Arquitectura Britanica

BRITAIN
Alan Powers
modern archi tec tur es i n hi s tory
Britain
modern architectures in history

This international series examines the forms and consequences of modern
architecture. Modernist visions and revisions are explored in their national
context against a backdrop of aesthetic currents, economic developments,
political trends and social movements. Written by experts in the architectures
of the respective countries, the series provides a fresh, critical reassessment of
Modernism's positive and negative effects, as well as the place of architectural
design in twentieth-century history and culture.
Series editor: Vivian Constantinopoulos

Already published:
Finland
Roger Connah
Forthcoming:
Brazil
Richard Williams
Turkey
Sibel Bozdogan
France
Jean-Louis Cohen
USA
Gwendolyn Wright
Germany
Iain Boyd Whyte
Greece
Alexander Tzonis and Alkistis Rodi
Italy
Diane Ghirardo
Japan
Botond Bognar
Netherlands
Nancy Stieber
Spain
David Cohn
Switzerland
Stanislaus von Moos
Britain
modern architectures in history
Alan Powers
REAKTION BOOKS
Published by Reaktion Books Ltd

33 Great Sutton Street
London ec1v 0dx, uk
www.reaktionbooks.co.uk
First published 2007
Copyright Alan Powers 2007
All rights reserved
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording
or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publishers.
The publishers gratefully acknowledge support for the publication of this book by the
following:
Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts
The Paul Mellon Centre for Studies in British Art
Printed and bound in Great Britain by Cromwell Press, Trowbridge, Wiltshire
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Powers, Alan, 1955
Britain. (Modern architectures in history)
1. Architecture Great Britain 20th century
2. Architecture, Modern 20th century 3. Modern movement (Architecture)
Great Britain
I. Title
720.9410904
isbn-13: 978-1-86189-281-2
isbn-10: 1-86189-281-0
Contents
7 Introduction
one
13 Efficiency: From Modernity to Modernism

t wo
53 Compassion: Modern Architecture Builds the 'Just City'

three
89 Poetics: The Moral Dilemma of Modern Aesthetics

four
125 Production: White Heat and Burnout

f i ve
163 Happiness: The Reintegration of Architecture

six
197 Conscience: The Architecture of Fruitful Anxiety
s eve n
247 Difference: Local Action and Global Thought
278 References
290 Select Bibliography
296 Acknowledgements
297 Photo Acknowledgements
298 Index
Introduction
Whats your proposal? To build the Just City? I will.
I agree . . .
. . . O show us
History the operator, the
Organiser, Time the refreshing river.
Lines from Spain 1937 by W. H. Auden, quoted in the brochure for the opening
ceremony at Linton Village College, Cambridgeshire, 14 October 1937
Gordon Cullen,
cartoon of the MARS
Group exhibition of
modern architecture,
1938. The theme of
the introductory
section, suggested by
Godfrey Samuel, was
a reinterpretation of
Sir Henry Wottons
paraphrase of the
Vitruvian triad
Commoditie,
Firmeness and
Delight, words that
were spoken with a
commentary by John
Summerson on a
repeating gramophone
record concealed
behind a screen.
The way that the history of architecture is conceived changes constantly. A

subject that may appear narrow in its focus can extend almost indenitely
into the social and intellectual history of all times and all places.
Fundamentally, it is a history of buildings, but these do not tell the
whole story. Behind them are people, ideas and social pressures that
increasingly have become an essential part of the way in which architecture is written about. A catalogue of works is a fundamental basis for
history, but this book is conceived in addition as a history of ideas,
reecting on architects own motivation and on the way that modern
architecture was received and understood outside the profession.
The title of this series of books denes modern as its eld, but gives
architecture a plural form, as if to encourage multiple readings of both
words. Unlike some of those who have written on modern architecture,
I have doubts about the value of dening the term too closely and my
pluralist scepticism (something I believe to be necessary for a historian)
is probably evident in the way this book tells the story. The received view
is that the white hats of Modernism are lined up against the black hats
of otherness, under whatever name. Over time, I have looked quite
closely at representatives of both sides, and tried to ll out the middle of
the eld, an area often shunned by the advocates of black and white
alike. It is in the nature of the brief for this book to concentrate on the
white hats, but I have deliberately looked along the boundary line where
they can sometimes fade to grey. This is important in my view, because
the lack of widespread popular acceptance of Modernism in Britain
since its inception cannot simply be ignored or dismissed as the stupidity
of the unenlightened.
Louis Hellman, cartoon

in Architects Journal
(20 June 1973).
In Britain, the Modern Movement has been a moral and political

battle for a share in shaping the environment and commanding the
resources necessary to do so, against a background of reluctance and
scepticism. The idea that modern and good are the same thing, while
self-evidently right to some, is ultimately a subjective proposition. In a
long-vanished dawn of Modernism, it was assumed that by avoiding
certain errors, such as historic style, archaic construction methods or
ornament, everything would turn out right. It took until the 1960s for
this hope to be destroyed. We are still too close to the following decades
to make a coherent story out of what happened next. For a country
whose popular press has often enjoyed bashing modern architecture, we
seem to have experienced an about-turn, so there are good reasons for
claiming a victory for the white hats after their setback, yet the elds in
which modern architecture is manifested are not unied, and what seems
like success may be limited in its acceptance or long-term effect. Thus,
for example, the things that matter most in architectural schools are
often out of line with what concerns the architectural critics, and both
are out of line with the more successful practitioners. The choice of
nalists for the ribas annual Stirling Prize has virtually no impact on
the most pressing problem of the time, the design of houses and the
planning of new development. The richness and diversity of these different cultures are commendable, but the gaps between them undermine
most generalizations that one tries to make.
Perhaps modern, an ambiguous word at best, is at the root of the
problem, since it is no more than a reication of something that by its
nature resists xed denition. The conjunction of a temporal category
(modern as in new) and a stylistic category (modern as a specic style
of the twentieth century) worked at the beginning, but there was nothing
in the logic of the situation to suggest that this represented any ultimate
truth, and many commentators predicted drastic change in the near
future. They might be surprised how little architectural ideas and arguments have changed since the 1930s. Either the ideas of that time,
embodied in the work of the masters of modern architecture, were more
potent even than was realized, or later generations have lacked the creativity and imagination to move very far away from them. Thus, paradoxically, Modernism early on became a period style that underwent a
series of revivals and reworkings, in fact not unlike the history of jazz.
When the early critics cemented the bond with morality (the separation
of black and white), the whole issue was made irrationally emotive, and
it is still almost impossible to have a calm examination of it.
In recognition that Britain is not the same thing as England, I make
amends for any imbalance in the nal chapter by examining the different
histories of Modernism in other parts of the United Kingdom, before
asking whether Britain or England has a special relationship with
Modernism. It is often assumed that British people are cautious, nostalgic,
literal-minded and unwilling to discard pre-Modernist ways of ordering
their surroundings. Supercial evidence suggests that we are not the
only ones in this condition, but that the quality of average building in
many other European countries tends to be higher both in material and
visual terms, even if it does not represent a Modernists heaven. In other
words, we do not seem to care very much about investing in architecture
and urbanism of any kind, and have little consensus about quality. The
social democracies of northern Europe seem to have managed to establish a better-designed public realm, owing to the higher status of design
within their cultures, although we may be justiably proud of our conservation of landscape and wildlife.
Introduction
From the start, Modernism was viewed as a mission to convert the

benighted, and inviting them, in the often-quoted words of W. H. Auden
in 1930, to
Harrow the house of the dead; look shining at
New styles of architecture, a change of heart.
Since then the conversion process has been tful, but nothing beats incomplete success as a motive for carrying on. Being a missionary might seem a
rather old-fashioned and morally dubious activity in any other eld today.
The missionary does what he believes to be right, and if people do not like
it, he will redouble his efforts. Louis Hellmans brilliant cartoons (several of
them reproduced in this book) show how absurd the mission can appear
at times. It changes shape and direction, but for me, the denition of
Modernism could well be that of mission, of almost any kind. For this, as
for the National Trust and the National Health Service, two other formative British organizations of the twentieth century, we may thank the inspiration of John Ruskin. An echo of Ruskins Seven Lamps of Architecture
(1849) may seem to have slipped into the chapter titles, while they also
represent an extended version of Vitruvius categories, known to English
readers in their seventeenth-century formulation as commodity, rmness
and delight. While Ruskin, as an anti-industrialist advocate of handcrafts,
may seem an odd grandfather for British Modernism, his presence in the
way this narrative is structured will become apparent. My suggestion that
British Modernism was at its most radical when aiming for such goals as
compassion, happiness and conscience, rather than in its moments of
material or purely aesthetic success, proposes Ruskinian priorities, and I
do not think that these are frivolous or accidental issues.
Ruskin spent almost as much time on science as he did on art, and
saw no division between them. This book has also tried to make connections between shifts in architecture and shifts in peoples general
understanding of the nature of the universe. Close correlation is seldom
possible to prove, but I nd the links easier to believe than the proposition that architecture, or even what is usually known as culture, are
wholly autonomous elds driven by their own immutable logic alone.
In the generation before Ruskin, at the historical conjunction of
moralized aesthetics and the progress of scientic thought, the theory of
the Picturesque developed in England, proposing sensation in the face
of nature as the basis for making and understanding art. This meant that
rules were to be tested by subjectivity, rather than established by logic. It
meant that opposites could be brought together without cancelling each
other out. It has often been claimed that the Picturesque was the only
10
original English contribution to aesthetics, and its effects have been profound. During the twentieth century, it provided plenty of grounds for
controversy, and there is a current fashion among academics to condemn
it. The Picturesque seems relevant, however, because of its concern with
human sensations and responses, and its sensitivity to natural processes,
in which it is not unlike the systems theory that entered architectural
discourse in the 1950s and remains an ideological model and a practical
tool today. Perhaps my approach to this task has been a Picturesque one,
evoking a changing parade of images and characters, not easily reduced
to simple generalizations, but operating quirkily and making up their own
rules as they go along.
11
Introduction
chapter one
Efficiency: From Modernity

to Modernism
Daniel Burnham & Co.

(job architect Francis
Swales, with R. Frank
Atkinson, engineer
Sven Bylander),
Selfridges, Oxford
Street, London, under
construction, 1910.
When did modern architecture in Britain begin? The country was not in
step with the other developed nations where modern architecture
emerged by stages between 1900 and 1920, and not until 1925 did actual
built examples conforming to the denition of modern architecture
become visible. It took at least ve more years before a condent core
of modern designers in Britain could be identied, and, in the opinion
of many people, an inux of European refugees and migrs was needed
to make it happen.
When modern architecture arrived, many commentators claimed
that it had been below the surface all the time. Georgian classicism shared
many of its concerns with eliminating ornamental detailing, creating
tidy and unied street pictures, and pushing new technology to provide
buildings for transport and industry. During the period 17501820 a
national English style developed, but, in the form of Georgian terraces
and squares, it was not self-consciously English. A more immediate
source was the Arts and Crafts Movement, which secularized the moral
impulse of Victorian Gothic and turned it towards the improvement of
society and the assistance of the underprivileged. Englishness was a conscious concern here, especially after 1900, and seems to have been linked
to a spreading anxiety about Britains economic performance in the world
at large. This in turn triggered a new attitude to construction.
Military and economic challenges from abroad, above all from
Germany, provided a climax to anxieties that had been growing since the
1880s. The historian Martin Wiener wrote: In every political camp the
question was asked, what had gone wrong with England? Though answers
varied, one answer that found wide support crossing party lines was
inefciency.1 The call for efciency highlighted the uneasy combination of two attitudes, even in the same individual. The attitude broadly
dened as Arts and Crafts preferred older ways of building, resulting in
buildings with a strong sense of locality, leading other countries to similar National Romantic architectural movements. The alternative was to
go international, an attitude associated with the Campaign for National
Efciency that was launched after the revelation at the outbreak of the
Boer War in 1899 that many volunteers for the army had to be rejected
on grounds of health.
The call for efciency was answered with many solutions, combining
old ideas of diligence and public service with new theories of mind,
body and the physical world. It was a practical, not an aesthetic movement, with the aim of putting Britain back in the rst rank of industrial
progress and expanding the role of the state in most areas of life. Martin
J. Wieners classic account of the background to this movement, English
Culture and the Decline of the Industrial Spirit, 18501980 (1981), shows
how rural and urban models of progress opposed each other, and
Wiener is unequivocal in his condemnation of the romantic and backward-looking attitudes of the Arts and Crafts. By contrast, Frederick
Taylors Theory of Scientic Management and Henry Fords development of the assembly line provided models for rethinking building
methods during the rst years of the twentieth century, and represented
a new level of industrialism that attracted politicians with its promise of
spreading material progress.
One of the fundamental justications for modern architecture is its
basis in new technology, one of the aspects of modernity that is normally assumed to lead to new formal solutions. It is, however, possible to
adopt technology and disguise it in more familiar forms, which is broadly what happened in Britain between 1900 and 1930. The early histories
of modern architecture viewed this as a serious error, believing that
Modernism was, as Mies van der Rohe said, the spirit of the epoch
translated into form, and that, allowing for slight variations, it was possible to know what this was, and dishonest and cowardly not to exercise
this knowledge. In the history of ideas, the early twentieth century was
notable for welcoming a number of theories that sharply divided right
from wrong, and claimed a scientic basis for doing so. Ironically, the
actual progress of science during this time, whether in physics or psychology, was away from such certainties, but architecture took a further
fty years to acknowledge and understand these changes and admit that
reality is composed of difference and variation, which are not necessarily
antagonistic to logic or principle.
It is thus tempting to adopt the language of the early Modernist histories, with their references to progress, looking forward and leading to
Modernism. The rst thirty years of the century make more sense if one
does, but the danger has been that a ranking order of buildings emerges
that depends entirely on their rating as pioneers, and tends to ignore
other qualities, such as the skilled adaptation of classical models, or
streetscape or organizational skill. By insisting that modernity and
14
Modernism are inseparable, more prominence is accorded to aesthetic

factors than to actual innovation in engineering, unless the latter is
correctly dressed. Pioneer hunting still has value, but only in our postpostmodernist age if stripped of its insistence on the one true path.
New Techniques: Modernity without Modernism
The career of Louis Gustave Mouchel is representative of the reluctance
of British architecture and construction to accept technical innovation
before 1900. Born in Cherbourg in 1852, Mouchel became a businessman
in South Wales early in his life. In 1898 he became the agent for his compatriot Franois Hennebiques system of reinforced concrete, at the time
that the provender mill for William Weaver and Company was under
construction at Swansea (18978), the rst multi-storeyed reinforced
concrete building in Britain, for which workmen and materials were
imported entirely from France. Mouchel learnt the techniques required
for designing concrete, and set up an ofce in London in 1900 to license
the Hennebique system, rapidly extending his network and supplying
specialized design skills for British architects. Mouchel faced considerable prejudice in Britain, and the use of patent systems by pretentious
foreigners came under attack in 1907, shortly before his death.2
Concrete was not without well-placed supporters, however, and the
Principal Surveyor to the Government Ofce of Works, Sir Henry Tanner,
chaired a major committee on reinforced concrete at the riba in 1907,
the year in which the Concrete Institute was founded. At a lecture at the
Architectural Association (aa) in London in 1909, he warned his audience
that architects would be relegated to interior decoration and external
design by the reinforced concrete specialist, or, indeed, by the civil engi-
Weavers Mill,
Swansea, 1897.
The building on the
right is the rst
reinforced-concreteframed structure in
Britain, built by L. G.
Mouchel, using the
Hennebique system.
15
Efficiency: From Modernity to Modernism
Liverpool University
School of Architecture
studio in the Bluecoat
School, c. 1910. At the
rear of the room are
Professors C. H. Reilly
(Architecture, left)
and S. D. Adshead
(Civic Design, right).
neer3. In 1909 the edgling architecture schools in Britain were actually

moving away from experimental science and leaving consultants to design
their concrete or steel structures. In the process that led to the establishment of the riba Board of Architectural Education in 1904, W. R. Lethaby
advocated that a laboratory of building should be attached to each
school. This suggestion was overruled by the chairman, Reginald
Blomeld, who was committed to promoting classical design in the
grand manner, and the concept never instituted.4 Among the exceptions
were courses at the Brixton School of Building in south London, a school
established in 1904 by the London County Council (lcc) under Lethabys
inuence to bring architecture and building more closely together in the
manner of a German Technische Hochschule; it was directed by Beresford
Pite, an architect who as a teacher took a practical and constructional
line, combined with a high level of artistic knowledge and taste.5
At the Liverpool School of Architecture, the energetic head, C. H.
Reilly, was more concerned with the American approach, derived from
the classicism of McKim, Mead and White, in which skill in handling
conventional historical forms and complex axial plans was valued as
evidence of professional ability, rather than any attempt to fuse new
construction methods with new aesthetics. In terms of painting and
theatre, Reillys tastes were moderately progressive for his time, but he
provides evidence of the way in which architecture followed a different
course, with a preference for theatricality and dressing up.6 The atmosphere he created at Liverpool was intended to mix a Parisian Beaux-Arts
Atelier with a bohemian artistic party, and it was a popular combination.
In 1909, owing to the generosity of the local soap manufacturer Sir
William Lever, Reilly was able to install the architecture school and the
newly founded School of Civic Design in the eighteenth-century Bluecoat
School, together with artists studios and the Sandon Studios Club.
Reilly designed relatively few buildings, and among his early works
the only one to show constructional
innovation was the church of St Barnabas,
Shacklewell, London (190910), a simplied classical structure in brick with a
concrete barrel-vaulted roof, of which Ian
Nairn, writing in 1968, believed: England
could so easily have stepped across to modern architecture from here, instead of relapsing into an eclectic fog.7 Reillys preferences
around this date would be better represented by the steel-framed Selfridges store on
Oxford Street, nominally designed by the
16
leading Chicago architect Daniel Burnham, although actually the work

of Francis Swales, a Canadian-born American studying in Europe. The
whole project was described at the time as the American invasion of
London.8 The steel itself was fabricated in Germany as an economy.
Unlike the buildings in London by the Anglo-French partnership Mews
and Davis, which Reilly also admired, Selfridges could not have looked
the way it did without the use of steel to create wide windows on the
elevations, and, as Dan Cruickshank comments: the easy integration of
new steel-frame and reinforced concrete construction with a traditionally detailed stone faade make Selfridges a spectacular example of the
elegant synthesis of pioneering technology with appropriate history.9
Taking advantage of the Ofce of Works exemption from building
controls, Henry Tanner was able to use the Hennebique system when
designing the King Edward Building of the General Post Ofce in London
(190710), thereby reducing the cost by some 60,000 to 323,000, because
of the economy possible on foundations. The publicly visible elevations of the building that survive are clad in conventional Edwardian
Baroque masonry on the underlying concrete frame. The simplied
rear elevations, which might be presented as more modern, have been
destroyed.
Reinforced concrete does not just offer an alternative way of holding
a building up, but also the potential for off-site prefabrication. This
was originally developed for harbour works, where it avoided the need
John Brodie (City

Engineer), prefabricated concrete flats
in Eldon Street,
Liverpool, under
construction, 19045.
17
to form wet concrete below the waterline, and adapted in one notable
example in Liverpool, where in 19045 John Brodie, the city engineer
and a pioneer of electric tramways, as well as the inventor of the football
goal net, made experiments in using large pre-cast panels of breeze concrete, incorporating waste material, for a block of ats in Eldon Street,
including a at roof for a childrens playground. Brodie described his
method as
that of a dove-tailed box. Each of the four sides, the oor and
ceiling of a room consisting of one concrete slab made in a mould
at a depot . . . whence after maturing, it was conveyed behind a
traction engine to the site and erected in position.10
Brodie saw this project as a prototype for cheap mass municipal housing, a thoroughly modern approach to a long-standing problem. In
theory, by pre-casting the panels off-site, and cutting down on joinery
and other trades, the result should have been cheap and serviceable, but
the ats shared the fate of later prefabrication schemes that relied on economics of scale, and after exceeding their budget by 400 per cent were
never repeated. The block was still in good condition when demolished
in 1964. Brodie used the same system for a cottage in Letchworth,
which still stands, and for municipal stables in the Liverpool suburb of
Walton. The experiment was studied by an American architect, Grosvenor
Atterbury, with results that were adopted in Europe after 1920. A further
reason for the lack of widespread interest in Brodies ats must have been
their rather naive design, with mullioned windows in a vaguely Jacobean
manner. He was an engineer, and not primarily concerned with matters
of taste in new constructional forms, which architects themselves found
hard to cope with. Given that Brodie was closely associated with Reilly in
Liverpool, and also with Sir Edwin Lutyens in the layout of New Delhi in
1912, these inuential gures did not lack the opportunity to hear about
his work in this eld, although they clearly did not consider it signicant.
The Letchworth experiment was one of a number of attempts to provide cheap housing by industrialized methods before 1914. With existing
models of transportable and demountable buildings, especially those for
export overseas, the basic ideas were in place, while new products such
as concrete blocks (which could be made on site by non-expert labour),
expanded metal lathing and encased steel frames offered reproong,
and thus removed the principal problem associated with timber and
cast-iron structures. The relatively small scale of these constructions
made this a more promising eld for innovation, but the economics
were still not compelling and no breakthrough was made.
18
For larger buildings during this period, reinforced concrete was less
popular as a structural frame than steel. With the development of
cheaper steel produced by the open-hearth method in the 1880s, its
application for building was gradually appreciated by the construction
industry, visibly in the Forth Rail Bridge of 188390, and invisibly in
hotels, theatres and clubhouses in London and elsewhere. Steel buildings in which the structural forms of steel were more clearly visible are
found, like their contemporary equivalents in concrete, outside the
canon of polite architecture and far from the inuence of the riba in
London. The Guinness Store House in Market Street, Dublin (19034),
then part of the United Kingdom, still stands (unlike the demolished
Weaver Building) in the register of pioneer buildings, notable for the
scale and complexity of its steel frame and the thinness of its admittedly rather conventional brick skin. This was permitted because it was not
an inhabited building.
One eld outside normal architectural interest in which steel was
used was for football stadia, especially in the aftermath of a collapse of
timber terracing at Ibrox Park, Glasgow, on 5 April 1902 with 25 deaths,
in the presence of Archibald Leitch, the engineer who designed it in 1899.
Leitchs career survived, and in 1906 he took out a patent for steel crush
barriers, embedded in concrete terracing, which remained standard
into the 1960s. The ability to build large-capacity stadia without further
major structural disasters had a considerable effect on the development
of football as the principal spectator sport for the working class in England
and Scotland.
Both steel and reinforced concrete offered increased construction
speeds, of which theatre designers in the 1890s took advantage. They
could eliminate much of the mass masonry needed in solid load-bearing
construction, and thus free up oor space within the building envelope.
Building regulations based more on the need for re protection than
doubts about the strength of the materials were a hindrance to development in habitable buildings, rather than industrial structures. Even after
the re-drafting of 1909, the London Building Act actually made modern
methods more difcult to use than the earlier Act of 1894, which scarcely
mentioned them.
Modern building services are less often considered than structure, and
the rst important example of a modern approach to air conditioning in
the world was far from London, in Belfast, at the Royal Victoria Hospital,
by the architects William Henman and Thomas Cooper (190002). Prior
to this date, ventilation in hospital wards, considered a crucial issue since
the time of Florence Nightingale, was achieved by a pavilion plan, usually
in the form of ngers off a central corridor. The use of a plenum or
19
William Henman and

