Can modern skyscrapers coexist with ancient cathedrals without destroying their meaning?
In short: The concrete municipal buildings of the 1960s and 70s left a lasting blight on many historic centres. Today, a deep fissure exists between architects favoring contemporary materials and those advocating for a local historical vernacular. How do we judge if a new structure enhances or detracts from our heritage?
The debate over urban development often focuses on the physical fabric of individual monuments. Nevertheless, Professor Simon Thurley CBE contends that the primary difficulty involves how modern construction affects the 'setting' of heritage sites. Setting is not merely about physical proximity; it is the relationship between a historic building and its surroundings, encompassing how a place is perceived, experienced, and valued by people in both the past and present. This architectural conflict is further complicated by the competing pressures of developers seeking large-scale projects and local residents advocating for a more human scale.
This tension is exemplified by the controversy surrounding The Shard at London Bridge in Southwark. When Thurley began his tenure as chief executive of English Heritage in 2003, he inherited significant opposition to the proposal. Although the skyscraper would leave physical historic materials intact, opponents claimed it would damage the historic surroundings of numerous conservation areas and listed structures, shifting the visual connection between landmarks such as St. Paul’s Cathedral and St. George’s Hospital. The concern was that the presence of such a massive structure would forever compromise the historical significance of these landmarks.
To navigate these complexities, one must distinguish between 'setting' and 'context.' While planning legislation focuses on setting, the 'context' of a building includes broader cultural, intellectual, or functional links. For example, the context of the Commonwealth Institute in Kensington includes its symbolic role in the post-war years and the global origin of its materials. Evaluating these impacts is uniquely difficult because, unlike music or painting, architecture must also fulfill a functional utility. The physical space of a site, such as the Salisbury cathedral close, also forms part of its setting. Making these aesthetic and functional judgements remains a complex challenge with very few established tools available for decision-makers.
Opens the Intellect+ feed with this card first. Swipe up for the next one.
Sources
- Summary by Intellect · source: Perfection or Pastiche? New Buildings in Old Places - Professor Simon Thurley CBE
- Also: Perfection or Pastiche? New Buildings in Old Places
To cite this card, link to https://intellectplus.co.uk/app/ideas-perfection-or-pastiche-new-buildings-in-old-places-professor.
How we source, check and correct cards: Editorial standards.
General information, not professional advice. Spotted an error? Flag the card or see corrections and complaints.
Intellect Plus is a visual educational discovery platform for exploring fascinating facts and ideas. Brain Food, Not Brain Rot. What is Intellect Plus?
