Interesting take I would argue.
I would like to point out that Baroque architecture (St. Paul) works well in Rome, not so much in Northern Europe with bad weather/light.
The Northern Europeans (Germans, Scandis) tried to “solve” the problem with their modern designs (clean lines, efficient heating, big windows etc.)
Personally I like modern designs but that is me.
Nothing wrong with being Mid-Century Modern, old bean. There’s even an acronym for it. Hans Wegner, arguably one of the most influential furniture designers of C20th, trained as a cabinet-maker with the English Georgain chair as his model, and you can see this in the evolution of his chair designs. In his case, it’s not Why or What but How (it works) – he wanted to make the perfect Chair.
The old St Paul’s was a truly gothic wonder, complete with a spire rising to 500 feet. The whole building exceeded the present St Paul’s in length and additionally had a completely unnecessary, but glorious double storey cloister with the Chapter House in the centre.
From a distance it would have resembled Salisbury Cathedral despite its meagre 403 feet spire!
(Historically the only building in London to exceed it in size would have been the Basilica of the Roman Forum, now buried under Leadenhall Market.)
Nothing wrong with being Mid-Century Modern, old bean. There’s even an acronym for it. Hans Wegner, arguably one of the most influential furniture designers of C20th, trained as a cabinet-maker with the English Georgain chair as his model, and you can see this in the evolution of his chair designs. In his case, it’s not Why or What but How (it works) – he wanted to make the perfect Chair.
The old St Paul’s was a truly gothic wonder, complete with a spire rising to 500 feet. The whole building exceeded the present St Paul’s in length and additionally had a completely unnecessary, but glorious double storey cloister with the Chapter House in the centre.
From a distance it would have resembled Salisbury Cathedral despite its meagre 403 feet spire!
(Historically the only building in London to exceed it in size would have been the Basilica of the Roman Forum, now buried under Leadenhall Market.)
I too found this fascinating, not least through in-filling the back story on Wren. I’m not sure i agree with the author’s conclusions though.
If architectural styles didn’t change over time, we’d be living in a very boring urban environment. It’s been said (and i’m sure Mr Stanhope will correct me if i’m wrong) that prior to the uptake of Christianity by the Roman Empire during the reign of Constantine, the Empire itself was rather lacking in spirituality, a facet which allowed for the new religion to take hold. Now, do we think of a lack of spirituality when we look at the remaining examples of architecture still standing in Rome, or elsewhere within the former Empire? We do not!
So why ascribe a lack of spirituality to contemporary architecture? Of course, there’s the “form follows function” dictum, but i personally find much modern architecture satisfying, and occasionally inspiring. Might i suggest that those who fail to find a spiritual context for such architecture (post-war concrete blocks notwithstanding!) are simply reflecting something lacking in themselves?
Heaven forbid!!
“the Empire itself was rather lacking in spirituality”.
Lacking a uniform spirituality certainly, but NOT spirituality per se. In fact you could ‘believe’ in almost anything as long as you obeyed two cardinal rules.
Don’t kill anybody (eg Human sacrifice), and don’t ask/ demand state cash!
Otherwise for example, if you wished to worship Crocodiles as some Egyptians did, fine. If you wished ( as many soldiers did) to worship ‘Sol Invictus Mithras’, (The Invincible Son God-Mithras) fine, but don’t bore me with the details.
In short it was all about, “to hunt,to bathe, to play, to laugh, OCC EST VIVERE…THAT IS TO LIVE*
(* Inscription from Timgad, Aurés Mts, now Algeria.)
“the Empire itself was rather lacking in spirituality”.
Lacking a uniform spirituality certainly, but NOT spirituality per se. In fact you could ‘believe’ in almost anything as long as you obeyed two cardinal rules.
Don’t kill anybody (eg Human sacrifice), and don’t ask/ demand state cash!
Otherwise for example, if you wished to worship Crocodiles as some Egyptians did, fine. If you wished ( as many soldiers did) to worship ‘Sol Invictus Mithras’, (The Invincible Son God-Mithras) fine, but don’t bore me with the details.