Thomas Cooper, Royal
Victoria Hospital,
Belfast, 190002.
M. H. Baillie Scott,
Blackwell, Windermere,
Cumbria, 1900.
forced-air system had been tried on a traditional plan at Birmingham in 1893, but at
Belfast, where, as Reyner Banham noted,
there was considerable local expertise in
providing climatic conditioning for passenger ships, the wards were grouped in a single mass. As Banham describes, a set of
steam engines driven by waste steam from
the hospital laundrys boilers drove a pair of
slow-turning engines on a common shaft in
the engine house at the input end of the
duct.11 With humidity control, the hospital
can be claimed, in Banhams words, as the
rst major building to be air conditioned
for human comfort. The riba heard a
report about it on completion, but the
occasion seems to have been subject to a
sort of libuster operation that prevented
a proper discussion, presumably owing to
the threat implied by this novelty.
The industrial port cities, with their
shipbuilding yards and foundries, were the
natural cradle of modernity in the early
twentieth century, in what Wyndham Lewis
called england, industrial island machine,
while another writer referred to Glasgow
as that mist-encircled, grim city of the
north which is lled with echoes of the terrible screech of the utilitarian, and haunted by the hideous eyes of thousands who make their
God of gold.12 As Wiener indicates, the prosperous manufacturers moved
out of the cities when they could, and commissioned houses that, by
1900, were likely to reect traditional English values, as several previous
generations had done before them. M. H. Baillie Scotts Blackwell, near
20
Edgar Wood,
Upmeads, Stafford,
1908.
Windermere (1900), was representative of the type, built as a holiday

home for a Manchester brewer. These houses were admired by the
German architect Hermann Muthesius in his book Das Englische Haus
(1904) as an up-to-date national art a cultural achievement for which
England is certainly to be envied.13 It was houses of this type, rather than
Brodies cottage experiment, that provided the model for the Garden
City style, as developed by Barry Parker and Raymond Unwin.
It was possible for individual architects to make a smooth transition
from Arts and Crafts to proto-Modernism, as can be seen at Upmeads,
Stafford (1908), where Edgar Wood adapted the at concrete roofs that
he and his associate J. H. Sellars had hitherto used for educational
buildings. The design language of the elevations, more rened than any
previous experiment in the domestic use of concrete, was a combination of neo-Tudor and neo-Georgian.14 Although published at the time
in striking photographs, it seems to have had little immediate impact,
and Lawrence Weaver, generally an open-minded critic, while recognizing the advantage of a at roof when an irregular plan outline was
21
H. P. Berlage, Holland
House, Bury Street,
City of London,
191415.
Charles Rennie
Mackintosh, Glasgow
School of Art, 1899
1910. This photograph
of the library wing
added in 190810 was
published in Charles
Marriotts Modern
English Architecture
(1924), one of the first
to include this famous
building in the canon
of contemporary
architecture.
desired, questioned the economy and utility

of the idea.15 For the time being, it represented a dead end.
From the nineteenth century onwards, a
class distinction operated between commercial architects, specializing in ofce and warehouse buildings, and others with a more general and supposedly more altruistic type of practice.
Commercial architects could make stylistic innovations, but the tendency among them and their clients was for conservatism, and around
1900 they settled comfortably into the Classical Revival cladding of steelframed structures. Only occasionally do the backs or sides of these
buildings, like the cast-iron panels on the Cotton Exchange in Liverpool
by Matear and Simon (19056), show other possibilities. There was no
desire to create a new or appropriate form of design for steel-framed
buildings as seen in the work of Louis Sullivan in northern cities of the
u.s., and later in Vienna in the civil engineering and transport designs of
Otto Wagner, or in Berlin in the Turbine Hall for aeg designed by Peter
Behrens in 1909 although it is believable that, in a different cultural
climate, J. J. Burnet and others might have done so. Wagner attended the
22
J. J. Burnet, Kodak
Ofces and Warehouse, Kingsway,
London, 1909.
ribas International Congress of Architects in 1906, but none of his

buildings or those of the other architects mentioned was noticed in the
press.16 When the leading modern architect of the Netherlands, H. P.
Berlage, designed Holland House in Bury Street, London ec3, in 1914,
with a strong vertical emphasis on its steel frame and a richly decorated
mosaic lobby, it too remained largely unnoticed, although the start of
the First World War might have contributed to this neglect. Charles
Rennie Mackintosh, now seen as an architect of equivalent stature to
Wagner, was victim of the English prejudice against Art Nouveau as a
decadent foreign style that threatened to corrupt the purity of native
design. Scotland Street School of 19034 and the west wing of the Glasgow
School of Art of 19089 show him moving towards a more abstract style
in the same period that gures such as Behrens and Josef Hoffmann
were adopting a simplied classicism in Germany and Austria. In Britain,
the modernity of the steel frame usually led towards the conventional
clarity of American classicism, as we have seen with Selfridges, or, in the
case of Mackintoshs Glasgow antagonist and rival, Burnet, to a richly
mannered style, which was common to other London architects such as
J. J. Joass (another Glaswegian) and the young Charles Holden.
Burnet was one of the few architects who
came anywhere near crossing the gap from
classicism to proto-Modernism in the British
Isles, although he had no conscious desire to
be a Modernist in this sense.17 Trained at the
Ecole des Beaux-Arts in Paris, and perhaps
the most considerable master of classicism of
his generation, Burnet showed the inuence
of Chicago, a city he rst visited in 1896, in
his buildings in Glasgow, although at a smaller scale. After establishing a London ofce
in 1904, Burnet curbed most of the inventiveness and freedom of his earlier work, although
while he was working on the King Edward vii
Galleries at the British Museum, he designed the Kodak Warehouse and Ofces on
Kingsway (1909), which was noticed at the
time as a building where the steel construction, to some extent, could be read off the
faade in the form of wider window spans
and less surface depth than normal. For the
Wallace-Scott Tailoring Institute at Cathcart,
near Glasgow (191316), a model factory in a
23
Garden City setting, Burnet produced a building with no distinct period

style, appropriate for industrial use but not, in his view, for a more polite
location.
When, in 1908, with a rare recognition of European events, the
Architectural Review published two projects by Auguste Perret, the French
master of the Modernist-classical balance, they had no immediate inuence.18 For the rest, Britain seemed largely to turn its back on Modernism,
although not, as has been made clear, on modernity. Arguably, the latter
was not only manifested in the amateurish aesthetics of engineers like
Brodie, but in certain steel-framed buildings that march alongside the
admiration of German architects, including Behrens and Mies van der
Rohe, for Karl Friedrich Schinkels austere reductions of classical form in
the 1820s. Thus the early ofce buildings of Richardson & Gill in London
are more or less forgotten as prototypes for what could be called another
Modernism, because the architects discerned no separation between their
aim of recapturing the design language of a hundred years earlier and
their use of the latest building technology. The opportunity and the means
to create modern architecture were present in Britain, but there was a lack
of motivation to push more than the occasional architect past the comfort zone of eclectic stylism.
Fitness for Purpose
Only in the years immediately prior to the First World War did the disparate architectural applications of the idea of efciency begin to cohere
in a vision of what might be described as a modern architecture of British
origin. In hindsight, one wonders why even this stage took so long to
happen, but the fact that the Arts and Crafts Movement was trying to get
away from late Victorian borrowings from the styles of the world included an embrace of new styles as well as old, even though a prominent
group of Arts and Crafts architects wrote a letter in 1901 to the Magazine
of Art protesting about the gift of some French Art Nouveau furniture to
the Victoria and Albert Museum, because it would corrupt students who
needed to learn from rst principles.19 C. R. Ashbee, a leading gure in
the Arts and Crafts, met Frank Lloyd Wright, still hardly known, in
Chicago in 1900, but while admiring his work and arguing with him in a
friendly way over the place of the machine in the future, Ashbees mind
was on things other than architecture, such as moving his Guild of
Handicraft out of the East End and into the country.
The private house was often the place where experiments could be
made, and even a single patron in Britain aware of Wrights work might
have directed an architect onto this pathway, but Upmeads was as
24
modern as houses ever got before 1914. The private houses of the
European Modernists such as Peter Behrens, Mies van der Rohe, Le
Corbusier and Gunnar Asplund were all more classical than modern
before 1914, so Britain was less drastically out of step, but the energy
present up to 1900 seems temporarily to have drained out of the country
house and villa as experimental building types. This reected a growing
conservatism and anxiety among the house-building classes until the
period around 1930, when small houses once more became the harbinger
of the new wave of modern buildings.
In Edwardian Britain, W. R. Lethaby came closest to having a theory of
modern architecture, based on a combination of French rationalist readings of history, a Ruskinian respect for workmanship and materials, and
a distrust of facile imagery and decoration. This was despite his own
mastery of historical styles, demonstrated when he was in the ofce of
Norman Shaw. While Shaw lamented the perpetuation of eclecticism
without doing much to change his ways, Lethaby aimed for a positive
architecture, based on reason. It was an open question what this would be,
since it did not involve specic imagery. He wanted to divert architects
attention from individual buildings to the whole look of a city. Lethaby
was one of a group of friends working in architecture, design and manufacture that visited the Deutsche Werkbund exhibition in Cologne in the
fateful summer of 1914, where the experience of neatness and civic values,
running a gamut from architecture to industrial design, inspired the
group to found the Design and Industries Association (dia) the following
year. Lethaby felt that German designers had already moved to the position where British ones should be.
Lethaby shared a distrust of logic-driven theory with most of his
contemporaries, including the rising classicist Sir Edwin Lutyens. The most
cogent work of theory on the classical side, meanwhile, was The Architecture
of Humanism by Geoffrey Scott, published in 1914 and partly devoted to
the intellectual demolition of Lethaby and his heroes. Insofar as Scotts
text suggests a particular type of architecture, it could be highly abstracted,
although still based on Renaissance shapes, so that their preferences potentially intersected. The new shop for Heals on Tottenham Court Road by
Smith and Brewer (191416) would satisfy both positions with its abstracted stone-clad steel frame, which created a dignied and rational street
architecture without self-conscious period detail. A more modern version
of Lethabys ideas can be glimpsed in the design for Dominion House
(1913), a project conceived by the veteran Canadian businessman and patriot Lord Strathcona, to be built on the site later occupied by Bush House,
Aldwych. It was designed by A. Randall Wells, a former associate of Lethaby
in the construction of the church of All Saints, Brockhampton, in 1900,
25
Dunbar Smith and

Cecil Brewer, Heals,
Tottenham Court
Road, London.
Perspective by R.
Palmer Jones,
191416.
where concrete was used within a primitive rather than a Modernist design.
Dominion House was designed in reinforced concrete and, had it
been built, it would have been the most signicant example of protoModernism in Britain. As Nikolaus Pevsner commented, Wells inherited from Lethaby a sense of congruity between mediaeval methods for a
still mediaeval job, and modern methods for a modern job. While the
mullions and transoms looked Tudor in origin, Pevsner considered the
grid and the whole upward drive decidedly American.20 The design is
remarkable for the proposed tall tower as much as for the wide expanses
of glazing. It is equally surprising that a man of 93 should have commissioned such a progressive design to symbolize the British Empire,
which was otherwise represented on the adjacent site by the Beaux-Arts
classicism of Marshall Mackenzies Australia House.
Hedging on the question of whether he actually liked the hardness,
glare and brutality of modern German cities (this was spoken during the
26
A. Randall Wells,
Dominion House,
Aldwych (not built),
1913.
war), Lethaby concluded: I do, however, greatly admire the wonderful

efciency and ambition of the Germans in city organisation; and the dia
welcomed the role of science and industry in rening design and universalizing the spread of its products, thus bridging that gap between the two
cultures referred to earlier. Lethaby remained torn between his dislike of
27
resurgent eclecticism and doubts about the harshness of Modernism. One

wonders what he made of the early Modernist icons of the Cologne
Exhibition, the Model Factory by Gropius and the Glass Pavilion by
Bruno Taut. His doubts strengthened over time, and it would be wrong to
assume that the modern architecture he hoped for was the same as that
which became current by 1930. In his last year, 1931, Lethaby wrote about
Le Corbusiers phrase The house is a machine for living in:
It is striking and really suggestive when judiciously interpreted, but
some attempted applications seem only to be a new kind of whim
works in a Corbusier style. . . . The living in should be the operative part of the saying. It would be a pity if, in addition to sham
Gothic and sham Classic, we were to have sham modern as well.21
This comment was not simply conservative. By the time Lethaby said it,
younger architects in Britain were worrying about the same thing, and
nding themselves shifting further towards the soft materials and concepts of the Arts and Crafts.
In a lecture to the riba in 1921, Roger Fry, critic, painter and member
of the Bloomsbury Group, who in 1909 had designed his own rather
classical house at Guildford, made a greater allowance for aesthetics,
declaring that as well as the beauty of a locomotive or a panther (the
type that the dia favoured), there was Aesthetic beauty which results
from the clear expression of an idea.22 He believed that the inherent
weaknesses in English architectural thought (vices as he termed them)
had been exacerbated by modern conditions, in other words that rather
than modernity leading the English to Modernism, it had made it
harder to attain. Frys relatively modest call for a disinterested aesthetic
study of architecture was followed by the architectural writers A. Trystan
Edwards and Howard Robertson, both of whom were widely read by
students, while The Pleasures of Architecture by Clough and Amabel
Williams-Ellis was one of the few polemical books successfully aimed at
the general reader.23 Bloomsbury, in other ways a major force in inter-war
culture, had little to offer for architecture, and no signicant theorist
followed Geoffrey Scott. There was a decit in intelligent thought on
architecture in the early Modernist period, apart from fragmentary
occasional writings lacking a cohesive viewpoint adapted to the British
background. Modernism therefore became an issue of partisanship, based
on unsubstantiated assertions.
By a combination of curiosity about foreign activities, experiment
among its members in their own commissioning of buildings, and promotion of a collection of related causes, the dia nevertheless made a bridge to
28
Modernism. It fell short of becoming an avant-garde pressure group,

retaining the Lethabite idea that self-conscious aestheticism was wrong.
Thus, while some buildings of the 1920s associated with dia members are
the obvious rst fruits of Modernism such as the Silver End houses in
Essex, which were inspired by New Ways at Northampton (1925), the house
that Peter Behrens designed for Mackintoshs former patron W. J. BassettLowke others are more fence-sitting in their attitude to the obvious
markers of the Modernist style, such as Charles Holdens Headquarters for
the London Underground at 55 Broadway (1928).
After 1918: The Housing Crisis
S. D. Adshead,
Dorlonco houses
at Dormanstown,
Redcar, North
Yorkshire, 1919.
At the end of the First World War, against a background of threatened

revolution and with a shortage of conventional building materials and
skills, the conditions existed for the delayed breakthrough from traditional to industrialized building methods. Central control by the government offered the possibility of the economies of scale that could
benet from technical research and experiment, bringing the whole
machinery of efciency to bear on the issue that social thinkers had so
long wanted to address.24 In Germany and the Netherlands, the conditions following the war gave the rst major opportunities to emerging
Modernist architects, but in Britain there was no avant-garde in waiting
to translate technique into poetry. The exercise therefore became another
example of modernity without Modernism. Architects, where is your
vortex? asked Wyndham Lewis, founder of the Vorticist movement, in
1919 but he never got an answer.25
There were architects interested in the problem, such as S. D. Adshead,
an associate of Charles Reilly, who in 1916 proposed a construction involving brick, concrete and a light steel frame, which was developed for postwar production as the Dorlonco system by the Dorman Long steelworks.
Although modern underneath, it was over-clad in the late Georgian style
that Adshead favoured. Colin Davies comments:
29
it is hard now to reconstruct the logic of this form of construction. Its steel frame seems structurally redundant given the blockwork lining, and the cement render seemed doomed to fail, which
it duly did in the years to come.26
G. H. Skipper, housing
at Garboldisham,
Norfolk, 1920. The
clay lump construction is seen at the
time of demolition.
C.H.B. Quennell,
house in Clockhouse
Way, Braintree,
Essex, 1919.
In seeking unconventional building methods, Britain did not necessarily make more technical mistakes than other countries, but still failed to
produce modern architecture by modern methods. Despite its shortcomings, the Dorlonco system was used for about 10,000 houses built by
local authorities all over Britain.
It was people outside architecture who tended to nd the idea of prefabrication most exciting. The Scottish industrialist William Weir was
inspired by a meeting with Henry Ford to propose that he could erect
tens of thousands of houses in blocks of 100 at 150 apiece, to consist of
a couple of rooms with central heating, hot water, electric light, central
laundry and a piece of land.27 Part of the attraction was that the building trades, with their union restrictions, could be outanked by designing a standardized system suitable for unskilled labour. The Cabinet
Secretary, Thomas Jones, recorded: there is no reason why we should
not get tens of thousands of houses, ugly though they will be.28 This
dilemma between productivity and beauty was naturally one that concerned even the most mechanistically minded architects. Some argued
that pre-modern methods were just as appropriate for use in the crisis.
The Ministry of Housing set up one experimental site at Acton in west
London for industrialized housing, and another at Amesbury, Wiltshire,
for houses using the traditional but then obsolete technique of rammed
earth. These were not very widely adopted, although G. H. Skipper, an
architect based in Norwich, used clay lump in local authority housing
schemes on the Norfolk borders, which endured into the 1990s. All the
buildings of this type were in the almost universal Garden City cottage
style. Concrete block is a material essentially similar to rammed earth
30
Crittall workmen
demonstrating the
strength of the
Fenestra joint, c.1907.
blocks such as those used by Skipper. Thus the

handful of houses in the suburbs of Braintree,
Essex, built with concrete blocks in 1919 by the
architect C.H.B. Quennell, were not at the
opposite end of the aesthetic spectrum, apart
from their at concrete roofs and metal windows supplied by the company that built the
houses for its workers.
This was a local family business developed
from ironmongery into the Crittall Manufacturing Company, and, at the end of the First
World War, a major industrial concern in the
area.29 The story of Crittalls illustrates a typical
dia mixture of social concern and entrepreneurial air. In 1905 the company bought the
British patent rights for the Fenestra design for
steel windows from the Austrian engineer Karl
Zucker. The design involved the use of a thinner metal section than before, formed by crossing over continuous frame elements, rather than cutting and jointing
them at every intersection. This enabled the creation of much bigger
windows, especially suitable for industrial premises. Crittalls younger
son, W. F. Crittall, known as Pink, who had artistic aspirations, was set
the task in 1908 of reducing the range of cross-sections from the wide and
inefcient range then in use. His standardization exercise, so typical of
the efciency mentality, boiled them down to one Universal section,
which permitted casement windows to be manufactured by semiskilled labour, while for the user glass could be replaced from inside
without the need for scaffolding. Initially, these sections could be rolled
only by mills in Germany, since none in Britain had the capacity. The
third innovation was to use welding rather than more traditional jointing techniques.
Adjusting to the peacetime economy, Crittall was able to have his
standard cottage window adopted for government housing schemes,
helped by the timber shortages of the time. He built a new factory in the
country at Silver End and offered jobs to disabled war veterans, with
housing available for company employees to rent. With houses at Silver
End by Thomas Tait of Sir John Burnet and Partners completed in 1927,
Britain acquired its rst Modern Movement buildings, although more
conservative Garden City houses and public buildings were in the
majority at Silver End. Even so, the young American critic Henry-Russell
Hitchcock, on the basis of photographs and drawings, compared them
31
Sir John Burnet and

