Hamburg State Opera | What does money sound like?

There's a need for action. Hamburg's State Opera needs a complete renovation. Or – the city will build a new musical theater. Klaus-Michael Kühne has promised €330 million in funding for a new building.

Who is the man? This isn't the first time Kühne, born in 1937, has appeared as a donor. The multi-billionaire, who maintains his residence in Switzerland for presumably tax reasons, is the heir to the family-owned Kühne und Nagel company. During the Nazi era, Jewish shareholder Adolf Maass was forced out of the company. Kühne und Nagel profited significantly from the disenfranchisement of Jews in the so-called M-Aktion (M-Aktion). Klaus-Michael Kühne has been criticized for years for his inadequate review of the company's history.

The entrepreneur wants to have a say in the future construction of the opera house, both in terms of the choice of architectural design and the location. The latter has been chosen for Baakenhöft in HafenCity. A controversial decision.

Despite the three-digit million-euro investment, the Hanseatic city would also incur costs. As recently announced, the expected share amounts to approximately 250 million euros.

But should we even let it get this far? Fund cultural buildings with dirty money? Let a private individual participate in such far-reaching decisions? And does it really have to be so superlative? No real cultural life in the wrong system.

On the other hand: Is there money that isn't dirty? Can one afford such morality in times of tight budgets? Is a donated opera house really a good way to relieve a family of historical guilt?

Marco Hosemann, urban development spokesman for the Left Party in the Hamburg Parliament, opposes the construction of a new opera house. He has launched a petition against the controversial project. In a position paper from his party, he makes it clear: "We don't need another landmark, but democratic, historically conscious, and sustainable urban development!"

Marco Hosemann, when were you last at the Hamburg State Opera?

I've actually never been inside. I know the building very well from the outside, and I'm a huge fan of the building's architecture. But I was never introduced to opera, and I never found my way there myself.

You are part of an initiative opposing a new opera building, for which entrepreneur Klaus-Michael Kühne has promised funding. Before we talk about Mr. Kühne, please tell us: What speaks against the new building and what speaks for renovation?

I don't think there's anything to be said for a new building. We already have a State Opera in Hamburg, which, incidentally, is also a listed building. From studies commissioned by the city itself, I know that the opera house can be renovated and adapted to changing requirements. I can't think of a single reason, other than megalomania and the desire to play in the Champions League everywhere, that would speak in favor of a new building. Comparisons such as those made by Senator for Culture Carsten Brosda with the opera in Oslo, show that this is just another landmark attracting international attention. Instead, I think we should be content with what we have. Ecological considerations also come into play: in times of climate change, we should think carefully about what needs to be built and what doesn't.

At least one disadvantage of renovation is evident: If renovations are carried out, games will be temporarily suspended or limited. Alternative venues would have to be found.

That's certainly an argument. But even there, I would argue that at some point, as with other theaters, the time has come for a complete renovation. Something positive can also come from this: After all, we have Kampnagel to thank for the renovation of the Deutsches Schauspielhaus as a new independent venue.

Even if that doesn't have to be the goal, I don't think the necessary search for an interim venue is a good reason to build a new building just to avoid interrupting performances. If we don't play it too foolishly and include the summer breaks, it will be possible. But even a temporary closure and a move to another location doesn't mean the death of the Hamburg State Opera.

Regarding the economic considerations in favor of renovation: Opponents of new construction often cite potential renovation costs of €150 million. This figure comes from a 2020 report, a time before the energy crisis and inflation. Is there a more realistic figure from today's perspective?

I don't presume to be able to give a reliable figure. But of course, construction costs have risen since then. The Senate is pursuing a kind of salami tactic with its new construction plans, revealing potential costs only piecemeal. It's now said that Hamburg will contribute €250 million to the new construction. Considering the increased construction costs, the cost of a renovation would probably still be lower.

When funding of €330 million is promised, as Mr. Kühne is now doing, it seems quite tempting to simply accept the money. Isn't there a lot to be said for this?

Most people have understood by now: This isn't a gift, but a grant. Even though Mr. Kühne's contribution is not small, we don't know how high the actual costs for the city will be. We already know this from the Elbphilharmonie. Once construction has begun, the city might end up paying extra to ensure construction continues.

I know many people view this differently, but I wouldn't accept any money from this man. This fortune is based on injustice, on crimes in which Kühne and Nagel were involved, and which Klaus-Michael Kühne never had independently and publicly investigated.

Many of Germany's major cultural institutions were built by princes or donated by wealthy citizens and private entrepreneurs. Yet, today's urban society doesn't associate these institutions with these donors. Doesn't the argument that this is a memorial to Mr. Kühne ignore this fact?

I don't think so. Even if this institution in the Hafencity were called the Hamburg State Opera and not the Kühne Opera—unlike, for example, the Laiszhalle—I'm sure that with such a landmark, Klaus-Michael Kühne would be remembered on every city tour and every barge trip.

It should not be overlooked that this is not simply about a good deed, but rather that Mr. Kühne has been increasingly criticized in recent years and now, with the help of his money, he would like to be remembered differently.

If Mr. Kühne's intention with this funding was to distract from Kühne and Nagel's corporate history during the Nazi era, his plan has certainly failed. The debate surrounding the new opera house is causing more discussion about this injustice than ever before.

Yes, he probably didn't expect such loud criticism.

Not only the new building in general, but also the Baakenhöft site, which Mr. Kühne made a condition for its construction, is being criticized. Why?

Baakenhöft was once a trading hub for colonial goods, but also the place from which troops and weapons were transported to suppress the resistance of the Herero and Nama. This was the first genocide of the 20th century. There have long been calls for something to be built here to commemorate this crime. This last available plot of land for public use at Baakenhafen deserves a place of remembrance, not an opera that overwrites this history.

But there is a risk that in the end you will not get either: no opera and no memorial at a historical site.

In my opinion, the Senate shouldn't decide on such a memorial site and its precise design alone, but rather jointly with the city's community. Discussion should also be held about what additional facilities could be created at such a site. Spaces for youth culture, for example. There are certainly uses that are more compatible with a memorial site than, say, an opera house.

From a Berlin perspective, this Hamburg dispute also has something strange about it: While the cultural budget is being cut in Berlin, in Hamburg it has actually increased. In Berlin, a halt to the renovation of the Komische Oper was being considered, which would likely have been the first step toward closure. Patrons and private donors here, unlike in Hamburg, are merely a political wish, not reality.

It's true: We could probably build five Kühne operas in Hamburg if Klaus-Michael Kühne paid his taxes here instead of in Switzerland. Of course, that's difficult to change in realpolitik terms. I do think it's a positive aspect of the entire debate that this behavior of patrons and donors is being addressed in this way.