In short it was all about, “to hunt,to bathe, to play, to laugh, OCC EST VIVERE…THAT IS TO LIVE*
(* Inscription from Timgad, Aurés Mts, now Algeria.)
Interesting take I would argue.
I would like to point out that Baroque architecture (St. Paul) works well in Rome, not so much in Northern Europe with bad weather/light.
The Northern Europeans (Germans, Scandis) tried to “solve” the problem with their modern designs (clean lines, efficient heating, big windows etc.)
Personally I like modern designs but that is me.
I too found this fascinating, not least through in-filling the back story on Wren. I’m not sure i agree with the author’s conclusions though.
If architectural styles didn’t change over time, we’d be living in a very boring urban environment. It’s been said (and i’m sure Mr Stanhope will correct me if i’m wrong) that prior to the uptake of Christianity by the Roman Empire during the reign of Constantine, the Empire itself was rather lacking in spirituality, a facet which allowed for the new religion to take hold. Now, do we think of a lack of spirituality when we look at the remaining examples of architecture still standing in Rome, or elsewhere within the former Empire? We do not!
So why ascribe a lack of spirituality to contemporary architecture? Of course, there’s the “form follows function” dictum, but i personally find much modern architecture satisfying, and occasionally inspiring. Might i suggest that those who fail to find a spiritual context for such architecture (post-war concrete blocks notwithstanding!) are simply reflecting something lacking in themselves?
Heaven forbid!!
J Bryant
1 year ago
A fascinating essay. Thank you.
Francis Turner
1 year ago
The key difference between Wren and Rogers is that Wren’s building have lasted centuries. Roger’s are unlikely to last a century without significant repair and redesign (see the current shuttering of the Pompidou Centre for 4 years).
If Roger’s buildings could manage to not rust away and were actually practical then they would be more impressive
Yes, and didn’t the Pompidou require the knockdown of some of the few remaining medieval buildings in central Paris? A French friend owned one such building nearby. What an era! It was the worst of times, and then some.
Yes, and didn’t the Pompidou require the knockdown of some of the few remaining medieval buildings in central Paris? A French friend owned one such building nearby. What an era! It was the worst of times, and then some.
Francis Turner
1 year ago
The key difference between Wren and Rogers is that Wren’s building have lasted centuries. Roger’s are unlikely to last a century without significant repair and redesign (see the current shuttering of the Pompidou Centre for 4 years).
If Roger’s buildings could manage to not rust away and were actually practical then they would be more impressive
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Will we really say this about Rogers:
“Lector, si monumentum requiris, circumspice.”*
*Reader if you seek a monument look around (you).
(Attributed to Wren’s son, although remarkably similar to one used for the Roman architect Julius Lacer at Alcantara circa 110AD).
No we won’t, at least not in any positive sense – more as a warning. Equally, the classic Vitruvian formulation of firmitas, utilitas, and venustas (roughly translated as strength, functionality and beauty) hardly applies to Rogers, while clearly it does to Wren. A silly article, in my humble
No we won’t, at least not in any positive sense – more as a warning. Equally, the classic Vitruvian formulation of firmitas, utilitas, and venustas (roughly translated as strength, functionality and beauty) hardly applies to Rogers, while clearly it does to Wren. A silly article, in my humble
Will we really say this about Rogers:
“Lector, si monumentum requiris, circumspice.”*
*Reader if you seek a monument look around (you).
(Attributed to Wren’s son, although remarkably similar to one used for the Roman architect Julius Lacer at Alcantara circa 110AD).
Mark Vernon
1 year ago
William Blake would have entirely agreed. He thought St Paul’s a temple to Urizen, the god of the ratio, in love with measurement, whose mentality now dominates life.
Mark Vernon
1 year ago
William Blake would have entirely agreed. He thought St Paul’s a temple to Urizen, the god of the ratio, in love with measurement, whose mentality now dominates life.
Andrew Boughton
1 year ago
Another perfect essayist in this fantastic journal.