Partners, managers
house for Crittall
Manufacturing
Company, Silver End,
Essex, 1927.
very favourably with the most advanced French, Dutch, and German
work.30 Judged realistically against the European competition, however,
Silver End scarcely deserves this status, although locally important.
1920s1930s
What had become of the Efciency campaign by the late 1920s? Government anxiety about progress in the building world led in 1917 to the
foundation of the Building Research Station, although this research
laboratory did not produce tangible results for some time. British architecture of the 1920s, continuing Edwardian themes of rened classicism
and vernacular, deserves study, but only a few buildings obviously linked
the Arts and Crafts to early Modernism. Prominent among them were
the early Underground stations of Charles Holden on the southern
extension of the Northern Line, commissioned by a dia stalwart, Frank
Pick. Starting with Westminster Station, which he remodelled in 1923,
Holden established the basics of his future work for Pick, who in 1915
had exercised his rst major piece of patronage in commissioning the
sans-serif lettering still in use on the system from Edward Johnston, a
protg of Lethaby at the Central School of Arts and Crafts from the
beginning of the century.
Holdens stations, like Johnstons lettering, were simpler and plainer
than the earlier house styles of architecture on the Underground, relying
on proportion and purity of form. To this extent they were classical, and
both designers had a thorough if non-academic grounding in classical
form. Holden saw the need to make his stations visually effective by day
and night, with lofty booking halls through whose windows electric light
could shine welcomingly. He developed a kit of parts approach, helping
32
to develop a corporate identity subtly rooted in a set of values that treated the travelling public with sympathy, while anxious not to over-excite
them. The headquarters of the Underground over St Jamess Park Station,
designed by Holden in 1928, was chiey innovative on account of its adoption of a cruciform plan from hospital design, so as to avoid the use of
light wells, and also in the controversial sculptures near street level commissioned from Jacob Epstein; but the form of the elevations, clad in
Portland stone, was cautious and reticent, like Holdens later Senate House
for London University. Neither the rst set of Holden stations, designed
in Portland stone for the southern section of the Northern Line in the
mid-1920s, nor his more famous later stations on the Piccadilly Line from
1930 onwards can be called fully modern, in the sense of competing with
the public service architecture then being created in Germany and the
Netherlands, which Holden and Pick toured in 1930 in order to assess
whether it had anything to offer them. In Germany, Pick felt that architecture has gone farther than that of any other country in its break with
the past and the results cannot be said to be particularly satisfactory,
sanctioning only a rather narrow path for Modernism between past and
future.31
At the end of the 1920s several of the middle-aged architects who had
been too young to be swept up fully in the Arts and Crafts Movement, and
who exercised a generational reaction against its sometimes winsome simplicity, began to show a greater interest in Modernism in their work and
pronouncements. They constitute a sort of lost generation, depleted by
the First World War of a few major talents. Fated to be treated as marginal
Charles Holden,
Arnos Grove Station,
London, 1932.
33
Elisabeth Scott
(Scott, Chesterton
and Shepherd),
Shakespeare
Memorial Theatre,
Stratford-upon-Avon,
Warwickshire,
192932.
gures in history, they nonetheless occupied many crucial positions in

teaching and journalism and, most inuentially, as competition assessors.
They eased the long drawn-out transition from eclecticism, if only by making space for a younger generation who had not practised before the war.
One notable example was Robert Atkinson, a skilled eclectic designer
who was Principal of the Architectural Association School in the early
1920s and selected Elisabeth Scotts scheme for the Shakespeare Memorial
Theatre Competition in 1929. This plain brick mass stands solidly, as theatres with y-towers must, over the River Avon, where other competitors
were hoping to put something much more gestural and associational. Its
virtues are partly negative ones, of not trying to upstage the surroundings. Inside, the north European equivalent of Art Deco, with marble wall
claddings, stainless-steel chevrons and small pieces of mosaic, shows the
popularity of Ragnar stbergs Stockholm City Hall, a building easy to
love but almost impossible to emulate.
Atkinsons colleague Howard Robertson, who with his partner John
Murray Easton designed the Royal Horticultural Society New Hall in
34
Easton and Robertson,

Royal Horticultural
Society New Halls,
Vincent Square,
Westminster, 1928.
1927, was the most effective journalist in bringing Modernism in front of British architects
in the second half of the 1920s, despite having
been responsible for a strikingly un-modern
British Pavilion at the Paris Exhibition of
1925, behind which Le Corbusiers Pavillon de
lEsprit Nouveau was concealed. As Atkinsons
successor at the aa, Robertson looked tolerantly on students who, around 1929, began to
go modern, usually as a result of reading Le
Corbusier in their second or third year. The
rst wave to be thus affected joined Berthold
Lubetkin in the formation of the Tecton
Partnership in 1932. In contrast to the Modernist belief in an exclusive correlation between form, structure and function,
Robertson believed that all styles could essentially be put on a single level
by treating everything as a mixture of building construction and composition, with decoration added according to the requirements of the building type. By the 1930s, Easton and Robertson were starting to design atroofed buildings, usually in brick, with something of the Amsterdam
School architecture of the early 1920s about them. Other architects in a
similar bracket were G. Grey Wornum, winner of the competition for a
new headquarters for the riba (193034), and H. S. Goodhart-Rendel, a
complex gure suspected of dilettantism, who was an eclectic by conviction rather than opportunism, yet believed in the underlying logic of
plan and construction. His position was unique, and although he made
it apparent in copious writing and lecturing, few architects tried to join
him. For some, one feels, Modernism represented an easy solution to the
hard thinking required for understanding the complexity of combining
form and content in architecture. The answer could be simply to leave the
content out and focus on efciency.
Could architecture deal with ambivalence about modernity through
a Modernism equivalent to that of Eliot and Joyce? Apart from the interiors of a house in Cambridge, Finella, created for a lecturer in English,
Manseld Forbes, in a richly themed poetic vein by a young Australian,
Raymond McGrath, between 1927 and 1929, the direct evidence is not
easy to nd. The doctrine of efciency had no time for inner contradiction. Therefore, when Le Corbusiers book of 1923, Vers une architecture,
was published in translation in 1927 as Towards a New Architecture, it
was seen (as Lethabys comment reveals) as a text about the need for a
mechanical approach to design and to life, even though it is now possible to read into it many more layers of meaning from Le Corbusiers
35
richly stocked and divergent mind. His buildings themselves were

equally seductive to those looking for inspiration, and beautifully presented in the photographs he carefully staged so that those who imitated
them could be led intuitively into a Modernism with cultural depth.
Le Corbusiers books (Urbanisme was translated in 1929 as The City of
Tomorrow) were generally welcomed by reviewers, both inside and
outside the architectural community. One may suspect that he represented, at the beginning, the latest Paris fashion, yet there was clearly
a deeper appeal to the intellect and the senses, and it is hard to think of
any other country where he had such a profound impact on the development of modern architecture, lasting even into the present. The
inuence of Walter Gropius, the Bauhaus school and German modern
architecture generally is not so clearly identiable, although Bruno
Tauts Modern Architecture of 1929 introduced a wide range of German
examples.32
The idea that there was an international community of modern
architects was made visible in the foundation of ciam (Congrs internationaux darchitecture moderne) in 1928. Howard Robertson attended
the meeting of 1929 at Frankfurt on the Minimal Dwelling, but did not
become a member; and it was only with the congress of 1933 on board
the ss Patris, on the theme of The Functional City and attended by
Wells Coates as a representative of the newly founded mars Group (and
also by Ern Goldnger, soon to be resident in London), that the British
involvement began. mars stood for Modern Architectural Research,
and Coates, with his scientic background, intended that actual research
would result. When it did, it was more in the form of social survey work
on housing than technical research, and from this point of view mars
was a failure, creating doubt in many minds as to the whole potential
value of an approach dominated by science and technology.
The excited, multi-lingual and multi-factional world of the ciam
congresses contrasts with the more carefully stage-managed promotion
of the International Style in New York in 1932. This is now widely seen
as the tipping point between the creative and highly politicized activities
of individuals in a variety of countries, unconstrained by a party line,
and the emergence of a Modernism suited to international corporate
capitalism, and stripped of its political ideals. Henry-Russell Hitchcock,
joint selector of the exhibition with Philip Johnson, was familiar with
England, where, in common with Italy, Spain and Japan, modern
architecture has only begun to appear. They named Joseph Emberton,
Frederick Etchells (a slightly dilettante architect responsible for the
translation of Le Corbusiers books), Amyas Connell and Tait as representative gures. Embertons Royal Corinthian Yacht Club at Burnham36
on-Crouch (1930) was illustrated in The

International Style, a book that the Museum
of Modern Art produced after the exhibition.
ciam and the exhibition occurred just ahead
of Germanys transition to Nazism and the
simultaneous exclusion of Modernism from
Soviet architecture, which altered the ambitions of the whole movement. ciams ambition to comprehensively remodel all physical
and social structures was deferred in most
countries, even those without regimes overtly
hostile to modern culture of all types.
Joseph Emberton,
Royal Corinthian
Yacht Club, Burnhamon-Crouch, Essex,
1930.
First Fruits
In 1929 the historian and archaeologist Bernard Ashmole commissioned
the young Connell, a New Zealand Rome Scholar, to build a house at
Amersham in Buckinghamshire. It caused commotion before it was
built, owing to local objections (the rst of many to follow from the
1930s to the present), but on completion High and Over was a news sensation, with magazine articles including a favourable feature in Country
Life, and a newsreel lm. The design is fascinating in its slightly tentative
approach to a new formal language of architecture, with a regular plan
form, abstract decoration and a slight air of being built for an exhibition.
Owing to the builders inexperience, a frame structure with blockwork
inll was used and rendered over with a smooth coat of cement (as were
Le Corbusiers early villas), instead of the desired purist alternative of
monolithic reinforced concrete.
Connells second house, in partnership with Basil Ward, also from
New Zealand, played with asymmetry and irregularity. Built in Surrey
for a 72-year-old accountant, Sir Arthur Lowes Dickinson, White House
(as it is now called) was a true monolithic concrete construction. Ward
later wrote:
Connell conceived the idea of a monolithic reinforced-concrete
structure, based on the Dom-ino [the skeletal concrete house
form devised by Le Corbusier in 1914] and, thereafter, we caused
oors, walls (where these were required), columns, beams to be
tied together to form a structural whole.33
This was seen by Ward as a total package, encompassing structure, use and
aesthetics, each of which impacted on the other, with concrete as the means
37
Amyas Connell and

Basil Ward, White
House (originally New
Farm), Haslemere,
Hampshire, 1932.
Sir Owen Williams
(architect and engineer), Wets building,
D10, Boots, Beeston,
Nottingham, 1930,
Curtain wall design.
of uniting them. Joined in 1934 by Colin Lucas,

an English-born architect who had already
gained experience in using reinforced concrete,
the rm of Connell, Ward and Lucas continued to experiment both aesthetically and structurally up to 1939. In 1956 Peter Smithson called
them the nearest we had in England to rst
generation modern architects.34
Owen Williams, an engineer specializing in concrete before the First World War
and also interested in modern architecture,
produced what might be called his breakthrough building in 1930, and perhaps never
surpassed it. This was his rst design for
Boots Pure Drug Company of Beeston, Nottinghamshire, which had
temporarily been taken over by American owners. The Wets building,
known as d10, was a large concrete structure with a series of atria,
planned for the production ow of pharmaceuticals and other products down to packaging oors and loading bays for despatch. It became
modern architecture, rather than engineering, largely by virtue of its
completely glazed exterior walls, the sublime length surpassing anything else of the sort done during the remainder of the decade. These
were intended to be fully glazed as curtain walls. In the event, the oor
38
Lubetkin and Tecton,

Highpoint One,
Highgate, London,
19345.
plates interrupted the glass in horizontal bands, slightly diminishing

the effect.
Williams designed other buildings for industry, specializing in large
spans and the deep basements needed for newspapers. His simplicity of
approach made modern architecture seem easy, except for those with
superuous architectural knowledge to shed. He was an embodiment
of the idea that engineers could effectively replace architects. Through
Williams, Connell and a few others, concrete became established in
Britain at the beginning of the 1930s as the supreme material for Modernism. Unlike Williams, Ove Arup, Danish by origin, was notable as an
outstandingly sympathetic collaborator with architects who had not developed their own expertise, but who wished to go beyond conventional
techniques. Without his help concrete buildings of the rst Modernist
generation in Britain would have been much cruder. His most famous
collaboration was with Berthold Lubetkin, who came to London from
Paris (and before that from Georgia, via a post-revolutionary education
in Germany and Poland) at the end of 1931, and by forceful charm quickly
found partners and jobs.
Lubetkin was the undoubted star of 1930s modern architecture in
Britain, achieving a combination of social purpose and aesthetic athleticism, with a basis in applied research. On a family holiday visit to England
in 1914, he had admired the trim condence, harmony and balance of
a cricket match, the kind of thing that Lethaby wanted as a model for
Modernism, contrasting it with the moribund n de sicle world of
creepy ornamentation.35 Lubetkin brought to modern architecture a
depth of philosophical understanding previously lacking in England,
belying the fear that too much thinking would spoil the architecture. He
knew Russian Constructivism, and fed its inuence into English-language
publications at a time of enthusiasm for
Russia as the great scientic society of the
future among intellectuals, ironically just at
the point when modern architecture there
was being suppressed. His works, such as
the Penguin Pool at London Zoo and the
Highpoint Flats, are the best-known examples
of 1930s Modernism, captivating as images,
while rewarding further investigation into
their constructional techniques and, at
Highpoint, the detailed reconsideration of the
equipment of daily life. Lubetkin made a less
obvious but potentially more important shift
within Modernist practice with the Finsbury
39

Finsbury Health
Centre, London, 1938.
Drawings from a
set prepared by the
practice to explain
the building to
non-specialists.
Health Centre, where he designed the wings of the building, containing

the medical areas, so that the services, water, heating and electric wiring
which Modernists usually buried in the concrete oor slab were accessible for repair and change in panels beneath the windows. The move
from relatively solid and massive buildings, especially those whose concrete
began to cause problems even at an early date, towards lighter-weight
structures pieced together from components was, at a relatively late stage
in Modernism, a major acknowledgement of the difference between what
actually was efcient, and that which merely looked as if it might be.
It has often been remarked that British Modernism depended largely
on people who had come from elsewhere. While it might have been
possible to have a completely home-grown Modernism in Britain (one
thinks of Owen Williams, Joseph Emberton, Maxwell Fry or Frederick
Gibberd, whose work, at its best, was scarcely inferior to the foreign
arrivals), the migr phenomenon is an inescapable part of the story and
inuenced the host architects, including those who went into partnership
with the migrs. From the end of 1933, refugees from Nazi Germany
began to arrive in signicant numbers, including three major architects,
Erich Mendelsohn, Walter Gropius and Marcel Breuer, partnered for
ofcial purposes by Serge Chermayeff, Maxwell Fry and F.R.S. Yorke,
respectively. Despite occasional xenophobia, these architects joined an
already cosmopolitan intellectual and artistic scene in London, inhabited
by gures such as Chermayeff, who was Russian by birth but English by
education and naturalized at the time of his marriage.
The years 193031 laid the groundwork. Dmitri Mirsky wrote that the
nancial, political and social crisis following on from the Wall Street Crash
forced the intelligentsia of Great Britain to look face to face into
historical realities from which there was no escaping . . . The
40
revival of interest in politics was accompanied by an increased

need for a world view, for a system . . . a key to the chaos, the so
puzzling confusion into which reality seemed to have moved.36
Le Corbusier appeared to offer such a key. A rapturous review in The

Listener, the bbcs magazine, by the art critic Herbert Read early in 1931
set the tone for uncritical adulation of a city of towers, all air, sky and
metaphysics, in which people are abstracted into distant tennis players.
This is not a poets vision; it is a practical scheme for which Le
Corbusier can give you the working drawings and the estimated cost,
Read nished his article, The cost is an immense economy. Why, then,
not begin right now?37
We can recognize the sense of impending crisis on all fronts in the
personal account given by Maxwell Fry, a student at the Liverpool
School under Reilly when classicism was still in full ood in the 1920s
and apparently successful as an architect and planner, but suffering from
an inner emptiness both in his professional and private life. He found
encouragement in meetings of the dia, the best available cutting edge
at the time. As the world economy threw all established patterns into
doubt, Fry met the Canadian engineer Wells Coates, soon to become an
architect himself, who pushed Fry further towards his leap to freedom.
It happened, according to Frys account, when looking at Devonshire
House, Piccadilly, an American-style classical building by Reilly in partnership with Thomas Hastings, the New York architect to whom Fry had
earlier been sent to learn up-to-date methods. I knew it all like a game
played out, Fry wrote of the decoration on the building,
That evening I sought out rolls of drawings treasured from those
years of tutelage, and gazing at them, not without some fondness,
I consigned them to the dustbin. Coming to my empty ofce in
the morning I stretched paper on my board and at once set to
work on the structure of a hypothetical block of working-class
ats that would owe their economy to the balanced forces of what
was well-known among engineers as a portal truss in reinforced
concrete.38
Modernism worked on a mixture of reason and emotion, and the

combination of these was its great strength, at a time when ideas of
efciency were themselves highly emotive, owing to the rising sense of
guilt among the more prosperous and educated population about the
poor. The politicization that Mirsky describes took many forms to left
and right, with modern architecture offering attractions to all of them.
41
As Frys memory of the portal truss indicates, a specic construction

form could take on the symbolism accorded by Victorians to the Gothic
arch. Working-class ats enjoyed a brief period of architectural distinction at the beginning of the century in the work of the lcc, but it took
foreign examples to show later architects that they could be the ultimate
exemplars of the Modernist synthesis. In the earlier 1930s the idea of
building high was especially exciting, because it had been associated
with the wealthy and promised the extreme opposite of slum streets. The
rather dour courtyards of the ve-storey walk-up tenements, scarcely
differing from Victorian Peabody Buildings, were still under construction in large numbers in the 1930s, especially by the lcc. These would go,
to be replaced by the Zeilenbau, the parallel lines of scientically spaced
and oriented slab blocks advocated in Germany as housing funds began
to tighten after 1930, and advocated by Gropius to ciam in 1933. In his
book of 1935, The New Architecture and the Bauhaus, he repeated the reasons for these forms, which duly began to appear in the planning of new
Wells Coates, Isokon

Flats, Lawn Road,
Hampstead, London,
1934. Plan and section
of a standard minimum flat.
42
housing in Britain in place of courtyards. During his residence in London,

Gropius lived in the Isokon ats in Hampstead, a private development
designed by Wells Coates for Jack Pritchard, an enthusiast for modern
living and modern design. A small slab block with external access
galleries, it would have seemed unremarkable in pre-Nazi Germany, but
created a stir in sluggish London.
Flats were supposed to solve the dilemma of spreading suburbia,
which was especially abhorrent to educated people, who imagined that
the inhabitants lived pinched and incomplete lives. The Dudley Report of
1934 suggested that the cost of large-scale housing can be reduced by
rationalized organization and carefully studied design to well below any
level of cost yet achieved in this country. Commenting on this in a letter
to The Times, the quantity surveyor Cyril Sweett, the secretary of mars,
emphasized the labour-saving possibilities of central heating, hot water,
fuel, and laundry and rubbish collection.39 As demonstrated in the
famous Frankfurt kitchen, the at could become a domestic machine.
The Mopin system of lightweight steel framing lled with vibrated
concrete (this made it set faster and without the danger of air pockets)
employed at La Cit de la Muette, near Paris, by the architects Beaudoin
& Lods, was applied in Britain at the Quarry Hill Flats, Leeds. This very
large municipal development, completed in 1938, had waste chutes, a
communal laundry and other amenities, all wrapped by one enclosing
wall of housing on a hilltop slum-clearance site. Conventional labour
and materials were not available to satisfy the whole house-building
effort in Leeds, as Livett, the municipal architect, argued in justication
of using Mopin, although the failure of the system in the 1970s was
used as an excuse for their demolition.40 Quarry Hill was extreme in its
modernity but moderate in its Modernism, once more showing the lack
of essential linkage between the two concepts.
Functionalism
With Modernism, the generalized concept of Efciency was replaced in
architecture in Britain with a widespread use of the word Functionalism.
As Adrian Forty and others have noted, functional can be used to
translate three words used in German in the 1920s to dene aspects of
what was known as The New Building (Das Neues Bauen): sachlich,
zweckmssig and fonctionell.41 These terms have individual and largely
untranslatable meanings distinct from the English word, whose loss
undoubtedly impoverished the potential of architectural criticism in
Britain, while the word itself caught the popular imagination, to architects dismay, although there is no evidence that the ultimate reduction
43
R.A.H. Livett, Quarry

