace of the Republic was not the only German Democratic Republic building to be torn down, he adds.

"I read that more than 180 buildings here in the inner city were demolished since '89," he says. "This is quite a lot. There was a high-rise building called the foreign ministry of the GDR, so they demolished it very quickly. So this was a prominent building, also not really nice architecture, but it was a piece of the German history."

The sentiment, Krueger adds, is, "Everything is ugly from the GDR times and so we have to demolish it."

i i

Thomas Krueger, a West German transplant, runs a company that offers architectural tours of Berlin. Soraya Sarhaddi Nelson/NPR hide caption

itoggle caption Soraya Sarhaddi Nelson/NPR

Thomas Krueger, a West German transplant, runs a company that offers architectural tours of Berlin.

Soraya Sarhaddi Nelson/NPR

Remaking — Or Negating — East Berlin's Past?

Krueger very much disagrees. But he says the problem is that West Germans — especially those not from Berlin — don't believe the communist-era buildings are worth protecting. They are a reminder of a time in Germany's history they'd rather forget.

That's put Berlin's last major East German-era landmark — Alexanderplatz — at risk as well. The 20-acre square was the showplace of communist East Germany and is best known for Berlin's iconic television tower that, at 1,207 feet, is one of Europe's tallest structures. A "World Clock" and somewhat gaudy copper and enamel fountain here also draw tourists.

Alexanderplatz is also framed by hulking Soviet-era buildings with stark glass and metal facades that, since reunification, feature mostly businesses, stores and restaurants. The square's critics and investors say it is wasted space with old structures that are eyesores. They are pushing to tear them down.

In an op-ed in Der Tagesspiegel in August 2013, one West German author and journalist, Peter von Becker, likened the proposed preservation of one of the buildings to keeping Berlin looking like the North Korean capital, Pyongyang.

That's not how Katrin Lompscher sees it. She's a native East Berliner who was 27 when the wall came down and now serves in the Berlin parliament as a member of the Die Linke party, which includes members of the political party that succeeded East Germany's ruling communists.

Related NPR Stories

Cities Project

Ghosts Of The Past Still Echo In Beirut's Fragmented Neighborhoods

Parallels

Germany's Battle Over What May Be Its Last Lenin Statue

"The Alexanderplatz of my youth, as I remember it, was a major transportation hub and great place to shop," Lompscher says. "The best department store ... was here and had a terrace with open stairs like a piazza.

Europe

Ach! No End In Sight For Berlin Airport Woes

"Of course it's important to move forward and develop things," she adds. "But it's wrong to completely negate what's already here."

She worries about a 1993 master plan by German architect Hans Kollhoff. It was approved by the government and calls for 10 high-rise towers in and around the square, although investors shied away from erecting any during a decade-long economic slump. Lompscher says it now it appears that plans are moving ahead for one of the high-rises: a 39-story building designed by avant-garde architect Frank Gehry.

To Lompscher, it's a slap in the face to East Berliners, many of whom feel reunification has meant doing everything the Western way.

City planner Annalie Schoen agrees that many East Berliners view this as something "conquerors do."

She says it was tougher for them to adjust post-reunification "because we sort of took over. They had to use our laws, they had to use our regulations, our social security system, everything."

"For them," Schoen says, "the change was more dramatic than it was for us."

Anyone concerned about how the two parties would pay for their national conventions after a new law took away their public funding can stop worrying.

The Federal Election Commission approved a joint request Thursday by the Democratic and Republican parties to let them accept as much as $32,400 per donor per year – for conventions alone. That's even in the three years of each presidential election cycle in which there is no actual convention, and on top of the $32,400 per year individuals can already give each party.

From an October 8 letter to the Federal Election Commission from the Democratic and Republican parties. Federal Election Commission hide caption

itoggle caption Federal Election Commission

In a letter to the commissioners Wednesday, the parties blamed "Congress's sudden and unexpected termination of the National Party Committees' entitlement to receive public funds to pay for convention expenses, at a time when planning for the national nominating conventions was well underway."

That "sudden and unexpected termination" came in the form of the Gabriella Miller Kids First Research Act, which was passed with bipartisan support and signed by President Obama this spring. It ended public financing for the conventions and promised to shift the money saved — $18 million for each convention in 2012 – for children's cancer research.

Advocates of campaign finance limits opposed the change. Public Citizen noted that Congress so far has failed to actually provide any new cancer research funding. "Today, the commission is being asked by the same parties to create another loophole in federal election law," the group wrote in a Tuesday letter.

The commission has been blocked from acting in recent years because of a three-three split between the three Democratic and three Republicans members. It approved the change today on a 4-2 vote when Democratic vice-chairwoman Ann Ravel voted with the three Republicans.

party conventions

Federal Election Commission

A new program to encourage guests to tip the housekeeping staff at Marriott hotels is meant to make it easier for people to show their gratitude to workers. But the plan, part of an initiative from Maria Shriver's group A Woman's Nation, is raising questions over how the company pays its staff — and whether guests should be expected to tip.