The odd thing about this “world so complex it needs technocrats to manage it” is that even abstract labour is reduced to child-like simplicity, marked by the primacy of Process. Division of labor in hand and mind. It’s not actually a complex world at all, in that we’ve reduced the humanities, personal relations and thought work into simplicity.
Neo-Marxism is another manifestation, axioms from physics applied universally to entire groups, even comprising entire genders, absent individual living people.
And Shelley wrote an essay anticipating the English language would devolve into factspeak, parallel with the growth of technocracy, circa 1820.
But then, we have signs of revival, signaled by the very existence of this essay, and the return of art, design and architecture. Next to reclaim the humanities.
Last edited 1 year ago by Andrew Boughton
Andrew Boughton
1 year ago
Another perfect essayist in this fantastic journal.
The odd thing about this “world so complex it needs technocrats to manage it” is that even abstract labour is reduced to child-like simplicity, marked by the primacy of Process. Division of labor in hand and mind. It’s not actually a complex world at all, in that we’ve reduced the humanities, personal relations and thought work into simplicity.
Neo-Marxism is another manifestation, axioms from physics applied universally to entire groups, even comprising entire genders, absent individual living people.
And Shelley wrote an essay anticipating the English language would devolve into factspeak, parallel with the growth of technocracy, circa 1820.
But then, we have signs of revival, signaled by the very existence of this essay, and the return of art, design and architecture. Next to reclaim the humanities.
Last edited 1 year ago by Andrew Boughton
Tapani Simojoki
1 year ago
Loyalty to my alma mater compels me to point out that Wren’s first building was in fact the chapel of Pembroke College, Cambridge, commissioned by his uncle, Matthew Wren and consecrated in 1665. The Sheldonian followed soon afterwards.
Tapani Simojoki
1 year ago
Loyalty to my alma mater compels me to point out that Wren’s first building was in fact the chapel of Pembroke College, Cambridge, commissioned by his uncle, Matthew Wren and consecrated in 1665. The Sheldonian followed soon afterwards.
Prashant Kotak
1 year ago
That picture, is that St. Paul’s, or the Capitol building?
A fascinating essay. Thank you.
Interesting take I would argue.
I would like to point out that Baroque architecture (St. Paul) works well in Rome, not so much in Northern Europe with bad weather/light.
The Northern Europeans (Germans, Scandis) tried to “solve” the problem with their modern designs (clean lines, efficient heating, big windows etc.)
Personally I like modern designs but that is me.
Nothing wrong with being Mid-Century Modern, old bean. There’s even an acronym for it. Hans Wegner, arguably one of the most influential furniture designers of C20th, trained as a cabinet-maker with the English Georgain chair as his model, and you can see this in the evolution of his chair designs. In his case, it’s not Why or What but How (it works) – he wanted to make the perfect Chair.
The old St Paul’s was a truly gothic wonder, complete with a spire rising to 500 feet. The whole building exceeded the present St Paul’s in length and additionally had a completely unnecessary, but glorious double storey cloister with the Chapter House in the centre.
From a distance it would have resembled Salisbury Cathedral despite its meagre 403 feet spire!
(Historically the only building in London to exceed it in size would have been the Basilica of the Roman Forum, now buried under Leadenhall Market.)
Nothing wrong with being Mid-Century Modern, old bean. There’s even an acronym for it. Hans Wegner, arguably one of the most influential furniture designers of C20th, trained as a cabinet-maker with the English Georgain chair as his model, and you can see this in the evolution of his chair designs. In his case, it’s not Why or What but How (it works) – he wanted to make the perfect Chair.
The old St Paul’s was a truly gothic wonder, complete with a spire rising to 500 feet. The whole building exceeded the present St Paul’s in length and additionally had a completely unnecessary, but glorious double storey cloister with the Chapter House in the centre.
From a distance it would have resembled Salisbury Cathedral despite its meagre 403 feet spire!
(Historically the only building in London to exceed it in size would have been the Basilica of the Roman Forum, now buried under Leadenhall Market.)