Hill, Leeds, 1938. The
steel frame erected
as part of the Mopin
system.
Quarry Hill completed.
of functionalism, by Gropiuss successor at the Bauhaus, Hannes Meyer,

function economy = building, was known in Britain.
When the reception of Modernism in Britain during this period is discussed, it is usually the most adverse opinions that are quoted, such as
those of Sir Reginald Blomeld in Modernismus (1934). As a representative
of the 1880s generation, Blomeld could be expected to reject Modernism,
but even a liberal intellectual such as Aldous Huxley, writing in 1930,
44
Economy of space,
from W. Heath
Robinson and K.R.G.
Browne, How to Live
in a Flat (1936).
admitted his dislike of Modernist rooms and

furniture, to dine off an operating table, to
loll in a dentists chair this is not my ideal
of domestic bliss.42 A wider survey of the
non-specialist press reveals many more
balanced positions, critical of the majority
of contemporary high design architecture
and the pattern of suburban development,
two essentially unrelated aspects of the
inter-war building world, but uncertain
whether the alternative went too far. In How
to Live in a Flat (1936), the illustrator William
Heath Robinson, famous for imagining logical but unworkable machinery, conjured a
vision of Edwardian ladies and gentlemen
bewildered in a world of chromium-plated
furniture and minimal dwellings. Other
cartoons and comments presented the world
of Modernism as equally outlandish.
A leader in The Listener in 1933 made a division between advocates of
extreme and mechanistic functionalism on the one side and all those
not necessarily conservatives who believe that architecture has internal
laws of its own, independent of passing fashions or experimental mediums. The writer wondered whether functionalism had become a heresy,
since it was an exaggeration of one aspect of the truth insisted upon to the
damage or denial of other and equally important truths.43 The belief that
Modernism was meant to be uncomfortable was reinforced by the heated
emotion of Nikolaus Pevsners closing passage in Pioneers of the Modern
Movement from William Morris to Walter Gropius (1936), characterizing
the world of Gropiuss architecture as a world of science and technique,
of speed and danger, of hard struggles and no personal security.44 In fact,
Gropiuss message that the architect and artist needed to ameliorate the
deadening effect of the machine left the door open for imagination and
variety. In 1936 he built a timber house in Kent, one of many Modernist
houses of that and subsequent years successfully to abandon concrete and
steel, and his Impington Village College (1939) was built of load-bearing
brick, a very different matter to the Bauhaus building. Modernism
became trapped in its own rhetoric of efciency, even when it had
moved on to balance this with other factors, probably because efciency
was politically neutral and avoided the more contentious area of aesthetics. In the early 1930s the functionalist line was pushed to extremes
in order to provide a principle by which modern architecture could be
45
T. P. Marwick,
Co-operative Society
Bread Street showroom, Edinburgh,
1935.
distinguished from jazz modern, or Art Deco as it

is now called.
The huge signicance accorded to this distinction now seems difcult to understand. Buildings
such as the Daily Express, Fleet Street (1930), by
Owen Williams combine elements of sheep and goat
(as the ashy American-style lobby inserted by
Robert Atkinson would have been judged). The
interiors at bbc Broadcasting House (1932) by
Raymond McGrath and Serge Chermayeff were
decorative in spirit, although with the crucial difference that the decoration was not applied. After 1930
the primary architectural magazines, seeing themselves as leaders of taste, tended to exclude a large
swathe of popular Modernism, including cinemas,
that has subsequently been embraced by the public
as the representative architecture of the inter-war
years. The presumption was that true modern architecture would not come without a heroic struggle
against the seductions of ornament. It was rare for
rms working outside London to design genuinely
modern buildings. In Yorkshire and Lancashire, the
Co-operative Society, under W. A. Johnson, with a group of younger
but more or less anonymous talents, produced stores in Hudderseld,
Bradford and Southport that were admired in national magazines.
Almost forgotten, but even more remarkable, is the Co-ops St Cuthberts
Showroom, Bread Street, Edinburgh, with one of the most complete curtain walls of glass on any British street before the 1950s. According to
Charles McKean, this building provided an excellent advertisement by
day and night for the goods within, satisfying the 1930s preoccupation
with three-dimensionality.45 The only rival to this was Dunston b Power
Station, Gateshead, by the engineers Merz & McLellan (193031). This
arguably went even further that Owen Williamss d10 building in translating engineering directly into modern architecture, for the turbine halls
were surrounded by huge expanses of sheer glazing, as neatly capped at
the top as the Bauhaus, with never a suspicion of ornament.46
During the 1930s many of the international Modernist avant-garde
architects modied or abandoned their earlier insistence on engineering
as an adequate analogy for architecture. Implying the subsidiary place of
technique to poetry, Le Corbusier declared in 1930: Les techniques sont
lassiette mme du lyrisme. It soon became clear that functionalism did
not work very well, and on this account, if no other, was ethically dubious,
46
especially in elds such as social housing. A new realism arose about

adapting modern buildings to the uniquely stressful British climate, with
its rapid alternation between freeze and thaw in the winter months. Contrary to the assumption that efciency would always result from new techniques and products, it often seemed to come from the adaptation of old
ones. At the same time, the idea of novelty remained strong in the imagination. In Principles of Modern Building (1938) by Richard Fitzmaurice of
the Building Research Station, the subject of wall nishes was exhaustively researched, and the smooth white nishes beloved of Modernism were
shown almost inevitably to deteriorate in the English climate.
This shift in design thinking was paralleled by a shift in understanding what science could do for architecture. The charismatic Communist
crystallographer J. D. Bernal, fted in the architectural community, showed
that science had a deeper purpose of achieving rationality in society than
just contributing to the invention of new technology. This could, of
course, take varied forms, and utopian ideas remained alive in the urban
planning that became ciams main mission during and after the Athens/
ss Patris congress of 1933. The mars Plan for London, mainly by a young
Tecton staff member, William Tatton-Brown, was the outcome of a struggle between a radial plan (which Tatton-Brown favoured) and a linear city
on Russian utopian lines, favoured by the German migr Arthur Korn.
The 1938 mars exhibition also showed The Concrete City of the Future,
a model made to designs by Yorke and Breuer in 1936. If this was going to
replace London, then at least one reviewer was happy with the status quo,
writing that the new architecture seems to fail even more completely than
F.R.S. Yorke and

Marcel Breuer,
Concrete City of the
Future, 1936.
47
the impressive muddle of the Strand and Fleet Street.47 The difculty of
reconciling the Modernist call for a tabula rasa, even in historic cities, with
the growing appreciation of their existing charms remained an insoluble
puzzle for decades to come. Meanwhile, London began to display modern
buildings, such as the Peter Jones store, that were deliberately contextual,
showing the possibility of an amicable truce between old and new.
Prefabrication and Post-War Reconstruction
For many architects, the war became an opportunity to harness government nance for research and development beyond any peacetime levels,
and prepare for reconstruction with new techniques adequate to the task.
The emergency demanded a real attention to functionalism. Light and
dry construction techniques, bringing together coordinated products
for rapid assembly, were well developed in Germany and advocated in
Britain by Gropius. The idea of prefabrication, with its promise of
rational progress in design through feedback to industry, controlled
by the architect as sensitive technocrat, was especially compelling for
designers. For common building types such as houses and ats, factorymade systems of building would obviate the need for architecture of
the conventional kind, while producing higher levels of comfort. The
idea was present before the war, in designs by Leslie Martin and Sadie
Speight among others, and in proposals made for evacuation camps, but
it was overtaken by events in 1939, and the evacuees were billeted ad hoc
wherever they were sent in the phoney war that autumn.
Martin left his job as Head of Hull School of Architecture just
before the war, and moved to London as principal assistant architect
to the London Midland and Scottish Railways. Apart from war-damage
repairs, he worked with one of the rising political gures of the younger
generation, Richard Llewelyn-Davies, in devising rapid-assembly prefabricated station buildings. His attention was less on prefabrication as
such and more on the potential of systematic analysis of various aspects
of plan, section and construction that could generate forms at a broad
conceptual level. Martin is acknowledged as a crucial gure in the history of British Modernism, his inuence rising decade by decade until
the 1960s. He supported younger architects, including James Stirling
and the Smithsons, whose designs differed considerably from his own
rational sobriety. Through his own practice and teaching he acquired
many disciples. Both Martin and Llewelyn-Davies were inuential in
putting the idea of research into architectural education, thus upholding the pre-war ideal of progress though the combination of architecture
and science.
48
The AIROH house

prototype, exhibited
by the Ministry of
Works, 1944.
In 1944 the Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, announced that he

intended to build 500,000 temporary homes from steel, as a military
operation, but this conicted with a parallel promise to build permanent
homes as well, and the gure was reduced to 150,000. Not for the last
time, a politician quoted a large and arbitrary number to impress voters,
without any idea whether it could actually be achieved. As at the end of
the First World War, the deciding factor in favour of industrialism was
less its association with the design potential or efciency of manufacture,
than the desire to avoid using regular building labour, which was not only
insufcient for the task, but also prone to strikes and disruptions.
In America, by long tradition, houses were made from standardized
timber components, so that the transition to off-site manufacture
seemed a natural progression when the government began to intervene,
creating timber cottages for the Tennessee Valley Authority, which were
among the American examples promoted to the British public in Homes
by the Million by Hugh Casson.48 Aesthetically, the Arcon Pre-fab,
designed by a small group of young Modernists, was the most elegant,
with some of the accidental grace of Jean Prouvs similar experiments
in metal building in France. Technically, however, it was less developed
than the anonymous airoh house, made on the same production lines
that had recently made Spitre planes to win the Battle of Britain. The
airoh was, says Colin Davies, that rare thing in the history of the prefabricated house: a truly mass-produced product.49 It was, however, also
more expensive than a permanent house.
It is not surprising to nd costs, production methods and aesthetics
coming apart from each other in the uncertain climate of improvisation
during the closing stages of the war and the transition to peace.
Although Prefabs were popular with the families who moved into them,
the role of spearheading Modernisms penetration of mass culture
was reserved for large-scale public housing in the 1950s and after.
Similar to prefabs, but more conventional looking, were the permanent Demonstration Houses promoted by
the government at Northolt, Middlesex, to
develop partial alternatives to conventional
building, using steel frames and a variety of
cladding from metal sheets to concrete
slabs and bricks. The British Iron and Steel
Federation House of 1944, a comfortable
design by Frederick Gibberd with vernacular
overtones, was the only one to win architectural acclaim, and it was reproduced in large
numbers.
49
Frederick Gibberd,
The British Iron and
Steel Federation
House, 1944.
Prototype pair
erected at Northolt.
The school building programme after the

war was a better example than the prefabs
of the Gropius philosophy of architecture in
action, indeed as good as any in the world.
During the period of 1930s Modernism,
schools tended to be half modern under the
local authority architects who designed them.
Here, however, was a eld suitable for a gently
romanticized social architecture. Denis Clarke
Halls school at Richmond, Yorkshire, completed just as the war broke out, showed how
Modernism could be a matter of fruit trees
and cheerful colours as much as a brave new
world of concrete or steel. In 1944 the Butler
Education Act prepared the way for a major
rebuilding programme. Soon the rapidly
rising birth rate, combined with growth in
some residential areas, threatened to make
existing school buildings unsustainable and
made school building a political priority
and gave efciency its nest hour.
The solution to this crisis that has become imprinted in history was the
one developed in the architects ofce of Hertfordshire County Council
under the patronage of the Chief Education Ofcer John Newsom, and
the architectural leadership of Stirrat Johnson-Marshall. With an eager
team, the problem of rapid production to predictable budgets and timetables was analysed, and a solution found in liaison with the manufacturer,
Hills of West Bromwich, who supplied a light steel frame system, based on
modules that in simple repetition created standard classroom sizes. The
frame not only worked in linear series, but also could be connected in any
direction, allowing the plan forms to vary according to individual designers interpretation of a sites special qualities or a renement in teaching
theory. It was clever, but unlike many prefabrication systems, not so clever
as to limit practicability. In the minds of the designers, the effectiveness of
the end product was dependent on a combination of factors, including the
anonymity of the designer within a group and the sharing of research
between all the parties involved. This was a moral ideal with a demonstrable outcome in an improved service to the public.
The Hertfordshire schools that began to be published in architectural
magazines from 1946 had little resemblance to pre-war Modernist buildings, being less concerned with formality of exterior and more with creating interesting and colourful interior spaces, with outdoor planting
50
Architects CoPartnership,
Margaret Wix Primary
School, St Albans,
c.1956, a typical
Hertfordshire school.
and occasional pieces of modern sculpture.

Where possible, items such as washbasins
were redesigned, manufacturers being
condent in future orders. What began in
Hertfordshire spread to become a national
system of building, rened over time by its
inventors, such as the architect couple David
and Mary Medd, who transferred to the
architectural staff of the Ministry of
Education. The Hills system was joined during the 1950s by clasp (Consortium of Local
Authorities Special Programme), which had
many similar features, and continued into the 1970s, generating a whole
university campus at York along the way.
Hertfordshire schools tamed technology from a devouring monster
to a friendly servant. The people who designed them were keen on
Lethaby, and one can imagine him returning the compliment. In this
moment, the problem of reconciling function, social purpose and aesthetics seemed to reach equilibrium, although in the collectivism of a design
group the impulse to excel could become dulled by routine over time.
One response was to reinvigorate the poetics of architecture through
a return to individualist creativity. Another was to attempt a return to
a more rigorous functionalism through prefabrication. During the 1950s
and 60s modern architects became split between these alternatives,
occasionally crossing from one side to another.
Hertfordshire County
Council (A.W.C. Barr),
Templewood School,
Welwyn Garden City,
1949.
51
chapter two
Compassion: Modern Architecture

Builds the Just City
In the Hertfordshire schools there was a balance between the technical
aspects of Modernism and the humanist ones. The ethos of the schools
was a nurturing one, in contrast to the sense of struggle and survival so
prevalent in social thought at the beginning of the twentieth century.
While the technical achievements of British Modernism were not
insignicant, the application of creative and liberal social thinking to the
design of buildings and cities was arguably Britains most distinctive
contribution to the Modern Movement worldwide. It is usually seen as
something that coincided with the post-war welfare state, but, like that
great change in social thinking, its roots go back much further, to the
late nineteenth century, when the attractive, nature-conscious architecture of the middle classes was given to the poor as a sign of hope. Fascism
had a substantial body of British sympathizers, so that during the 1930s,
after modern architecture had taken root and begun to ourish, it was
recruited along with the other arts to the cause of social democracy.
Many architects were happy to moderate the harsh side of Modernism to
show the benets of a future as described by Louis MacNeice in the
closing passages of Autumn Journal (1939):
Where life is a choice of instruments and none
Is debarred his natural music,
Where the waters of life are free of the ice-blockade of hunger
And thought is free as the sun . . . 1
Eric Mendelsohn and

Serge Chermayeff,
De La Warr Pavilion,
Bexhill-on-Sea,
East Sussex, 1935.
For poets of MacNeices generation, including W. H. Auden and

Stephen Spender, the early 1930s induced the same urgent feeling that
dramatic change was required, for the sake of art and society alike, aided
by Marx and Freud. Architecture shared these gureheads of our transition, as MacNeice called them, as well as the educated middle-class guilt
about the condition of the working poor in Britain. From the Marxist
abstractions of class and historical necessity, many of the young generation of cultural leaders in Britain moved towards a more tolerant and
inclusive view of the future, tempered by age and experience, although

the idealism lived on for many decades. In 1934 the American cultural
critic and historian Lewis Mumford ended his book Technics and
Civilisation with the opinion that it would be a gross mistake to seek
wholly within the eld of technics for an answer to all the problems that
have been raised by technics. What was needed was a rebuilding of the
individual personality and the collective group, and the reorientation of
all forms of thought and social activity towards life.2 In architecture and
planning, subjects to which he devoted much of his time, Mumford
saw the emergence of a biotechnic order . . . pointing to a civilisation
in which the biological sciences will be freely applied to technology, and
in which technology itself will be oriented toward the culture of life.3
The culture of life, the subject of MacNeices passage, was an area in
which Modernists intended to show their superiority to the rather tired,
existing neo-Georgian norm of social architecture. If modern architecture
were by its own denition architecture with a social purpose, then almost
any examples would serve to illustrate the theme. Some were more carefully considered in this respect than others, while, conversely, it was possible to build social architecture that was not Modernist in looks, and is
therefore unfairly struck out of the category. For example, the early ats
built by the St Pancras Home Improvement Society, founded in 1923 by
the charismatic Father Basil Jellicoe, a mission priest at St Marys, Somers
Town, near St Pancras station, were neo-Georgian, although good of
their kind and ornamented with little pieces of sculpture or ceramic relief,
with a strong focus on ower boxes, which distinguished them from dour
Victorian tenements. Some of these ats can be seen in the background of
a photograph showing General Sir Ian Hamilton (confusingly, the namesake of the Societys architect) setting re to a pyre of rotten timbers from
demolished terraces, surmounted by giant models of bedbugs, the curse
of the slums, while Father Jellicoe looks on. This was only one of many
publicity devices aimed at bringing in donations for the Societys work.
Although the architecture was traditional, Jellicoes fundraising techniques,
involving a mobile cinema show, were not. The Trust engaged the rst
woman Chartered Surveyor in Britain, Irene Barclay.4
Quarry Hill Flats in Leeds was also inspired by a minister of religion
turned local Labour politician, the Reverend Charles Jenkinson, carrying on the mission of late Victorian Christian socialism. A number of
architects joined or sympathized with the Communist Party in the 1930s,
despite the inconvenient fact that modern architecture was banned
under Stalin, and revived academic classicism took its place.5
Left-wing attitudes accompanied a shift in the architects own role
from gentleman practitioner to employee of a public organization.
54
General Sir Ian

Hamilton sets fire to
a ceremonial bonfire
of rotten timber and
giant models of rat,
flea and bug, to promote the work of the
St Pancras Housing
Society, January 1931.
Writing in 1942, John Summerson related this to the discovery of

Modernism in the 1920s, which itself led to
a wider conception of what architecture is, of its relation to siting,
to town-planning and thus to sociology, and more remotely to
politics: then, from politics back to sociology, and the sociological
position of the architect himself.6
The Association of Architects, Surveyors and Technical Assistants (aasta)

was formed to be effectively a trade union for architects of the type that
Summerson described, working for local authorities or for organizations such as the Miners Welfare Commission and the Scottish Special
Housing Association. He believed that the political situation of the
1930s infused it with vitality so that it came to ll the role . . . proposed
by the mars Group, but which that round-table of architectural highbrows was too supine and introvert to perform. The professional status
of architects was more clearly dened in the Architects Registration Act
passed in 1938.
Sweden demonstrated the links between Social Democracy and
Modernism by turning to the former in 1932 after the corrupt conservative regime of the 1920s reached its nadir and the army shot ve strikers,
and to the latter in 1930 at the Stockholm Exhibition, where Gunnar
Asplund, Sven Markelius and the theorist Gregor Paulsson revealed a
55
Compassion: Modern Architecture Builds the Just City
change of heart, explaining it in a lengthy manifesto, acceptera (Accept!)

in 1931. Keynsian economic policies succeeded in generating employment and the foundations of a Social Democratic welfare state, dened
in the word folkhemmet (the peoples home), in which people of all
conditions would be cared for. In Sweden, expenditure on childrens
education and health was seen as investment in human capital, and this
exposed the callousness and ultimate inefciency of Britains tight-sted
welfare provision.
The new thinking of the 1930s was that compassion was a precondition for efciency, not a hindrance. Another political model observed
with interest from Britain was that of America under Franklin D.
Roosevelts New Deal. The project that caught the imagination of architects and planners most strongly was the Tennessee Valley Authority,
one of the New Deal showpieces, which involved coordinated control of
natural resources, relocation of population as well as prefabricated housing, reecting Lewis Mumfords ideas of regional reconstruction.
A Modern Architecture of Compassion?
Ignorance and poverty were barriers to health, as was the mindbody
split introduced by mechanist thinking and the social conventions
against showing the body, especially for women. The generation after
the First World War began to overcome some of these problems, and
Modernism offered an appropriate architecture of compassion because
it too was stripped down, effacing the signs of history and class and
connecting with sunlight and nature, especially in the still-polluted
industrial cities.
Often, the buildings were one-off solutions, owing to the absence
of consistent nancial provision. Most exceptional in its novelty of
approach was the Pioneer Health Centre in Peckham in south-east
London, established in 1926 in rented premises by two doctors. It proposed a radical alternative to health care in this poor but stable community, based on prevention rather than cure, and linked to the structure
of the family rather than the individual. In 1935 the Centre opened its
purpose-built headquarters, designed by Owen Williams. The concrete
frame structure enabled the at roof to be used for roller skating and
provided visual transparency inside, so that members seeing swimming
or other activities done by people like themselves would be encouraged
to join in. In place of the industrial order of production there was a sort
of anarchy deliberately fostered by the organizers, which was seen as the
rst condition in any experiment in human applied biology.7 It is a sad
56
Sir Owen Williams,

