Lübeck Inner-City Marketplace Past And Present Comparison

Market Inner-City Lübeck

I shot the image some weeks ago when I walked through the inner-city of Lübeck. I wrote about the marketplace in Lübeck a couple of times, for example about the christmas market last year or when I uploaded an image that shows a part of the architecture that surrounds the marketplace.

In the last post where I showed a part of the architecture, I did also upload a public domain image from 1905, I will attach this to my new post here too because this time I show my new image from a very similar angle. As it is nearly the same perspective, it’s a cool comparison of the market in the year 2015 and 1905. Past present photos are pretty cool, maybe I should do this more precise next time, and maybe even more often generally. So, let’s take a look at the photo that was taken in 1905…

The market of Lübeck in 1905
The market of Lübeck in 1905

If you ask me, the architecture that is surrounding the marketplace looks a lot more consistent in 1905. The white building you can see on my photo, that is the town hall of Lübeck, they painted it white years ago. White looks not too bad, but as said, it is simply not consistent with the rest of the architecture. My second opinion is that they also should plant some trees again and the fountain fits very well to the surroundings in 1905 too. That are my only complains, other than that it still looks the same. What do you think?


8 thoughts on “Lübeck Inner-City Marketplace Past And Present Comparison

  1. I agree with you Dennis, although the white would look OK alone it doesn’t fit in with the other buildings and yes I think some trees and a fountain would improve it. What happened to the old fountain?

    1. Right, white would be absolutely fine, but not there. When they painted it white (I think that happened 10 years ago when they did refurbish it) we all thought that looks now inconsistent.

      I had to research about the fontain now as I never saw this one in my life. Looks like they removed it 1934. City architects meant (literal translation is following) that the fountain was a “dead construct” that would take too much space and that would prevent people to see the surroundings and the townhall. After evalutation the city decided to remove the fountain in 1939.

      That’s sad, I thought it would fit very well into the place when I look at the old image. I would disagree with them and rebuild it 😀

    1. Yes, I had to research about this fountain as I never saw it in my life. Looks like they removed the fountain already in 1939 as they literally meant it would be a “dead construct” that takes too much space and that prevents people to see the townhall and the rest of the marketplace. I would disagree with those too who decided to remove it. 😀

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.