I too found this fascinating, not least through in-filling the back story on Wren. I’m not sure i agree with the author’s conclusions though.
If architectural styles didn’t change over time, we’d be living in a very boring urban environment. It’s been said (and i’m sure Mr Stanhope will correct me if i’m wrong) that prior to the uptake of Christianity by the Roman Empire during the reign of Constantine, the Empire itself was rather lacking in spirituality, a facet which allowed for the new religion to take hold. Now, do we think of a lack of spirituality when we look at the remaining examples of architecture still standing in Rome, or elsewhere within the former Empire? We do not!
So why ascribe a lack of spirituality to contemporary architecture? Of course, there’s the “form follows function” dictum, but i personally find much modern architecture satisfying, and occasionally inspiring. Might i suggest that those who fail to find a spiritual context for such architecture (post-war concrete blocks notwithstanding!) are simply reflecting something lacking in themselves?
Heaven forbid!!
“the Empire itself was rather lacking in spirituality”.
Lacking a uniform spirituality certainly, but NOT spirituality per se. In fact you could ‘believe’ in almost anything as long as you obeyed two cardinal rules.
Don’t kill anybody (eg Human sacrifice), and don’t ask/ demand state cash!
Otherwise for example, if you wished to worship Crocodiles as some Egyptians did, fine. If you wished ( as many soldiers did) to worship ‘Sol Invictus Mithras’, (The Invincible Son God-Mithras) fine, but don’t bore me with the details.
In short it was all about, “to hunt,to bathe, to play, to laugh, OCC EST VIVERE…THAT IS TO LIVE*
(* Inscription from Timgad, Aurés Mts, now Algeria.)
“the Empire itself was rather lacking in spirituality”.
Lacking a uniform spirituality certainly, but NOT spirituality per se. In fact you could ‘believe’ in almost anything as long as you obeyed two cardinal rules.
Don’t kill anybody (eg Human sacrifice), and don’t ask/ demand state cash!
Otherwise for example, if you wished to worship Crocodiles as some Egyptians did, fine. If you wished ( as many soldiers did) to worship ‘Sol Invictus Mithras’, (The Invincible Son God-Mithras) fine, but don’t bore me with the details.
In short it was all about, “to hunt,to bathe, to play, to laugh, OCC EST VIVERE…THAT IS TO LIVE*
(* Inscription from Timgad, Aurés Mts, now Algeria.)
Interesting take I would argue.
I would like to point out that Baroque architecture (St. Paul) works well in Rome, not so much in Northern Europe with bad weather/light.
The Northern Europeans (Germans, Scandis) tried to “solve” the problem with their modern designs (clean lines, efficient heating, big windows etc.)
Personally I like modern designs but that is me.
I too found this fascinating, not least through in-filling the back story on Wren. I’m not sure i agree with the author’s conclusions though.
If architectural styles didn’t change over time, we’d be living in a very boring urban environment. It’s been said (and i’m sure Mr Stanhope will correct me if i’m wrong) that prior to the uptake of Christianity by the Roman Empire during the reign of Constantine, the Empire itself was rather lacking in spirituality, a facet which allowed for the new religion to take hold. Now, do we think of a lack of spirituality when we look at the remaining examples of architecture still standing in Rome, or elsewhere within the former Empire? We do not!
So why ascribe a lack of spirituality to contemporary architecture? Of course, there’s the “form follows function” dictum, but i personally find much modern architecture satisfying, and occasionally inspiring. Might i suggest that those who fail to find a spiritual context for such architecture (post-war concrete blocks notwithstanding!) are simply reflecting something lacking in themselves?
Heaven forbid!!
A fascinating essay. Thank you.
The key difference between Wren and Rogers is that Wren’s building have lasted centuries. Roger’s are unlikely to last a century without significant repair and redesign (see the current shuttering of the Pompidou Centre for 4 years).