Pioneer Health
Centre, Peckham,
London, 1935. This
cut-away drawing
dates from 1951,
shortly before the
closure of the Centre.
reection on the limits of the post-war welfare state that the Centre was
shut down in 1951, rather than being emulated all over the country. The
building was admired by Walter Gropius, not only as the best of the new
architecture in Britain, but also the only one that he found interesting.8
Jack Donaldson, who as a young man decided to give most of his money
to fund the Centre, was also the client for the Wood House, Shipbourne,
designed by Gropius.
The Finsbury Health Centre, opened in 1938 and designed by Lubetkin
and Tecton, operated in a different way, chiey as a tb screening centre
and clinic. As well as its intelligent approach to making building services
accessible, it presented a familiar image of a public building, with a central
entrance surmounted by the borough coat of arms and neo-Victorian
lettering, and a symmetrical layout. It showed Lubetkins rapid shift
from white Modernism to the use of colours and textures. The combination of imagery as well as certain formal devices within the design was
recognizable in post-war architecture, especially the Royal Festival Hall
of 1951.
Most social and architectural experiments had to be carried out by
private trusts or voluntary bodies, limiting their scope but avoiding the
danger of bureaucratic ossication of architecture. Even where public
money was used, it required an uncommon patron somewhere in the
organization concerned for modern architecture to be the outcome. This
was the case with the De La Warr Pavilion at Bexhill-on-Sea, Sussex, by
Mendelsohn and Chermayeff, which was the result of an architectural
competition assessed by Thomas Tait and promoted by the mayor, the
9th Earl De La Warr, who was the chief local landowner and also a
57
W. E. Lescaze,
boarding house for
Dartington School,
Devon, 1934.
member of Ramsay MacDonalds cabinet. The amenities were standard

for a municipal seaside theatre, with a restaurant, although a public
library and reading room represented a higher cultural aspiration, not
unlike the combination in a Soviet Workers Club. The architecture was
exceptional, offering space, light and a lift to the spirits. There was a conservative faction in the town that resented the style of the building and
contested the money spent on it, but the building was completed without any major compromise and opened in 1935, by the Duke and Duchess
of York, the future George vi and Queen Elizabeth.
The sun is one of our emotive nouns wrote Auden in 1938, and liberation through physical activity in the open air was learnt by the British
from working-class Germany in the 1920s, as well as from the international rich on the Cte dAzur. Many municipalities built open-air
swimming baths or lidos from 1928 onwards, the date when central
funding became available for the purpose. They came in a variety of
architectural styles, including various forms of Modernism. None was
H. Vicars Lobb, Youth

Hostel, Holmbury St
Mary, Surrey, 1935.
58
G. Philip Bell, Yacht

Club, Strangford
Lough, Co. Down,
Northern Ireland,
1938.
designed by leading architects. They were

most often the work of borough engineers,
but the basic requirements produced
accidental beauty. Other outdoor leisure
pursuits were embodied in Modernist
buildings, such as sailing in the Royal
Corinthian Yacht Club by Emberton, or the
forgotten little yacht club on Strangford
Lough in Ulster by G. Philip Bell. The
Youth Hostels Association, founded in
1930, began to commission new buildings,
including the Modernist brick hostel at
Holmbury St Mary, Surrey, by H. Vicars
Lobb, which was originally furnished with
Aalto chairs.9 An exhibition on Health,
Sport and Fitness held at the riba in 1938
reected a government campaign for what
the riba president of the time described as tter, atter Britons in the
form of the Physical Training and Recreation Act of 1937. The exhibition
showed a number of Continental examples (including many from
Germany and Italy, where tness formed part of the Fascist programme),
which put the meanness of British provisions to shame. The architectural
historian Christopher Hussey, reviewing it in Country Life, advocated a
more active use of the countryside for leisure as a corollary to its preservation, but noted that in Sweden sports provision was funded by a tax
on football pools. Meanwhile, an editorial in the dias Trend magazine
commented on the curious irony that here where the open air was loved
for itself (Wordsworth, Constable) and where games are a religion,
green spaces are still a world away from thousands who need them most
the children of the slums.10
The feeling that urban mass culture was a danger to peoples better
instincts led Henry Morris, the young Education Ofcer of Cambridgeshire County Council, to invent the idea of the Village Colleges in 1923,
completing the rst building in 1930 at Sawston. A Village College was
a local school with additional facilities, such as meeting rooms and a
public lending library for use by the adult population in the evenings.
It was a simple idea for getting maximum use from one set of facilities,
but also asserted that farm labourers and their wives could and should
have somewhere to go in their leisure time other than the pub. The
county architect, S. E. Urwin, designed Sawston in a neo-Georgian
style, but was urged by Morris to adopt a modern style for the next
two colleges, at Bottisham (1937) and Linton (1938). The nal one of the
59
Walter Gropius
and Maxwell Fry,
Impington Village
College, Cambridge,
19379. The model
shows an unexecuted
gymnasium.
pre-war series was Impington, designed by Walter Gropius and executed

to a tight budget after his departure to the usa in 1937 by Jack Howe,
a young assistant in the ofce of Maxwell Fry. Other local authority
architects made a contribution comparable to Urwins, such as W. T.
Curtis, designer of many brick schools in Middlesex to accommodate
the rising population of the suburbs. A small number of local authorities, such as the West Riding of Yorkshire, commissioned modern
buildings, either from outside architects such as Oliver Hill (Whitwood
Mere, Castleford, 1939) and Burnet, Tait and Lorne. Invariably, the commissions came from a young and persuasive ofcer on the council staff.
Britain had many theorists of alternative education, some of whom
opened schools in existing buildings, lacking the funds to build new. The
only school to employ modern architecture in quantity was Dartington,
part of a project of rural reconstruction by Dorothy and Leonard
Elmhirst, endowed with the American fortune she had inherited, and run
by Leonard in emulation of the poet Rabindranath Tagores community
of Santinikatan in Bengal. Beginning in 1926, radical arts, ecological recovery and scientic efciency were brought together in the luscious Devon
countryside, in buildings ranging from a medieval royal great house,
through late Arts and Crafts to Modernism, which arrived almost by accident in 1932 in the luggage of the new headmaster of Dartington School,
the educational experiment that was one of the manifold activities. W. B.
Curry had worked in a school near Philadelphia designed by the Swiss
Modernist William Lescaze, and persuaded Dartington to employ him for
a number of years. A set of ne International Style buildings resulted.
The Miners Welfare Commission was set up in 1921, and through its
architecture aimed to provide the miner and his family with fuller
60
H. W. Rowbotham
(for the LCC),
Parliament Hill Lido,
London, 1935.
A whirlpool bath
at a pithead bath
building provided by
the Miners Welfare
Commission.
opportunities for recreation both of body and mind, with a brighter

social life, and generally with a healthier and sweeter environment than
the nature of his occupation can otherwise offer to him.11 Pithead baths
were a priority, enabling miners to change out of working clothes and
avoid the daily ritual of a tub in front of the kitchen re after work. The
Commission initially used the designs of a retired naval commander, B.
T. Coote, but after 1925 J. H. Forshaw, one of a new breed of public architects, was employed to lead a mwc architects branch, and 345 pithead
baths were built between 1928 and 1939. Like Curtis in Middlesex, or
Harold Rowbotham, who designed park buildings for the lcc, they
found that the Dutch brick style of W. M. Dudok, architect of Hilversum
New Town, suited their purposes of representing progress rather than
revolution. The style involved clear interlocking volumes with horizontal
bands of windows, contrasted with points of vertical emphasis around
towers or staircases. Although not at the cutting edge of style, these
buildings, resulting from research and teamwork, brought the tangible
benets of Modernism to a group of workers whose living conditions
were typical of unreformed Victorian capitalism. Since the virtual collapse
of the British coal industry in the 1980s, few
remain standing.
Charles Holdens work for Frank Pick
and the London Underground has been mentioned already, but its missionary context
deserves more exploration. In a fascinating
analysis, the American historian Michael Saler
has linked Picks tastes and motives for
social improvement back to the Arts and
Crafts Movement, and more specically to
his Nonconformist background in York. From
61
the example of Pick and the Underground, Saler has generalized a mediaeval modernist style in distinction to a more avant-garde Modernism of
the 1930s, dened by its iconography, which retained traditional symbolism in a modern style. There is certainly something in the unpretentiousness of these buildings, and their inclusion within a complete programme
of public service design, that extends more widely in the ethos of English
Modernism both before and after the war. Although the writings of
Ruskin were deeply unfashionable between the wars, his effect on linking
the aesthetic, social and spiritual remained a deep underlying inuence.
In 1939 Nikolaus Pevsner wrote:
it would be wrong to assume that there are no British architects
of strong personality who have contributed new and independent
solutions to the international modern style. There are several
just as there are certain modern themes specially developed or
even created in England, e.g. the planned trading estate, the pithead bath or the health centre.12
John Summerson in 1942 predicted a regression from the most

advanced outposts reached by, say, Tecton Maxwell Fry or Wells Coates
and that instead,
interest will centre in evolving a type of design incorporating
many accepted formulas of planning and nish, but more exible
than anything which there could have been before the onset of the
modern movement between the wars.13
In a book review of 1940, Tim Bennett, a brilliant young architect killed

in 1942, looked forward to an even greater convergence between architectural style and popular taste in a Modernist vernacular, with words
that Lethaby might have used: We can look forward to a time when architecture will again be ne building, just as old manors and churches were
ne cottages and barns.14
An even wider pluralism was evident in an exercise conducted early
in 1939 to ask 50 public gures to choose their favourite six modern
buildings.15 The outcome failed to follow obvious preferences for one
sub-section of modern architecture rather than another, so that most
respondents mixed the more traditional examples, such as Battersea
Power Station (11 votes) with more obviously modern ones, such as
Peter Jones (highest score with 15 votes). A few completely traditional
buildings, such as the Jockey Club at Newmarket by Albert Richardson
and the church of St Philip, Cosham, by Ninian Comper, received at
62
least one vote, the latter being the choice of John Betjeman, the poet who
worked on the Architectural Review between 1930 and 1935, later becoming a national gure responsible for opening English eyes to buildings
and the environment. Comper was at odds with the modern world, as
Betjeman also increasingly became, but was an original artist and a profound thinker.16 Modern architecture appealed to educated people, but
even among these it remained a minority taste. By the time of the war,
some supporters had doubts about the chances of it becoming popular
in its existing form. John Summerson, who wrote much of the caption
copy for the mars Groups exhibition at the beginning of 1938, confessed
in a letter to the painter Ben Nicholson in 1940: I think modern architecture will have to beat a retreat, simply because the public cant understand it, never will, and hates it like poison.17 Unwilling to commit to
any alternative, Summerson concealed his ambivalent feeling.
Garden Cities Horizontal or Vertical?
When 1930s Modernists in Britain thought about planning new cities, they
experienced less sense of a violent break with the past than was the case
with architectural style. The great English contribution to European
Modernism was the Garden City, not for its architecture, which was no
more modern than simplied Arts and Crafts, but for the concept of a
planned settlement in which grass and trees played a signicant role and
industry was carefully zoned away from housing. Before the First World
War, the architect of New Frankfurt, Ernst May, worked for the leading
designer of the Garden City movement, Raymond Unwin, and the inuence could easily be traced in his work. In the 1930s Unwin himself became
one of the gures of the older generation sympathetic to Modernism.
What had begun so promisingly in the planning and construction of
the rst garden suburbs and the Town Planning Act of 1909, the rst of its
kind, had gone terribly wrong by the 1930s, but governments seemed
unable to correct it through further legislation. The historian Alan Jackson
attributed the dismal result to lack of central government time and
willpower, lack of properly qualied planning advisers at a local level, and
lack of coordination between local authorities.18 For the left, private enterprise in a free market was bound to lower cultural standards and only the
collaboration of intellectuals with the state could be trusted to deliver
efciency and fair shares to all. The romantic right (along with a section of
the left) deplored the suburbanization of England, which was besmirching
the country and upsetting social hierarchies.
The despised suburban semi-detached villa (a paired grouping of
houses symmetrical about a party wall) effected an extraordinary transfor63
Mrs Elsy Borders with

her family outside
Insanity, 81 Kingsway,
Coney Hall, Kent,
1939.
mation in British social class. It went further

towards solving the slum problem than any
direct government intervention, but the cost
in amenity and aesthetics was a high one,
and the original and much more principled
Garden City movement was blamed for producing a hermaphrodite, sterile, imbecile, a
monster, abhorrent, loathsome to the Nature
which he worships.19 The more politically
minded saw these houses as the expression
of impotent individualism, expressed in
their minute differentiation and compartmentalization of outdoor space, detracting
from the spirit of community. The Architects and Technicians Organisation (ato,
into which aasta was absorbed in 1941) was
set up to help people on housing estates who
were having problems over repairs or faulty
construction, including the most famous,
Mrs Elsy Borders, who trained as a lawyer to
defend her case against a jerry builder in
south-east London. The public sector alternative, municipal cottage estates in places such as Becontree, Essex, and
Wythenshawe, Manchester, were architecturally sober but dull because of
the lack of such basic urban amenities as shops and markets.
By the end of the 1930s a growing section of architectural opinion
saw suburbs as a wasted opportunity to create towns more on the lines
of English tradition, usually interpreted as a Georgian palimpsest overlaid on medieval street plans. The received idea of Modernism as a
mathematical grid had little to offer in this respect, and a new alliance
between Modernism and history began to emerge in Britain. The new
housing estates in Germany by May and others from the mid-1920s
showed the lesson of open space and controlled growth interpreted not
in vernacular cottage architecture, but in a mixture of terraced houses
and medium-rise ats, not so far removed from the semi, but symbolic
of community rather than individualism. British schemes such as
Quarry Hill, Leeds, aimed to recreate this feeling of a large, embracing,
neutral background of architecture, although the central space at
Quarry Hill was never landscaped to match Tauts Hufeisen or horseshoe of ats at Britz.
Writing in 1974, Alison Ravetz summarized the arguments of the
time in favour of flats under the headings of economics and social
64
Photomontage of
slab block of flats on
the site of Blenheim
Palace, created in
1935 for an article
by W. A. Eden in the
Architectural Review.
exigency the wastefulness of leaving inner urban sites underdeveloped; technical innovation; social idealism; Continental example; ne
architecture; and the preservation of rural land.20 The mathematics of
density appeared to favour height, giving the promised benet of
open space. The enthusiasm for flats of the type proposed by Le
Corbusier was driven by the desperate feeling of the early 1930s,
encouraging solutions that went against traditional habits almost for
their own sake in order to acknowledge the need for radical change. A
theoretical proposal of 1935 showed a slab block occupying the site of
Blenheim Palace, and therefore doing no damage to the landscape,
contrasted with a scatter of low-density low-rise dwellings. These images
subtly helped to insert the large housing slab within a cultural tradition of English landscape design, promising to the worker the amenities
of a duke, although the Danish writer Steen Eiler Rasmussen warned
the British against adopting these inferior standards of housing and
abandoning their own traditions.21
65
The incentive to build ats grew stronger during the course of the
1930s. The Housing Act of 1930 offered a subsidy from central government funds to local authorities based on the number of people displaced, which increased for buildings more than three storeys in height.
Suburban cottage estates were still eligible for subsidy until 1933, when
Sir Hilton Young, the Health Minister of the coalition (National) government, reserved the subsidy exclusively for ats. The Dudley Report
on Slum Clearance of 1934 anticipated the use of much taller ats, and
in the comment of Lewis Silkin as Chairman of the lcc Housing
Committee we hear an anticipation of post-war condence in high rise.
He believed that though the public
might be prejudiced in favour of ve storey as against ten storey
blocks, the question should be viewed with an open mind and it
might be found advisable to build higher than they at present
contemplated.22
The Housing Act of 1935 accelerated the rate of slum clearance by offering higher subsidies for a limited term of three years, producing what
Alison Ravetz calls the great quinquennium of at building. The takeup rate for building ats varied considerably from one place to another,
although by 1939, Ravetz argues, there was a wider acceptance from
many different groups of the idea of living in ats.
The acceptance of ats, never more than grudging, reected a lack of
imagination or will to do anything different. London was still restricted
by its Building Regulations to 80 feet of habitable height, usually making six or seven storeys. For cheaper ats, ve storeys was the maximum
practicable height without the additional cost of lifts. The models of the
future of working-class housing were more often from the private sector, including Wells Coatess Isokon (1934), Lubetkins and Tectons
Highpoint (1935) and Frederick Gibberds Pullman Court (1935). Where
ats by elite modern architects were actually for the working class, they
were mainly supported by some form of subsidy, as with Maxwell Frys
Sassoon House, Peckham (1934), which was funded by a private benefactor, or the industrial sponsorship of his Kensal House (1936). Longer
established housing charities, such as the Guinness Trust and the Four
Per Cent Industrial Dwellings Company, also employed modern, if less
newsworthy, architects on some of their schemes.23
Kensal House was the most effective of the Modernist blocks in its
inclusion of shared social facilities of a type offered in some Continental
schemes, owing to the involvement of the housing consultant Elizabeth
Denby, who gave Fry his earlier opportunity at Sassoon House after his
66
E. Maxwell Fry, with

housing consultant
Elizabeth Denby,
Kensal House Flats,
North Kensington,
London, 1937.
epiphany of the portal truss. From experience in housing management

rather than architecture, she could see beyond the abstraction of community to the reality. Kensal House was commissioned by the Gas Light
and Coke Company, whose initial interest was to improve the design of
gas-red domestic appliances, until Denby persuaded them to develop a
derelict industrial site in North Kensington, her main area of activity, as
a full-scale demonstration of modern living, and Fry put himself forward for the commission. Aided by the topography of the site, which
made it difcult for the ground level to be inhabited, there was a communal room, a workshop for men and, the greatest coup of all, a nursery school introduced as an addition to the brief in the round shape of
a former gasholder on the site. Equally important, however, was the
desire to ease the womans work at home in cooking and laundry by a
more thoughtful design of spaces and equipment. Denby referred to the
scheme as an urban village, and wrote about the delight with which
many of the residents had responded to the new opportunities for gardening and maintenance.24 She insisted that when one resident constructed an elaborate trellis on his balcony, seemingly at odds with the
modern aesthetic, others should be allowed to do the same. Kensal
House appeared in the form of a model in the pioneering documentary
lm Housing Problems (1935), in tacit contrast to an lcc block, which
67
Elizabeth Denby,
The All-Europe House,
as displayed at the
Daily Mail Ideal Home
Exhibition, 1939.
Preparation of the
MARS Group display
on Bethnal Green for
the New Homes for
Old Group, shown at
the Building Trades
Exhibition, Olympia,
London, 1934.
was efcient but soulless. On completion, a

separate lm showed it in action, while the
Ascot Water Heater Company produced a
lavish book on ats, in which it occupied
centre stage.
Denby joined with architects and activists, many of them women, in a series of
exhibitions, under the title New Homes for
Old, between 1931 and 1938. The campaign
shifted from persuading authorities simply
to take responsibility for housing to arguments about the most appropriate forms
of provision. In 1934 the Housing Centre
was formed by voluntary activists, mostly
women, among them the architect Judith
Ledeboer, who made a link with members
of the mars Group and the ato. They were
critical of the erection of human cages, which are a mockery of housing, as they described the standard walk-up tenement blocks normally
provided by local authorities, which had almost no amenities, no connection with a wider neighbourhood and no visual graces.25 Denby was
uneasy with the whole notion that ats would become the universal
housing form of the future, suggesting that there was a position beyond
the choice between two impractical and unnecessary extremes represented by Garden Cities and ats.26 The rows of terrace cottages built in
Regency days, with a small garden in front and a long one behind, she
explained at the riba in 1936, were built at a density of 50 or 60
dwellings to the acre. That is the density at which we are now building
ats.27 This solution fell between the subsidy provisions of the government, and Denby was patronizingly put down by Lewis Silkin, who
could not imagine altering the ministerial norms. In the conclusion to
her book Europe Re-housed (1938), however, Denby proposed that social
housing should ideally merge invisibly into the urban texture through a
mixture of rehabilitation and new-build inll, with an end to zoning
snobberies more typical of the European city or the pre-industrial
British city. Clean and quiet industries should be readmitted. This
would encourage a welcome return to street architecture in Britain,
she believed.28 In the same year, students at the Architectural
Association, working under Max Lock, later an important planner, took
the bold step of interviewing the potential clients for new housing in
Ocean Street, Stepney, with the help of the left-wing group MassObservation. This was a lcc redevelopment area where two-storey terraces
69
were destined to be replaced with standard ats, as the subsidy regulations required. They discovered that the majority of residents would
prefer replacement houses, and furthermore that overall density would
be unaffected if these were provided. Although this exercise received
some attention at the time, the methodology and the outcome were
largely forgotten in the post-war years.
Denby seems in retrospect an increasingly signicant gure. She stood
almost alone in her capacity to assess the actual situation in housing,
unaffected by dogma, and thus to move beyond the cruder models of technological progress that appealed so strongly to architects. F. R. Yerbury,
long-serving secretary of the aa, recognized her special contribution:
she obviously does not belong to that scientically-minded school
of thought which would teach people how to live. Rather, one
imagines, she would help them to live in a more comfortable and
richer way than they had been able to do so before.29
The Romantic Turn in Modern Architecture

