The present work deals with questions of editing and communicating architecture in the specialized press. The period and place of observation are six representative periodicals published in Berlin between 1900 and 1914: Die Bauwelt, Berliner Architekturwelt, Centralblatt der Bauverwaltung, Kunst und K\u00fcnstler, and Der St\u00e4dtebau. The selected periodicals, which outline the spectrum from civil servant to art journal, are used and examined here not only as chronological source material, but as “corpora,” as self-contained units that followed very different concepts of mediation.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Architectural theory and history tend to be less interested in the “work” or the “building artist” than in the media “representation” of the “work”. Architecture and the art of building do need the media for identification and explanation, but this can also lead to a situation in which only this “representation” is evaluated. The “image” of architecture is thus often and sometimes exclusively created through its media reflection (K. Rattenbury).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":1388,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false},"product_brand":[],"product_cat":[1773,1774,1775],"product_tag":[],"class_list":["post-2304","product","type-product","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","product_cat-architecture-urban-planning","product_cat-history-of-architecture","product_cat-theory-of-architecture","first","instock","taxable","shipping-taxable","purchasable","product-type-simple"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n