If Roger’s buildings could manage to not rust away and were actually practical then they would be more impressive
Yes, and didn’t the Pompidou require the knockdown of some of the few remaining medieval buildings in central Paris? A French friend owned one such building nearby. What an era! It was the worst of times, and then some.
Yes, and didn’t the Pompidou require the knockdown of some of the few remaining medieval buildings in central Paris? A French friend owned one such building nearby. What an era! It was the worst of times, and then some.
The key difference between Wren and Rogers is that Wren’s building have lasted centuries. Roger’s are unlikely to last a century without significant repair and redesign (see the current shuttering of the Pompidou Centre for 4 years).
If Roger’s buildings could manage to not rust away and were actually practical then they would be more impressive
Will we really say this about Rogers:
“Lector, si monumentum requiris, circumspice.”*
*Reader if you seek a monument look around (you).
(Attributed to Wren’s son, although remarkably similar to one used for the Roman architect Julius Lacer at Alcantara circa 110AD).
No we won’t, at least not in any positive sense – more as a warning. Equally, the classic Vitruvian formulation of firmitas, utilitas, and venustas (roughly translated as strength, functionality and beauty) hardly applies to Rogers, while clearly it does to Wren. A silly article, in my humble
Agreed.
Agreed.
Nice!
No we won’t, at least not in any positive sense – more as a warning. Equally, the classic Vitruvian formulation of firmitas, utilitas, and venustas (roughly translated as strength, functionality and beauty) hardly applies to Rogers, while clearly it does to Wren. A silly article, in my humble
Nice!
Will we really say this about Rogers:
“Lector, si monumentum requiris, circumspice.”*
*Reader if you seek a monument look around (you).
(Attributed to Wren’s son, although remarkably similar to one used for the Roman architect Julius Lacer at Alcantara circa 110AD).
William Blake would have entirely agreed. He thought St Paul’s a temple to Urizen, the god of the ratio, in love with measurement, whose mentality now dominates life.
William Blake would have entirely agreed. He thought St Paul’s a temple to Urizen, the god of the ratio, in love with measurement, whose mentality now dominates life.
Another perfect essayist in this fantastic journal.
The odd thing about this “world so complex it needs technocrats to manage it” is that even abstract labour is reduced to child-like simplicity, marked by the primacy of Process. Division of labor in hand and mind. It’s not actually a complex world at all, in that we’ve reduced the humanities, personal relations and thought work into simplicity.
Neo-Marxism is another manifestation, axioms from physics applied universally to entire groups, even comprising entire genders, absent individual living people.
And Shelley wrote an essay anticipating the English language would devolve into factspeak, parallel with the growth of technocracy, circa 1820.
But then, we have signs of revival, signaled by the very existence of this essay, and the return of art, design and architecture. Next to reclaim the humanities.
Another perfect essayist in this fantastic journal.
The odd thing about this “world so complex it needs technocrats to manage it” is that even abstract labour is reduced to child-like simplicity, marked by the primacy of Process. Division of labor in hand and mind. It’s not actually a complex world at all, in that we’ve reduced the humanities, personal relations and thought work into simplicity.
Neo-Marxism is another manifestation, axioms from physics applied universally to entire groups, even comprising entire genders, absent individual living people.
And Shelley wrote an essay anticipating the English language would devolve into factspeak, parallel with the growth of technocracy, circa 1820.
But then, we have signs of revival, signaled by the very existence of this essay, and the return of art, design and architecture. Next to reclaim the humanities.
Loyalty to my alma mater compels me to point out that Wren’s first building was in fact the chapel of Pembroke College, Cambridge, commissioned by his uncle, Matthew Wren and consecrated in 1665. The Sheldonian followed soon afterwards.
Loyalty to my alma mater compels me to point out that Wren’s first building was in fact the chapel of Pembroke College, Cambridge, commissioned by his uncle, Matthew Wren and consecrated in 1665. The Sheldonian followed soon afterwards.
That picture, is that St. Paul’s, or the Capitol building?
St Paul’s from the Millennium Bridge, ie from the south.
Contemporary architecture deserves to die.