It is becoming more widely recognized how much Modernism of the
1930s differed from that of the 1920s, turning from the active to the contemplative mode, and more concerned to heal than to destroy.30 Marcel
Breuer, arriving in London in 1935, published an important text, Where
Do We Stand?, in the Architectural Review in April (it was originally
delivered to the Swiss Werkbund in Zurich the previous year).31 He registered his own desire to go beyond mechanistic forms to a more intuitive way of designing, and pointed to a more varied range of possibilities
within Modernism. The freedom to experiment and run the full range
of expression had become for him the real gauge of our strength.
Breuers thoughts matched the rural, contemplative image of Britain
that emerged in response to the crisis at the beginning of the decade.
Interest revived in the eighteenth-century landscape and the Picturesque
eclecticism of the Regency, seen afresh through Modernist trends in
poetry and painting, especially Surrealism. The Architectural Review was
keen to promote this self-referential and educated type of Modernism,
which was potentially less alienating for the public than the high
Modernism of the previous decade.
Timber was a crucial material and Serge Chermayeffs house at Bentley
Wood, completed in 1938, was one of several modern timber houses of
the time, remaining the most celebrated example of a perfect balance
between Modernism and the English tradition of rapport with nature.
Breuer made his contribution in the Gane Show House at the Royal West
70
Marcel Breuer, pavilion

for A. E. Gane Ltd at
the Royal West of
England Show, 1936.
of England Show in 1935, presenting a mixture of rough-stone walling,

much of it built on the curve (allowing a thin wall to stand without
buttressing), with large panes of glass and plywood inside. Lubetkins
enriched palette of materials at the Finsbury Health Centre has been
mentioned, and Maxwell Fry later recorded his search just before the war
for something richer and more satisfying than reinforced concrete, and
not so much for the structure as for the nish. The results can be seen
in a student hostel in North Gower Street, London (1939), where Fry
used brick to give texture: rough red brick, and shiny, blue-glazed
tiles, set in contrast to a highly nished faade of sliding metal
windows alternating with opaque, vitreous-glass panels, so that the
two sets of surfaces the metallic and the organic should set up
a lively conversation within the framework of the whole.32
J. M. Richards, writing for a popular audience of Penguin readers

in 1940, saw regionalism in architecture as a form of progress, and not
conned to England:
71
Countries have their own different temperaments and ideals, and

different climates, habits and raw materials. They also have a past,
and the national culture of which their modern architecture is
part is not separable from its roots, even if it were desirable that it
should be. So, as modern architecture matures, a new differentiation according to national characteristics is inevitable not on
the basis of the racial exclusiveness of Nazism, and not so clear
or distinct as would have been the case many years ago . . . As
mankind is still organised into nations biologically as well as
politically a permanently international architecture would not
even be produced by literal functionalism.33
E. Maxwell Fry, Cecil

Residential Hostel for
Women, North Gower
Street, St Pancras,
London, 1939.
The appeal to biology was part of the romantic trend, operating on

the level of popular science writing, in which mechanistic models for
understanding the world were being replaced by holistic ones. During
and after the war, the separate profession of landscape architecture in
Britain began to have an effect, combining scientic understanding of
72
the land with a humanist understanding of how the environment had

been shaped historically. At the end of the war, books by the landscape
architects Brenda Colvin (Land and Landscape, 1948) and Sylvia Crowe
(Tomorrows Landscape, 1956) offered architects a fresh way of understanding the relationship of buildings to other human interventions in
the landscape. As Colvin wrote:
human life at the present stage of evolution becomes so articial
that we seem easily to forget that man is just part of the rest of
nature and that, in spite of his immense powers of adaptation and
his ability to create new conditions, he is still utterly dependent on
such things as weather, soil and plants for his very existence.34
Landscape and planting became a fully integrated aspect of the

best modern architecture in the post-war decades, so that it is hard to
recall how much needed to be learnt. Switzerland, Germany, the
Scandinavian countries and America all offered examples of designed
landscapes that worked with modern architecture, often unobtrusively,
as in Holger Bloms famous linear park on the shore of Lake Malaren in
Stockholm. Where early Modernist architecture might seem to involve
mostly looking up into the sky, the next phase included much attention
to what was beneath ones feet. Geoffrey Jellicoe, who taught at the aa
in the early 1930s and encouraged modern design, made this a feature
of his studio discussions. Frederick Gibberd took over from him as
head of the school during the war, and led many major post-war practitioners such as Powell & Moya, Leonard Manasseh and Neville
Conder to think less of the building form in itself and more about the
spaces between buildings. Jellicoe, Gibberd and other architects such as
Peter Shepheard developed a dual practice designing buildings and
open spaces of various kinds after the war, from small urban parks and
gardens to the settings for large industries, including power stations.
Many other architects had a sideline in planting trees and shrubs
around their buildings to model the space and develop atmosphere.
Thus the often rather bald presentation of modern architecture changed
to a situation where the building form was deliberately lost over time in
leaves and shadows. The tendency was to revert to apparently traditional materials for paving and other hard landscape works, such as
cobbled borders to paths, but these could equally be seen as modern in
a timeless sense.
73
Planning and Wartime Reconstruction

The war gave the cause of the revised modern architecture and planning
its great opportunity, which was met in the new spirit of anti-extremist
tolerance. As Sonya Rose has written,
as early as 1939, and gathering strength as the war progressed,
there was a growing almost millenarian belief that a new Britain
would rise up from the ruins of war. This would be a Britain not
only with rebuilt cities and towns, but a Britain that was socially
transformed.35
Thus the social direction of Modernism in the 1930s already set a path
that was followed into the 1950s.
In 1940, with the outcome of the war still extremely uncertain, the
architect Ralph Tubbs, a pre-war assistant to Ern Goldnger, organized
the exhibition Living in Cities for the 1940 Council and the British
Institute of Adult Education, one of the rst of many exhibitions that
were circulated to show servicemen and other war workers what they
could hope for after the war. Penguin Books produced an attractive
companion volume, whose penultimate page, titled Some Misconceptions, indicated the shift away from functionalism by this date:
That modern architecture ignores tradition
That modern architecture means at roofs and white concrete walls
That architects are trying to impose an international style
That planners want everyone to live in ats
That the modern planners idea of the city of to-morrow is a city
of skyscrapers
That garden cities are a solution to the town-planning problems
of to-day.36
The last item reected the new concern to regenerate existing cities,
already partially cleared by bombs in many cases, retaining a real commitment to urbanity. The popular left-wing illustrated weekly Picture
Post devoted the rst issue of 1941 to A Plan for Britain, with an article
on planning and architecture by Maxwell Fry, with before and after
illustrations of a typical industrial town, remodelled as a Corbusian idyll
of slab blocks among greenery, similar to the endpapers of Tubbss book,
which were not wholly reassuring in respect of the misconceptions
quoted. The town of the future can well be a place of open spaces diversied and dignied by building and interlaced by trafc ways for vehicles
74
R. Myerscough-Walker,
A Plan for Britain,
Picture Post,
14 January 1941.
and walkers, Fry wrote, adding: I have often thought that parts of
Cambridge might set the standard.37
When the bombs began to fall, the architect and planner William
Holford, the young former head of Civic Design at Liverpool, was recruited to a new Reconstruction Group. In a letter of 1942, he explained how
the political pressures constrained action:
Government holds, in this tightly packed and ancient island, an
uneasy balance between public and private interest, but has not
solved the difculty of promoting development itself in which
I include good architecture, public works, national parks and
reservations, even a rst class road system.38
These were tasks requiring new legislation and administration. Despite

hesitations, a Ministry of Town and Country Planning was created in
November 1942, against a background of growing optimism about the
outcome of the war, helped by the entry of the Americans and Russians
as allies of Britain.
Heavy bombing in Coventry in November 1940 allowed a pre-war replanning scheme for the congested medieval centre to proceed, under
75
Basil Spence, Coventry

Cathedral, 195162.
Donald Gibson
(City Architect),
plan for the reconstruction of Coventry
city centre after
bombing, 1941.
Donald Gibson, one of the new type of ofcial architect planners who
had arrived in his post before the war and was impatient to reject the
cautious and conservative ideas of his seniors. Gibsons new scheme
involved a new shopping centre, all pedestrianized on two levels, placed
on axis with the spire of the bombed cathedral, encircled by a ring road,
and containing such groups of historic buildings as had survived amid
the new trees and grass. Beyond the ring road, Gibson and his team
planned new residential neighbourhoods, and although the architecture
was mostly rather pedestrian too, Basil Spences picturesquely sited new
cathedral, won in competition in 1951, added zest to the mixture and
Gibson considered it a major achievement to have avoided having a
Gothic design by Giles Gilbert Scott.
One of the chief concerns for Holford and his team who transferred
to the new ministry was the location of industry, a problem emphasized by the seemingly terminal unemployment in many areas where
traditional heavy industries such as steel and shipbuilding had virtually
ceased. Research and legislation in the 1930s established a principle
that government aid was needed to bring new industries into such
areas, and the wartime Barlow Report set a new policy framework for
creating benign and rational relationships between population, landscape and employment.
Brynmawr, a small and remote town in the Welsh Valleys, was typical
of the places the Barlow Report intended to help. During the 1930s it was
76
Cyril Mardall
(Sjstrm), Community
Centre, Brynmawr,
Gwent, Wales
(unexecuted), c. 1939.
already known through the independent action of a group of Quakers,

who established new light industries. One member of this group, Lord
Forrester, an electrical engineer and industrialist, also had an interest in
architecture, and commissioned pre-war projects (unbuilt) for prefabricated timber housing and a civic centre from Cyril Sjstrm (later
known as Cyril Mardall) in a light Scandinavian style. During the war,
Forrester commissioned a group of former aa students, formed into
the Architects Co-Operative Partnership, to build a large factory, the
Brynmawr Rubber Factory (194751; demolished 2001), which represented an emotional commitment to create an exceptional if not wholly
Architects Co-Operative
Partnership (consulting
engineer Ove Arup and
Partners), Brynmawr
Rubber Factory, Gwent,
Wales (demolished),
194751.
77
From Rebuilding
Britain, 1944.
appropriate building. These architects aimed, through an anonymous

group practice, to avoid the egotism of the earlier generation and, like
architects in public service, to become part of a shared movement based
on research and openness to experiment.
The Barlow Report was followed by the Scott Report on Land
Utilisation in Rural Areas (1942), anticipating new building in the country
in the form of enlargement of existing villages and the enhancement of
their community facilities. The report included a section on planning, recommending avoidance of historical styles but at the same time an abstract
sympathy for materials and context. Formally planned towns and villages
from the eighteenth century were upheld as exemplars to dispel fears
of incongruity.39 Paired to the Scott Report was the Uthwatt Report, in
some ways the most radical of these three foundation stones of post-war
planning, in that it recommended that the increased value accruing from
developed land should be returned to the community, and that development rights should effectively be nationalized by a restriction to existing
uses, unless permission was granted otherwise.
In 1943 Frys new personal and professional partner, Jane Drew (they
married in 1942), organized an exhibition Rebuilding Britain, based on
the work of the riba reconstruction committee, which was shown at
the National Gallery before touring. It represented the united front of
Modernist architecture and planning, broadly on ciam lines with an
emphasis on separate zones for different activities, but with plenty of
un-frightening examples of recent buildings with pitched roofs and
small-paned windows, and pairings to suggest the continuity between
Georgian and modern. The New Towns policy was
anticipated, in the recommendation that no single
city should be allowed to grow beyond a certain
size. There was a naive condence in the predictability of the future, and in unlimited supplies
of energy and materials, as seen in the revised
wartime version of the 1937 mars plan that was
proposed as a basis for London. Rural planning
and modernization assumed a new importance,
and new green belts around cities were expected to
provide fresh food in the future. In common with
almost all Modernist thinking of this time, the
value of densely built, historic cities was forgotten,
even though writers, artists and photographers
were discovering it anew. Thus Lionel Brett, a young
architect of the time, wrote in response to the
Royal Academys Beaux-Arts plan of 1943:
78
London Needs
a New Plan Now,
from Margaret and
Alexander Potter,
The Building of
London (1944).
the lover of London would nd his mysteries gone. By mysteries

I do not mean slums or smoke or trafc blocks, but the curving
line, the sheepy park, the piled-up asymmetrical silhouette, the
secret alley and the silent square. Parisian vistas are not in this
tradition.40
Installing an exhibition of the County of

London plan, 1944.
The inability to see London for what it could be when only gently
modernized was the legacy of generations of demonizing the slums,
for which the overarching solution was deemed to be a low density of
population. How low became the only question. For the County of
London Plan (1943), Patrick Abercrombie suggested 136 persons per
acre as a desirable norm for the reconstruction of built-up areas, an
apparently random gure. For Frederick Osborn, this was too many,
and he worked hard to ensure that the Greater London Plan (1945)
lowered the number to 100, and proposed eight or ten new towns well
outside the existing limits of London, combined with a cessation of
suburban building by setting up a green
belt. Moving through the East End of
London today, with its patchwork of surviving narrow streets and its rationally
placed but visually incoherent slab
blocks and mixed development, interspersed with large and seemingly superfluous open spaces and a few surviving
historic churches and pubs, one experiences the results of 1940s thinking in
action, and it seems a very inept way to
make a city.
79
Abercrombie applied the concept of neighbourhood planning to existing areas, and Shoreditch was drawn and modelled in detail to show the
effect of creating schools and other public facilities in the centre of an area
bounded by major roads. Since population had been declining in central
London since the Second World War, this trend was accepted as proper and
good, because the remaining residents could stretch into new space, while
the New Towns took the emigrants. The reintroduction of nature into the
city was a major theme, with new parks projected in areas that were
poorly served, and the River Lea turned into a linear park. Today, we may
think that there are limits to extending urban nature before it interferes
with urbanity and ease of movement, and that neighbourhoods conceived
in this fashion can become ghettos of social exclusion, cut off by major
roads. As Abercrombie showed in his plan for Plymouth, where he wanted
to maintain the oldest part of the city, the Barbican, as a historic centre, he
was sympathetic to the accidental poetry of urban development, although
the Plymouth plan equally shows how clumsily he hoped to improve it.
Local opposition to the Plymouth plan at the end of the war inspired the
young director Jill Craigie to make a lm, half fact and half ction, about
the people of the city and the planner coming among them, nishing
with a rousing march of the young through the ruins of the old in favour
of new houses, schools and pools.41
Thus the war ended, with high hopes and nearly ten more years of
hardship ahead. The provisions of the welfare state, offering health care
Still from the closing

sequence of The Way
We Live, director Jill
Craigie, 1945.
80
and education from national taxation, free at the point of delivery, were
mostly in place by the time of the 1945 elections, in which Jill Craigies
future husband, Michael Foot, later a leader of the Labour Party, whom
she met while making her lm, was elected to the seat of Devonport
Dockyard. He served under Clement Attlee in the administration that
also introduced in 1947 the Town and Country Planning Act, which put
into legislative form the modied recommendations of Barlow, Scott
and Uthwatt. These included provision for the protection of historic
buildings by listing without compensation to owners, and a presumption against the development of any land unless it was provided for in
local planning documents. By nationalizing development rights, the
government came close to actually nationalizing land.
New Empiricism
Frederick Gibberd,
housing at Somerford
Road, Hackney,
London, 1947.
In June 1947 the Swedish architect Sven Backstrm wrote a text to

accompany publication in the Architectural Review of three new Swedish
houses, under the title The New Empiricism, a name that stuck as a
description of the new form of Modernism.42 The image in the article of
Sven Markeliuss apparently informal bungalow near Stockholm, with a
back view of his daughter standing naked on the grass, was a sufcient
summary of the positive and life-assenting in architecture to which
Backstrm referred. The published plan of the house lovingly included
the canopy of each birch tree, and the shallow pitched roof with a deep
overhang, a feature just beginning to enter Modernism before the war,
set a pattern that was functionally more reliable and socially more
acceptable than the at roof for housing after 1945.
Sweden, which had remained relatively unaffected by the war, was a
popular destination for architects who picked up the new and unpretentious forms of modern architecture,
landscape and planning. These values
were found in housing at Somerford
Road, Hackney (1947), by Frederick
Gibberd, a mixed development of ats
and houses, linked by pedestrian pathways and sensitively landscaped, one
of the early projects at a time when all
building was still heavily restricted.
Among Gibberds friends were Herbert
Tayler and David Green, who found
themselves in Lowestoft during the war,
and went on to build more than 700
81
Tayler & Green,

Whiteways,
Wheatacre,
Norfolk, 1949.
houses in the remote Loddon district of Norfolk, up to the early 1970s.

These all had shallow pitched roofs, overhanging eaves and small decorative details, combined with sensitivity to the rise and fall of the site and
the gardening ambitions of the residents. In Taylers words:
We realised that having broken away from the international modern stuff, functional style if you like, that people lacked decoration
and enjoyment in the look of the houses and so we introduced all
sorts of colours, different colours for each house, brick patterns,
dates . . . Everybody liked it, people do like decoration.43
The New Empiricism corresponded to the dominant mood of relief at

the end of the war, and suited the patchwork effects demanded by erratic supplies of materials. Domesticity of any kind was welcome for a while,
and even the despised suburbs began to look charming in the eyes of
J. M. Richards, whose book, The Castles on the Ground (1946), struck at
the roots of Modernist belief in a way he could scarcely have imagined
ten years previously. It was a poetic reverie, but also a serious acknowledgement that the lifestyle choice of the majority of English people
might not deserve the disdain poured on it by the architectural community. Without sanctioning the cruder forms of inter-war suburb, Richards
made the case for the independent life that could be achieved in these
surroundings. To succeed, he wrote, the Modern Movement must keep
in touch at all costs with the people it serves, and . . . the needs of suburban dwellers, as expressed in the architectural style they have evolved for
themselves, is something it cannot afford to misunderstand.44
82
Since the mars Group was strong in numbers and organizing ability
at the end of the war, it was asked to organize two of the renewed series
of ciam conferences (1947 and 1951) at which the agenda reected the
change of mood in British architecture, with the themes of Architecture
in Relation to the Common Man and The Heart of the City. The conference of 1951 coincided with the Festival of Britain, an event involving
many of the younger mars members in designing temporary exhibition
pavilions on the South Bank in London, where a heavily bombed site
gave a long-sought opportunity to extend the cultural and ceremonial
centre of the capital across the river. The exhibition layout demonstrated the principles of Townscape, a visual philosophy of informal composition developed in the Architectural Review by the editor, Hubert de
Cronin Hastings, and a brilliant architect draughtsman, formerly with
Tecton, Gordon Cullen. This was the culmination of a decade spent
investigating the doctrine of the Picturesque that Hastings and Pevsner,
who carried out the research under Hastingss direction and encouragement, both considered the key to understanding the English genius in
the past and projecting it into a compassionate Modernist future,
through the layout strategies of the late Georgian and Regency periods,
rather than the direct imitation of that phase of architecture.
Of the eight topics through which Nikolaus Pevsner chose in 1955 to
illustrate his radio lectures on The Englishness of English Art, the last
was The Genius of the Place, a phrase made famous in 1731 by the poet
Alexander Pope to describe how to avoid the aridity of the French or
Dutch formal garden styles. Pevsner connected the English delight in
nature and gardening to the mildness of the climate, adding that this
eminently English style is also due to that English quality of tolerance,
of every case on its own merit.45 The picturesque rather than formal
approach to Modernism, Pevsner believed, was the quality that has
much to teach the Continent and America. In his analysis, Britain (or at
least England) had arrived at Modernism through a sort of back door
that had been standing open in history all the while, short-circuiting the
more laborious journey made by other nations.
The conditions of the South Bank exhibition site, intersected by
Hungerford Bridge, made it difcult to use a conventional symmetrical
exhibition layout, apart from the Concourse that extended from
Waterloo Station to the Skylon on the river bank, but in any case informality was preferred by the Director of Architecture, Hugh Casson, as
a political statement and as a more valuable model for urban renewal in
the near future. Out of the repertory of pre-war Modernism, a team of
architects developed architectural strategies for the exhibition buildings
that integrated the work of painters and sculptors, displayed engineering
83
The Concourse,
South Bank Exhibition,
Festival of Britain,
London, 1951
(fountains designed
by H. T. CadburyBrown, with the sea
and ships pavilion by
Basil Spence beyond).
in a playful spirit, using as much bright colour as possible, and creating

a general feeling of uplift both literal and metaphysical.46 Although the
site had only one tree at the beginning, mature trees were brought in,
and informal landscape and planting played an important role. The
Royal Festival Hall, offered by the lcc as its contribution to the site and
as a permanent symphony hall for London, reected the rise in popularity of the serious arts during the war, especially classical music and
ballet. It was an achievement to build anything on this scale under such
difcult conditions, and the result was held to be highly satisfactory,
despite later problems with over-engineered acoustics. In line with the
ethos of the time, it was a team effort, involving Robert Matthew, Leslie
Martin and Peter Moro, a former assistant of Lubetkin. More recently,
the Festival Hall has been reinvented as the Peoples Palace, and its ability to include all types of people at all times of day within the capacious
foyer spaces understood as part of the original intention, although at
rst it operated in a more conventional manner.
84
Robert Matthew and

Leslie Martin with
Peter Moro, Royal
Festival Hall, London,
194751.
All the content of the exhibitions was related to Britain in different

ways, providing a mixture of self-scrutiny and mild self-celebration. It
was certainly hoped that visitors would learn new ways to enjoy themselves, with modern design doing what it could to encourage a light
heart and an open attitude. The Festival was anti-militaristic and, as
Casson said in a lm made shortly after the event, nobody was taught
to hate anything.47 In contrast to earlier national exhibitions at
Wembley in 1924 and Glasgow in 1938, it said almost nothing about the
British Empire, which at the end of the war mutated into the British
Commonwealth of Nations. Whatever the deciencies of the project as
85
serious modern architecture, it proved popular and its rapid demolition