Marriott isn't the first hotel to use a note or an envelope to connect a name to the room's upkeep and amenities. But it seems to be the first large chain to do so. Announcing its new program, called The Envelope Please, the company explained its goal:

"Hotel room attendants often go unnoticed, as they silently care for the millions of travelers who are on the road at any given time. Because hotel guests do not always see or interact with room attendants, their hard work is many times overlooked when it comes to tipping. The Envelope Please makes leaving them a gratuity simple and secure."

Responding to questions about its room attendants, Marriott says it employs nearly 20,000 people in that capacity, making them its largest group of workers. The company says most of them work an eight-hour shift, five days a week.

As for the attendants' wages, a Marriott representative says they're "competitive" and vary depending on the local market. She adds, "The vast majority make more than the minimum wage, state or federal."

The Envelope Please is being rolled out in hundreds of Marriott-managed hotels in the U.S. and Canada. Calling the new program a case of economic empowerment, A Woman's Nation hopes to expand it to include other hotel chains.

But not everyone is welcoming the plan to promote tipping. Some compare it to blackmail. And hard-core business travelers who rack up hundreds of nights in hotels per year say they don't want to tip in cash, as is customary. Instead, they suggest, the company should let guests add a tip to their room bill.

If Marriott wants to see the wide range of responses, it won't have to look far — people in its rewards program have been debating the issue for the past day.

A sampling:

"I always wondered if the actual service provider ended up with the gratuity, this helps increase those odds." – erc

"This is a bit over the top for Marriott to be doing this to us, almost like black mailing us into it. If they are so concerned they should pay these hard working people a better wage! Letting Maria Shriver have this much influence over them is a bit disturbing." – pdyer

"I always leave gratuity, biggest problem you often don't know the housekeepers name as they normally clean room when i am not there. I end up giving to front desk with instructions as to forward to correct person." – donethat

"Pay an adult wage! Increase the room rates and then let some of the increase in room rates be ACTUALLY passed on to those who provide services(I am an investor too, so I do want to still get some returns on my investments)." – barrpat

"In actual fact, tipping should be unnecessary unless a member of staff goes beyond the norm. Such as the concierge who insisted I gave him my car keys so he could retrieve something I had accidentally left in my car earlier in the day. The car was a little way down the car park and it was pouring with rain. Of course I tipped him; he was a star!" – Tommo781

If you're wondering how Marriott is doing financially, in its most recent annual report, the company says that in 2013:

Total revenues for the year were nearly $12.8 billion.

It had net income of $626 million, up from $575 million the year before.

The cost of Marriott's accrued payroll and benefits was $817 million.

The revenue per available room in North America rose 5 percent.

tipping

hotels

As times got tough in the recent recession, the less well-off of America's citizens became more generous when giving to charity. But at the same time, wealthy Americans cut the proportion of their incomes they donated, according to a new study that analyzed data from tax returns.

NPR's Pam Fessler reports for our Newscast unit:

"The study was done by the Chronicle of Philanthropy, which looked at IRS data showing charitable deductions in 2006 and 2012. The study found that Americans who earned $200,000 a year or more cut the share of income they gave to charity by 4.6 percent, while Americans earning less than $100,000 a year gave 4.5 percent more of their income to charity.

"Those with incomes of $25,000 or less saw the biggest increase. The share of their income that went to charity rose almost 17 percent. Low-income Americans primarily give to religious organizations."

While the wealthiest Americans cut how much of their incomes they sent to charity, the total amount of their donations rose, with the Chronicle saying their donations "increased by $4.6 billion, to hit $77.5 billion in 2012, using inflation-adjusted dollars."

For the study, researchers used data about gifts to charity from taxpayers who itemized deductions, compiled by the organization Giving USA. They based their observations on donors' adjusted gross income, not their net worth.

To put the numbers in a wider perspective, consider that in 2012, individual Americans donated $228.93 billion to charity, or 72 percent of the total, according to the National Center for Charitable Statistics.

Beyond income levels, the Chronicle's study also highlights geographical differences in giving. For starters, Las Vegas, where the recession was sharply felt, surpassed its reputation as Sin City to show the largest increase in giving, with people shelling out nearly 15 percent more of their income for charity between 2006 and 2012.

The city's generosity helped make Nevada the state whose residents boosted the rate of their giving the most during the recession. Here's the top five:

Nevada
Idaho
Georgia
Connecticut
Florida

"Residents of Utah remain by far the nation's most generous," the Chronicle reports. "For every $1,000 they earned, they donated $65.60 to charity. New Hampshire remains the least generous. Those residents gave $17.40 for every $1,000 they earned."

charities

Blog Archive