(apart from the permanent Royal Festival Hall and a handful of other
buildings) in October 1951, under the newly returned Conservative government of Winston Churchill, was widely regretted.
In the East End of London, the Live Architecture Exhibition came in
two parts. The Lansbury Estate was a demonstration of the rebuilding
of a small urban core and neighbourhood, according to Abercrombies
principles, master planned by Frederick Gibberd, who designed the
Chrisp Street Market as a junction of two pedestrian streets with shops
beneath arcades, more like the sort of city square one might meet in a
small European town than anything previously known in London or
most parts of Britain. Terraces of houses and low-rise ats continued the
theme in yellow London brick, with schools, churches, a Festival pub
and a clock tower, which visitors in 1951 could ascend to see Lansbury
laid out like an architectural model beneath them. Gibberd made the
Town Hall at Harlow New Town (the edgling town was included in the
ciam round of visits) into a similar Outlook Tower, following the pattern set by Patrick Geddes for gaining civic consciousness by looking
down from above. If Lansbury with its small windows and pitched roofs
making variations on London models was the architecture of compassion, it was a very quiet revolution.
The New Towns were a direct continuation of the Garden City movement of the beginning of the century, too obviously so for Colin Boyne,
technical editor of the Architects Journal, who wrote in 1955: they have
achieved very little more than Letchworth or Welwyn achieved twenty
years ago.48 As Summerson wrote: there was a reluctance to think out
the architectural problems of the new towns with the intensity which
was being devoted to urban problems.49 Their architecture aimed to
please, and as a result was rather bland, even if the spaces were agreeable.
Frederick Gibberd,
Chrisp Street Market,
Lansbury Estate,
London, 1951.
86
Frederick Gibberd
(architect and planner),
model for centre,
Harlow New Town,
Essex, 1948.
The amount of green space began to seem like an overreaction to the

slums, and the different neighbourhoods, all planned with precision
according to the latest research, felt too distant from the commercial
centre and from each other.
In 1951 the post-war reconstruction campaign was still struggling to
survive the withdrawal of American loans that in 1947 had hindered
the full development of the welfare state. Older social patterns and older
forms of architecture began to assert themselves under the Conservative
government, while the Cold War destroyed whatever fragile consensus
existed between the worlds of capitalism and communism, when American
forces were sent to ght in Korea in 1950, followed by conscripted
British troops in 1951. The pain of the transition to a post-imperial stage
reached a climax for Britain with the Suez Crisis in 1956. By later
twentieth-century standards, as well as by comparison with the 1930s,
Britain during the 1950s showed unbelievable levels of commitment to
social spending, public sector employment and public ownership of
resources, coming close to the realization of a British Folkshemmet. It
was undertaken, however, without the equivalent commitment to change
that was achieved by the post-war Swedish political system. The qualities
of lightness, colour and even pattern that developed out of this time of
doubt and danger were discarded when the mood changed, but they still
help to explain how, despite the gap between modern architecture and
the public, bridges can be built.
87
chapter three
Poetics: The Moral Dilemma of

Modern Aesthetics
British architecture has never specialized in theory, and around 1951 the
closest it came was the Revived Picturesque, an anti-theoretical theory
at best. Modernism had arrived, but did not know where to go next. As
has happened in the past, the theory followed behind the stylistic change
as a post-hoc remedy and explanation. John Summerson wrote in 1956:
throughout the 30s principles were almost taken for granted
swallowed one might say in slogan form while the idiom was
assiduously acquired . . . but already in 1951 there was a perceptible
hostility to whatever was idiomatic and a tendency to go in search
of principles.1
What was found was not a fully reasoned theory, but a mixture of different
types of prejudice and analogy, which I have chosen to call poetics since it
was also, according to the origin of the word, a way of getting things done.
Architects who followed the path of compassion, even to a relatively
small extent, were accused by their younger peers of betraying true
Modernism by making it too easy and therefore dull. The Festival of
Britain was condemned as a bad joke before it had even nished by
young artists and architects in the bar of the Institute of Contemporary
Art. A young architect, Colin St John Wilson, writing regularly in The
Observer from early in 1951, commented on the extraordinary effeminacy
of the Lansbury Estate:
Sheffield City
Architects Department
(J. L. Womersley,
with Ivor Smith and
Jack Lynn), Park Hill,
Sheffield, 195761.
an architecture of cold feet . . . symptomatic of that post-war

loss of nerve which, from a sense of guilt towards the scientic
methods and machines that have been used for destruction, reacts
with a split-minded desire to retreat into a world of cosiness.2
Wilsons views were typical of the new generation, usually characterized
as New Brutalists, who are examined in more detail at the end of this chapter. For the rst time in the history of Modernism in Britain, there was a

Spa Green Flats,
Finsbury, London,
194350.
battle of styles within the movement, a signal that the enemy outside, in the
form of traditional styles, was nearly defeated, so that the luxury of inghting was now available. In the sharp new critical climate, Architectural
Design published in 1951 the German critic Julius Poseners article Knots in
the Masters Carpet, criticizing Lubetkins elevations for his rst major
block of council ats at Spa Green, Islington, where he had indeed derived
his two-dimensional patterning from his knowledge of oriental kilims.3
Even before the war, Highpoint ii, the 1938 block adjacent to the ats of
1935, was criticized for formalism. When Lubetkin was appointed to design
the new town of Peterlee in County Durham in 1949, he announced that
he would avoid picturesque gimmicks or trivialities as out of keeping with
the serious and dangerous lives of the miners for whom it was intended. It
seems unlikely that he would have kept this promise had his designs been
carried out. Lubetkins career tailed off in the 1950s in disillusion and anger,
although he left behind in the North-East two architects, Gordon Ryder
and Peter Yates, who showed in a scintillating set of regional projects where
Lubetkins work might have led on to.
When Denys Lasdun picked up the completion of the Halleld Estate
in Paddington, London, from Lubetkins dissolution of the Tecton partnership in 1949, he retained the patterned faades that were already part
of the design, and was pitied rather than criticized by Reyner Banham
for belonging to the party of order at a time when the Modern
Movement is having one of its periodic leanings in the other direction4
Lasdun made a decisive break from pattern-making in the Halleld
School, which is based on plan forms and larger elements, without surface decoration; and then in some housing projects in Bethnal Green
between 1952 and 1957 he broke up the monolithic block of housing into
a cluster tower, a form that he hoped would achieve the aim of association when residents stopped for a chat on the open walkways between
their ats. Within a short time, it was recognized as a social failure
though a sculptural triumph.5
There were a few major monumental buildings completed in the
years immediately following the Festival, despite continuing building
90
David Aberdeen,
Congress House,
Great Russell Street,
London, 19517.
Ern Goldfinger and
Colin Penn, offices of
the Daily Worker,
Farringdon, London,
1949.
restrictions, such as Congress House, Great Russell Street (1955), by

David Aberdeen, a skilled interpretation of the idiom of Le Corbusier,
previously unknown in the streets of London. The curves of its side
elevation could be contrasted with the rather dour but practical ofces
of the Daily Worker, the Communist newspaper, reconstructed by Ern
Goldnger on a bombsite in Farringdon Road. Goldnger resisted the
picturesque, despite skilfully tting his terrace of houses in Hampstead
of 19389 into a London street. With his personal contacts with such
masters as Auguste Perret and Adolf Loos, he was a link to the rst principles of the rst generation of Modernism, and lived by them rather
than by idiom. As his pre-war assistant H. T. Cadbury-Brown wrote,
Goldngers importance as an architect in England derives from his
steadfast aim to create a rational and vernacular answer to architectural
problems.6 Until the second half of the 1950s, Goldnger had no large
projects, but then received major commissions for commercial ofces
and housing.
Cadbury-Brown himself, belonging to the same generation as
Lasdun, revealed an individual approach tailored to the conditions of
91
Po e t i c s : T h e M o ra l D i l e m m a o f M o d e r n A e s t h e t i c s
Powell & Moya,

Churchill Gardens
Flats, Pimlico,
London, 194754.
each job within a small practice, culminating in scale and civic importance with the Royal College of Art in Kensington Gore, next to the
Albert Hall, with a strong sculptural form and dark tonality. The critic
Ian Nairn described it as the angry style completely justied, yet still
angry or whatever is the exact opposite of complacent.7 Yet the mass and
siting of the tall Darwin Building, containing workshops and studios,
were carefully calculated to respond to the group of Victorian buildings
around it. Sensitivity of this kind was a legacy of the 1930s Modernists,
including Chermayeff, Goldnger and Lubetkin, who valued the architects role in contributing to urban identity by enhancing the existing
situation. By the mid-1950s Italian post-war architects had extended
the range of examples, and Ernesto Rogers wrote in Italy Builds (1955):
functionalism is not only the nest means of expressing every construction according to its specic character, but also of adapting every building to the problems of its site and its cultural situation. He believed that,
rather than being a contradiction of pre-war rationalism, the post-war
interest in context showed the same principles . . . going deeper, according to the same unchanging method.8 The eclecticism and mannerism
that this attitude promoted, apparently so subversive towards a pure
ideal of Modernism, was duly criticized in Britain as a retreat from
modern architecture, an infantile regression, a revival of Art Nouveau.9
Consequently, some of the best modern architecture of the 1950s and 60s
that avoided strict Puritanism (such as the work of Patrick Gwynne) has
not been considered as part of the mainstream.
The side stream of contextual modernism took many forms, including the sensitive insertions in Oxford and Cambridge made by Powell &
Moya (Brasenose, Oxford, 196061, and St Johns, Cambridge, 196367).
They represent what is now called Situated Modernism, a middle way
betwen the simplications of high modernism and the reactionaries
opposed to it.10 As we have seen, this tendency was already well developed in Britain by the 1930s, although apparently misunderstood and
forgotten. Recognition of the continuity between, say, Maxwell Frys
work of the late 1930s, Powell & Moya, the Smithsons and the designs of
Ahrends, Burton & Koralek, in terms of materials, shaping of outdoor
space, requires a view of the path of history different from the one that
is generally understood.
As architects with a pre-war reputation, Lubetkin and Goldnger
were in danger of becoming gures of the past. Lasdun, their junior by
more than ten years, was closer to the post-war generation of Powell and
Moya, whose Churchill Gardens Flats, won in competition in 1946,
showed an alternative treatment of a brief similar to Halleld. Churchill
Gardens looked austere, more in the tradition of the early contemporary
92
architects than any other scheme of recent years, as one commentator

suggested, but was also gentle and unassertive, despite its size.11
Chamberlin, Powell & Bon, winners of the competition for housing at
Golden Lane on the edge of the City in 1951, used coloured panels typical of the period. Their smaller jobs in the 1950s, such as Bouseld
Primary School, Kensington, and the Cooper Tabor Seed Warehouse,
Witham, both of 1955, are characterized by a kind of romantic jollity that
does not compromise the directness of their conceptual approach.
Similarly positioned between Contemporary (the phrase used for
various kinds of soft Modernism) and Brutalism was the private sector
housing designed by Eric Lyons for the development company span,
starting in the years 19546 at Parkleys, in the sedate west London suburb of Ham, and continued in Blackheath from 1956 into the 1980s. The
politeness of the tile hanging and white-painted boarding, set in wellmaintained landscape, was appropriate to the middle-class professional
clientele. Lyons insisted that he had learnt important principles during
a brief pre-war spell working under Walter Gropius in the 1930s. Arguably
these details were secondary, and span projects were at least as modern
as the Siedlungen of Berlin or Zurich in their combination of rigour, a
little charm and a lot of foliage.
The inuence of Mies van der Rohes American buildings began to
appear as a new strand of British Modernism, for example in Gatwick
Airport (1957), by Yorke Rosenberg Mardall, with its clear grid of steel,
a Swiss watch of a building as Nairn described it. This represented a
generational shift, not only within the rm, but among buildings repre-
Eric Lyons for SPAN

Developments, The
Keep, Blackheath
Park, London, 1958.
94
Yorke Rosenberg
Mardall, The Pier,
Gatwick Airport,
West Sussex, 1957.
senting national prestige.12 Kenneth Frampton recalled more recently

that it had revolutionised overnight the performance level of British
corporate practice.13 Banham approved with only minor reservations,
admiring a dominant and appropriate concern with movement, and an
absence of self-conscious architecture that made Gatwick seem part of
the ascendant New Brutalist trend.14 The project was developed under
Yorkes supervision by two young assistants, Brian Henderson and David
Allford. Although he had been a pre-war pioneer of New Empiricism,
Yorke seemed happy to be drawn in to the new wave, which was also a
return to his Modernist roots. He was friendly with several pre-war
Czech Modernists, such as Havlicek and Honzig, who were stylistically
very rigorous, and chose one of their pupils, Eugene Rosenberg, as a
partner following the latters escape from Czechoslovakia and wartime
internment as an enemy alien.
Gatwick showed the new concern with curtain-wall systems that
seems utterly characteristic of the 1950s, and was linked not only to
schools, but also to commercial ofce architecture. In this market, developers, now willing to forego Neo-classical or Georgian elevations, found
that a Miesian wall was not only in line with a new image of Britain as
an international economy, but also offered the optimum net to gross
space ratio to the developer. For the permissible development envelope
on any given site, the thickness of the wall represented the prot margin,
and the thinner it was, the higher the rentable oor area on the inside.
While many practices kept clear of commercial work as a matter of
moral if not political principle, Gollins, Melvin and Ward were among
the artistically esteemed who showed that good modern architecture
was not incompatible with developers values. To begin with, it was a
gentlemanly game, as seen in the pair of ve-storey blocks facing each
other in New Cavendish Street, London, of 1955 and 1957. Then Castrol
95
Gollins, Melvin and

Ward, Castrol House,
Marylebone Road,
London, 1959.
House in Marylebone Road (1960), by the same rm, gave London its
rst equivalent of Lever House in New York the classic podium-and-slab
development of 1953 by Skidmore, Owings and Merrill signalling a
new brashness and scale.
Leslie Martin preferred to design as a member of a team and, after
leaving the lcc in 1956 to become Professor of Architecture at
Cambridge, assembled a studio (rather than an ofce), including Colin
St John Wilson, who also taught in the school, and Patrick Hodgkinson.
Both were members of London avant-garde architectural circles, and
Wilsons extension to the School of Architecture demonstrated
Corbusian construction and an obsession with geometrical relationships, a theme that young architects discovered with zest from the art
historian Rudolf Wittkowers book Architectural Principles in the Age of
Humanism in the early 1950s. A modern application of mathematical
relationships was promoted by Le Corbusier in two books describing
his Modulor published in 1948 and 1955. Harvey Court for Gonville and
96
Sir Leslie Martin with

Colin A. St John Wilson
and Patrick Hodgkinson, Harvey Court,
Gonville and Caius
College, Cambridge,
196062.
Architects CoPartnership, Dunelm
House (Students
Union), Durham, 1965.
Caius College (196062), developed by

Wilson and Hodgkinson from a Martin
concept, was too polite to be Brutalist, yet
as deantly non-picturesque as it could be,
with a dominant use of brick and a severe
geometric grid, set in a garden but avoiding
too much interaction with it.
After the Brynmawr factory, Architects
Co-Partnership (their revised, less politicized title) specialized in schools. Using
the Hills and later the clasp systems, they
achieved a high level of rigour. Later, at Dunelm House, the student
union at Durham University (19615), they made an excursion into concrete crumble, to use the preferred phrase for a building with a multiple form rather than a single volume, and at the University of Essex
(19625) moved more thoroughly into what by then had been marked
out as Brutalist territory. At the same time, acp developed a line in sensitive inll for historic settings, such as St Johns College, Oxford (1958),
and St Pauls Cathedral Choir School, London (19634), where the use
of Portland stone cladding added weight and respectability.
97
Alison and Peter

Smithson, Smithdon
Secondary School,
Hunstanton, Norfolk,
194952.
Enter New Brutalism

From these examples, we can see that the generation between the rst
founders of inter-war Modernism and the New Brutalists did not
remain stuck in the Festival idiom, and that historical accounts that
jump straight between these events risk omitting many of the buildings
that were most discussed at the time. Even so, the temptation to tell the
story of Brutalism according to its own traditions cannot be resisted,
and is equally part of the mythology of Modernism in Britain. This is
how it begins. Peter and Alison Smithson met as students at Durham
University School of Architecture and were married in 1949. The following year, while both still in their twenties, they won the competition for
a new secondary school at Hunstanton in Norfolk. While the Smithsons
competition statement referred to a close study of educational needs, it
combined these with purely formal requirements, without enlarging on
what these were, but apparently in deliberate provocation of what the
earlier generation of functionalists had condemned as formalism.15
The plan was virtually symmetrical, in contrast to the prevailing antiaxiality, and included courtyards, a feature that existing Modernists
thought they had eradicated. The aesthetic dened in the term as found
prevailed, with glass set against steel without subframes, in deance of
thermal prudence. Plumbing and other services were exposed to view,
almost as a form of decoration. According to generation or taste, architects of the time loved Hunstanton or loathed it. Even the choice of heavy
steel (rather than the thin austerity sections of Hills) was provocative in its
98
extravagance, causing delayed completion by fourteen months, owing to

steel shortages during the Korean War. The School architects following the
Hertfordshire system were, by contrast, devoted to issues of practicality
that the Smithsons blithely ignored in the pursuit of artistic perfection.
The Smithsons, who were the rst major architects for several decades to
commit themselves regularly to print, wrote that only a person familiar
with the pathetic gure of English functionalism supported since the war
on a crutch of pseudo-science can understand why it was necessary to
make such an obvious statement and design such a didactic building,
hitting straight at the rationale of the Hertfordshire achievement.16 As the
Architectural Review commented, this attitude reected a peculiar ruthlessness overriding gentlemens agreements and routine solutions
which pervades the whole design from original conception to nished
details.17
The point of the New Brutalists, the name the Smithsons acquired
around 1953 that became a label for a whole generation and style, was to
provoke the establishment, yet both the Smithsons, appearing on the
scene as the clever but disruptive children of a Modern Movement that
thought it had settled down for a conformist middle age, justied their
rebellion with a rare innate sense of architecture and a personal manner
in which arrogance was combined with a vulnerable kind of directness.
In a world in which women architects were still a rarity, Alison displayed
poise and self-condence. She was famous for making all her own clothes,
in an innite succession of surprising styles that anticipated the 1960s
repertory of Mary Quant.
The term New Brutalism began as an in-joke, but the Smithsons reaction to the over-renement and dry academic-abstract geometries lurking in the International Style was in earnest.18 The label was rst applied
in print to a house design of 1952 by the Smithsons for a small central
London site, of which they wrote: It is necessary to create an architecture
of reality . . . an art concerned with the natural order, the poetic relationship between living things and environment.19 It was like a plain industrial warehouse, but also a knowing reference to Le Corbusiers latest
exercise in primitivism, the Maisons Jaoul near Paris, completed in 1953,
for, as they later remarked, Mies is great but Corb communicates.20
The spirit of New Brutalism, cultivated by a complex overlapping
crowd of friends and rivals in architecture and the other arts, soon
began to set the tone for London architecture more widely. Some practices with a pre-war ancestry rebuilt their reputations in the 1950s and
60s through giving young assistants their head to produce buildings in
the new style. Edward Lyons and Lawrence Israel, who had worked as a
respectable but far from cutting-edge practice before the war, rst added
99
Lyons, Israel and Ellis,

Trescobeas School,
Falmouth, Cornwall,
19557.
a new partner with strong design skills, Tom Ellis, and then attracted at
different periods James Stirling, James Gowan, David Gray, John Miller,
Alan Colquhoun, Neave Brown and several more assistants and associates who took up the challenge of a tougher and more eloquent architecture, and went on to make independent names for themselves. The
partners were fully involved in the design of buildings such as Trescobeas
School, Falmouth (19557), a single Corbusian mass of rough concrete
structure, and the Old Vic Theatre Annexe, London (1958), on which
Miller and Colquhoun worked before going into partnership. These
were certainly tougher meat than acps Miesian Risinghill School,
Islington (1962), or Castrol House, or even than Lasduns Halleld.21
Their toughness comes from a typically Brutalist mixture of materials
and forms, with a tendency to exaggerate functional elements of a design
to produce a sense of alienation rather than conformity.
After the success of John Osbornes play Look Back in Anger at the
Royal Court in 1956, the phrase Angry Young Man was adapted to t
any other sign of youthful rebellion. Discussing whether New Brutalists
were the angry young men of architecture, Banham analysed the conditions that inhibited young architects from singing the blues out loud,
such as the importance of patronage within the profession (meaning
that it was suicidal to rock the boat too much), the indifference of the
public and the active hostility of planners and mortgage lenders to any
extreme forms of architecture. There were scandals inside the architectural establishment, he hinted, around which a powerful conspiracy of
silence had been built, making it almost impossible for young architects
100
to put their generalized sense of anger to good purpose in their own

eld. These conditions favoured gradual change at best, and for these
reasons Banham believed that the concept of Brutalism was tamed from
a violent revolutionary outburst to a fashionable vernacular.22
Similar movements of revolt against politeness and gentility occurred
at different moments in the other arts. In painting, the showing in 1945
of Francis Bacons Three Figures at the Base of a Crucixion was a challenge to purist abstraction and even to the romantic use of twisted thorns
and bombed ruins that was Graham Sutherlands wartime repertory. In
sculpture, the phrase the Geometry of Fear was coined by Herbert Read
in 1952, and included among its protagonists Eduardo Paolozzi and
William Turnbull, both of whom were part of the Independent Group
and New Brutalist circles. Poetry followed slightly later, with A. Alvarez
subtitling his preface to the Penguin anthology The New Poetry in 1962,
Beyond the Gentility Principle. Some of the anti-gentility leading up to
the angry young movement was a genuine expression of new entrants
into a cultural eld apparently dominated by a comfortable middle-class
establishment. The mediation of culture in print and broadcasting gave
way to new voices, such as Banhams, proclaiming outsider status in content and style.
Ethic or Aesthetic?
According to an early Smithson utterance, Brutalism was an ethic not an
aesthetic. On this basis, there were two Brutalisms. One of them, the
ethic, was a personal, almost subjective matter, and hence limited perhaps to the Smithsons alone, and Banham as their prophet. In their view,
few others measured up to their standards. Banham questioned whether
the aesthetic had triumphed over the much more elusive idea of an
ethic.23 The need to have one ethic for the benet of people and a different one for design was a perennial avant-garde problem, and the people
ethic was the more readily sacriced.
James Stirling and James Gowan tried to reject the Brutalist label in
relation to their rst major work, the Langham House Close, known as
Ham Common Flats (1958). Although they moved among the same
interconnected circles as the Smithsons, they represented a different
approach, in which the aesthetic, although seldom explicitly declared,
was almost everything, and the ethic merely a means to reach the aesthetic. Supercially, their ats resemble the Maisons Jaoul, about which
Stirling wrote in the Architectural Review in September 1955, with the
combination of brick and concrete and the use of an inverted l-shaped
window, but they are much neater in construction than Le Corbusiers
101
James Stirling and

James Gowan,
Langham House
Close, Ham Common,
Surrey, 1958.
James Stirling and

James Gowan,
Department of
Engineering,
Leicester University,
195963.
deliberately rustic response to a Paris suburb. Their work is not styled

but pure and full of harmony as we found it in constructivism, wrote
Arthur Korn, an migr veteran of the 1920s Berlin avant-garde.24 Forearmed by a reference to more protest than is needed from Nairn, Mark
Girouard, later to become Stirlings biographer, found them, by contrast,
exquisite, reticent, beautifully scaled, delicate, totally inoffensive (in the
nasty sense of the word), buildings which really were a pleasure and a
delight to look at.25
With the Engineering Building at Leicester University (195963), the last
major project executed before the partnership split up, Stirling and Gowan
hit harder. The vigorous articulation of the different parts of the brief combined an apparently impeccable argument from function to form with a
more overt reference to Constructivism, but far enough removed to avoid
pastiche. While relatively small in size, it achieved a heroic sense of scale,
and, like all Stirlings work, it posed well for the camera, especially at night.
102
It was more sensational even than Hunstanton, and even more irritating
and puzzling to some of the older generation.
In 1959 Gowan, writing about the reform of architectural education,
stated:
it is becoming apparent that architecture, mainly due to economic pressure, is becoming multi-aesthetic; that is, not one
style but a number of styles, each appropriate to the particular
problem, are developing.26
This was reasonable and liberating, giving permission to think again
about style, without the constraints of a single style, nor yet the doctrine
of association that led down the primrose path to picturesque eclecticism.
Reviewing the Leicester building, Banham noted the shock value, causing
more staid followers of Modernism to half hope that it would not actually
function as intended, and thus demonstrate the wrongness of its formalism.27 Despite some technical problems, they were disappointed. What
was more shocking about Stirling was his revelation that architecture was
a deadly serious game about form, and not much about anything else.
With the supercially similar History Faculty and Library in Cambridge
(19648), completed without Gowan, the context was especially savoury
for a Brutalist, in that its neighbour was Casson and Conders polite and
slightly historicized Arts Faculty buildings, with their spaces calculated in
terms of the dimensions of Cambridge college courts, and their materials
and weathering informed by tradition.
Douglas Stephen (19231991) was another crucial member of the
London Brutalist scene, not famous for any single work, but a provider
of design opportunities to some of his contemporaries who were developing academic careers, such as Robert Maxwell and Kenneth Frampton.
His Centre Heights building at Swiss Cottage (with Panos Koulermos)
of 195962 was an early example of Brutalism in a commercial development, along with the work designed by Rodney Gordon in the ofce of
Owen Luder, such as Eros House, Catford (19623).
The Independent Group and Team 10
The Institute of Contemporary Arts was founded in 1946 by survivors of
the inter-war avant-garde, led by Roland Penrose and Herbert Read. The
Smithsons friend, the artist and photographer Nigel Henderson, organized the exhibition Growth and Form there in 1951 with the sculptor
Eduardo Paolozzi and the artist Richard Hamilton. The exhibition,
104
Nigel Henderson
with Alison and Peter
Smithson, exhibition
installation, A Parallel
of Life and Art, at
the Institute of
Contemporary Arts,
Dover Street, London,
1953.
which went beyond the pre-war interest in the application of scientic

ideas for useful purposes to an interest in the imagery that science could
generate for the imagination, and a series of exhibitions involving these
and other gures, led from the legacy of pre-war Surrealism to Pop Art.
A Parallel of Life and Art (1953), in which the Smithsons were active collaborators, dipped deeper into the well of imagery and imagination, dissolving rational connections and categories in favour of intuitive visual
logic in a cave of images.28 Soon after the exhibition proposal was made
in April 1952, Banham, who joined the staff of the Architectural Review
around the same time, was invited by the ica to convene the young
independent group, whose name has become attached to the Parallel of
Life and Art, and whose members went on to become a signicant
avant-garde network in London.
The next exhibition devised by members of the Independent Group
was held at the Whitechapel Art Gallery. This is Tomorrow was the brain1 0 5 Po e t i c s : T h e M o ra l D i l e m m a o f M o d e r n A e s t h e t i c s
Poster by Richard
Hamilton for the This
is Tomorrow exhibition, Whitechapel
Art Gallery, London,
1956 (reproducing
Hamiltons collage
Just What Is It That
Makes Todays Homes
So Different, So
Appealing?).
child of Theo Crosby, architect and technical editor of Architectural Design and
editor of the little magazine uppercase.
He imposed a format of collaborations
between architects, engineers and artists to
create separate sections of the exhibition,
displaying the divergent interests of the
core group. The Art Brut aspects of the
Independent Group were evident in Patio
and Pavilion, a collaboration between the
Smithsons, Henderson and Paolozzi. A
simple timber shed was placed in a space
suggestive of an urban backyard, possibly
following a nuclear catastrophe, but also,
perhaps, indicating the future treasures of
a consumer society, represented on the exhibition poster by Hamiltons famous
collage Just What Is It That Makes Todays
Homes So Different, So Appealing? All this
was mixed incongruously with the survivors of English Constructivism, such as
Victor Pasmore, who was involved as an
artist in trying to give some visual interest
to new housing in Peterlee, having been
drawn to rescuing it from post-Lubetkin banality.
The links that had begun to form among the younger members of
mars at the ciam congress in 1951 were cemented at the congress of
1953 at Aix-en-Provence. This was attended unofcially by crowds of
students who camped in tents in the courtyard of the Ecole des Arts et
Mtiers and concluded proceedings by organizing a striptease on the
roof of the Unit dHabitation, which acted as the chief architectural
focus. The Smithsons produced a striking grille as the basis of their
presentation, using Nigel Hendersons photos of children playing in
the streets of Bethnal Green to explain their idea of association. Le
Corbusier proposed that the founders of ciam should begin to hand
over to a younger generation, although in reality he was reluctant to
let go, and Team 10 formed chiey by the British (Smithsons, John
Voelker, William and Gillian Howell) and Dutch (Jaap Bakema, Aldo van
Eyck, Haan) groups, with the addition of a Frenchman (George Candilis)
and a French-based American (Shadrach Woods) represented those
who wanted to take over. Later members were the Italian Giancarlo de
Carlo and Ralph Erskine, who although British by birth practised in
106
Alison and Peter

Smithson, Dubrovnik
Scroll and Valley
Section Grid, for
CIAM X at Dubrovnik,
1956.
John Voelcker, house

in Alyn Close, Arkley,
Hertfordshire, 1957.
Sweden. Through Team 10, the New Brutalist avant-garde found an

international platform and alliances for discussions of urbanism as a
wider extension of architecture. These individuals, in Voelkers words,
were all trying to nd a means through which this attitude could
become an approach and in consequence a positive force in urbanism.29
It sounds imprecise, and it was.
Although the ciam of the Athens Charter was supposed to be the
opposite of what Team 10 stood for, they were not always so far removed
in their use of sweeping universal concepts. Against the four functions
of Habiter, Travailler, Circuler, Cultiver lEsprit et le Corps named in the
Athens Charter, the Doorn Manifesto, drafted by the group in 1954, proposed villages, towns, cities, a classication based on the Valley Section
of the Scottish pioneer planner Patrick Geddes, and therefore supposing
a rather old-fashioned organization of economic production in relation
to landscape. One outcome in 1954 was a plan based on the village of
West Burton in Yorkshire, where the new is placed over the old like a new
plant growing through old branches or new fruit on old twigs.30 At the
tenth ciam congress, held at Dubrovnik in 1955, the Smithsons used this
as one of the starting points for their grille, on the theme of village housing. The compact huddles of vernacular houses in stone-built northern
English villages effaced the dreary reality of New Towns or semi-detached
suburbs, but were by now a world away from Mies. In 1967 the Smithsons
explained their scheme of inll as directly inspired by the complete
108
Alison and Peter

Smithson, Robin Hood
Gardens, Poplar,
London, 196672.
image system where every piece was correspondingly new in a new system of relationships, which they had found in the early
1950s in the work of Jackson Pollock or
Paolozzi.31
The principles behind this scheme appear
with hindsight as an inspired insight into a
persisting problem of appropriate but modern village housing, but apart from the single
house for the engineer Derek Sugden at
Watford (19556), the Smithsons never had
an opportunity to put such a scheme into action, unlike Giancarlo de
Carlo, who developed a new language for Italian villages. The closest
equivalent was the village of Rushbrooke in Suffolk designed by John
Weeks and Michael Huckstepp for Lord Rothschild in 1957, with monopitched roofs on white painted walls, shyly concealing their front doors
behind screen walls that link one house to another. To a commission
from the jazz musician Humphrey Lyttelton, Voelcker built a house at
Arkley, Hertfordshire (1957), in the form of a three-sided courtyard with
inward sloping roofs, a typical Brutalist solution to screen out a suburban site.
Kenneth Frampton has discussed the lack of logical connection
between the Smithsons admiration for the bye-law streets of Bethnal
Green (as captured in Hendersons photographs) and their attempt to
reconstitute them as streets in the sky in their proposal for the Golden
Lane housing competition in 1951. On what grounds could they admire
the street layouts and squares of Georgian and Victorian London, while
declaring, without much further investigation, that these forms were no
longer applicable under modern conditions, while living in pre-1900
terrace houses themselves? Their stream of new ideas in urbanism and
architecture, mostly in the form of competition projects, was nonetheless
inuential internationally. In the scheme for Shefeld University (1955),
movement through the site rather than merely between buildings generated a new relationship between architecture and planning. The winner,
a cool slab and tower by Gollins Melvin Ward, was aiming to solve a different set of problems.
Team 10 went on ghting against ciam until its destruction in 1959.
Despite internal conicts of their own, the members continued to meet
into the 1980s. When the cruder forms of Modernist housing in Britain
were perceived to have failed at the end of the 1960s, Ralph Erskine,
admittedly rather a fringe member of Team 10, built the Byker Development in Newcastle upon Tyne (197380), a scheme that demonstrated
1 0 9 Po e t i c s : T h e M o ra l D i l e m m a o f M o d e r n A e s t h e t i c s
McMorran & Whitby,

Holloway Estate,
Parkhurst Road,
Camden, London,
c. 1960.
LCC Architects,
Highbury Quadrant
Estate, Islington,
London, 1954.
the principles of mixed use and indenite form as means of creating a

new sense of authentic place, with a strong emphasis on pedestrian
pathways. By contrast, the Robin Hood Gardens scheme in Poplar by the
Smithsons (196672), which faced some of the same problems and
opportunities in terms of a site close to a busy road, was by their own
admission a disappointing realization of so many years thought about
housing design, even though it created a magical outdoor space overlooking the Thames, between two snaking slab blocks.
London County Council Housing
During the war, the lccs Valuers Department took over responsibility
for housing, implementing the construction of old plans for galleryaccess ats until 1949, when architects were able to reclaim the task. A
job in housing or schools at the lcc soon became the way that many of
the best architects of the next thirty years began their career. Far from
being shackled by bureaucratic caution, wrote Banham in 1965, lcc
architects were free to leap on every passing stylistic bandwagon and
even roll a few of their own.32 Everything after 1949 was more or less
modern, but conict developed between some members of the rapidly
growing Housing Division, who favoured a gentle, picturesque
approach, and others who had links with New Brutalism. The architec110
LCC Architects, Alton

Estate, Roehampton,
Wandsworth, London:
in the foreground
Alton East, 19525, in
the background, Alton
West, 19548.
tural conservatives (who were confusingly furthest to the left politically)

liked using brick, pitched roofs and what was derisively called Peoples
Detailing. They did not go so far towards Georgian classicism as Donald
McMorran (the assessor for the Golden Lane competition), who designed
a number of schemes for the City of London, demonstrating that this
way of working need not be stale and soulless.33 The conservatives of the
left were aware of their continuity with the Arts and Crafts Movement
and its importance for the earliest lcc housing in the 1890s. David
Gregory-Jones, one of the leading members of this group, lived for a
while at William Morriss Red House in Bexleyheath, after it was bought
by two other lcc architects, Edward Hollamby and Dick Toms.34 The
Highbury Quadrant Estate in Islington (1954) is representative of their
work. Since so many of them were Communist Party members or supporters, a palpable change of style took place after 1956, when the Soviet
president Nikita Krushchev repudiated the conservative style of Stalinism
in favour of something more modern.
The middle position following the principles of mixed-development
high- and low-rise housing set in a park-like landscape was popular in
Sweden, in new towns such as Vlingby.35 This approach suited the lcc
sites that bordered open land, offering ne existing trees from the gardens
111
of older houses equally as ornament and as obstruction to gridded plan

schemes. At Roehampton, this form of moderate soft Modernism
resulted in point blocks of moderate height on a hilltop site, and
two-storey brick-built houses. That was Alton East, whose ancestry was
traced by Pevsner back to an English reinterpretation of Modernist
housing by Gropius and Fry at St Leonards Hill, Windsor, and thence to
a generously landscaped aa scheme of 1938 for extending the town of
Faringdon.36 Alton West, developed slightly later, displayed the third,
hard option, developed by a team led by Colin Lucas, who was received
into the lcc as a hero of the 1930s Modernist battleeld, with the
involvement of Bill Howell and his future partners John Killick and
John Partridge. Colin St John Wilson was another member, working on
the development of the 12-foot-wide maisonettes that constituted the
housing units in the ve parallel slab blocks on the crest of the hill, in
homage to Le Corbusiers Unit dHabitation, completed in 1957. Modern
sculpture punctuates the parkland at intervals, recreating the arcadian
feeling of a Capability Brown park.
Similar buildings arose on other London sites with less leafy foregrounds. Compared with the pre-war building-code restrictions, it
became administratively easier to build tall housing after 1950, and Alton
West included square tower blocks of seven storeys. Although this is the
feature most associated with post-war housing in Britain as a whole, it
was scarcely an issue before 1958, when it began to be driven by a complex set of overlapping political, planning and economic motives. Team
10 members were more inclined to favour lower-rise solutions to match
their concept of enclosing urban form.
As with the victories of Team 10 and the Independent Group over the
older generation, it is hard after fty years to understand why so much
heat was generated over choices between methods that, in hindsight in a
case such as Roehampton, seem to offer relatively minor differences compared to the much wider range of possibilities that we can now imagine.
The answer must therefore lie in the signicance of the image, which was
so important during this period the Roehampton maisonettes looked
impressive in photographs, even though, owing to planning pressure,
they were reoriented and pushed off the crest of the hill in order to be less
conspicuous. The typical local authority ofce, rather than grounding
architects in reality, as was hoped when campaigned for in the late 1930s,
seems in the case of the lcc, at least, to have distanced them even further
from a sense of accountability for their actions. The liberalism of Leslie
Martins oversight of the department (until his departure to Cambridge)
was a kind of benign anarchy operating within an extremely rigid
bureaucracy, heightening the sense of unreality.
112
Access deck at
Park Hill, Sheffield,
195761.
Streets in the Sky

In 1962 a young architect, Jack Lynn, described most English high rise as
bungalows stacked one above the other . . . [like] tidy solutions of a storage problem.37 Park Hill in Shefeld, on which he worked with Ivor Smith
under the council architect, J. L. Womersly, tried to nd a better way to
create high density with a sense of place. It came closer to the Team 10 idea
of making the residential building an indistinguishable part of the urban
plan, rather than something slotted into an abstract scheme. The high rise
and high density of Park Hill coexisted in Shefeld, as in London, with a
more arcadian (or suburban) development, so that a range of housing
options were available, but for a city where much of the industry and
employment was still located in the centre, Park Hill had advantages. The
995 dwellings were positioned on a hillside previously occupied by crimeridden slum terraces. Smith emphasized the distinctive nature of the
English street approachable from either end and off which every house
was entered directly through its own front door, and felt that this was
113
crucial to our national independence of character and at the same time

with community structure.38 Here was a plain explanation for not imitating the internal access corridors of the Unit and opting instead, without
apparently noticing the difference, for a form that can never really be a
street, if only because front doors do not face each other, although it was
a proud claim that the milk oat, another feature of English daily life,
could drive off the hillside onto the decks to deliver the pinta to the
doorsteps, where the inhabitants, to the architects delight, ornamented
their thresholds with personalized pieces of coloured lino.
The street decks at Park Hill emphasized the new focus on circulation
spaces and routes as a means of recovering the sense of community
within this otherwise forbidding mass of structure. The combination of
tough and homely was typical of a new sense of northern identity, far
removed from the lush pastures of Roehampton. Here, as in other
industrial northern cities with Labour councils, psephology inuenced
housing form, encouraging councils to provide high-quality housing to
keep their voting supporters living within the citys electoral boundaries.
On completion of the ats in 1961, commentators believed from the
evidence of their eyes that the decks worked and that, in Banhams
words:
toddlers play on them; teens mend bikes, keep dates, swap gossip
on them, teds occasionally brawl; heroic Shefeld grans sit, legs
akimbo, at the street-deck door, backed by spectacular tableaux
of oral wall-paper and aspidistras in Art-Nouveau pots on
spindly wooden stands.39
By 1972, in a much altered architectural climate, Robert Maxwell was far
less sure, and after stating the good intentions all round, admitted:
we must wonder whether they constitute a human environment
for ordinary people. Like Regency terraces in Bath or Bristol,
they produce magnicent skylines. Unlike the Regency terraces,
however, they were not freely chosen by the people who went to
live in them.40
In the short term, at any rate, Park Hill looked like a possible shape for
the future, and the medium-rise deck-access complex was widely adopted
in the 1960s as an alternative to the high-rise tower that might avoid some
of the more obvious social problems without sacricing high density,
although in the event both were capable of spectacular failure.
114
History and Theory

Colin Rowe was a new type of gure on the architectural scene. One of his
contemporaries at the Liverpool School of Architecture, Robert Maxwell,
has written: He could imbue the present with an excitement derived from
past moments of creation, and students were often sent to the library to
check out the plan of a Palladian villa before drawing up their plan for a
secondary school.41 Nothing like his essay The Mathematics of the Ideal
Villa in the Architectural Review in 1947 had ever been published, and
Rowes parallel analysis of Palladios Villa Malcontenta and Le Corbusiers
Villa Stein at Garches remains a tour de force of lateral thinking. Mannerism in Modern Architecture(1950) was almost equally inuential in its
time, drawing recent and remote pasts closer together, in deance of
Hegels theory of the spirit of the age and the concomitant of evolutionary progress that dominated most versions of history. Rowes approach
had much in common with that of the migr philosopher Karl Popper.
In Rowes writing and teaching, classical architecture was revealed as
deeper than Geoffrey Scott imagined in The Architecture of Humanism,
the book of 1914 that his doctoral supervisor Rudolf Wittkower set out
to refute. Wittkowers own large-format pictorial survey, British Art and
the Mediterranean (with Fritz Saxl), of 1948 was equally important, and
a favourite browsing book for another Liverpool contemporary, James
Stirling. Among the examples from all the arts, from prehistory to the
1930s, the neo-Palladian architecture of the 1720s, disdained by historians
up to the Second World War, stands out in its geometric clarity, as revealed
by European eyes. Rowes inuence led to a more general understanding
of the abstract formal aspects of architecture, which, if not entirely absent
from inter-war Modernism, were certainly not consciously stated at the
time. If one is looking for Modernist analogues to Palladian villas, then
Colin Lucass Greenside, Wentworth (1937), is a strong candidate, with its
tripartite ordering of elevations in both vertical and horizontal directions.
James Gowans minute house at Cowes on the Isle of Wight (1958) shows
the new signicance accorded to plan form in its set of simple rectangular divisions, with an axially symmetrical footprint.
When history was seen as a source of examples that could be translated
abstractly into modern form, it had considerable potential for contributing to the revival of architectural imagery. New illustrated books, such as
the Pelican History of Art series, made the latest scholarship accessible;
and in a way that could not have been imaginable in the 1930s, whole
areas of the past, including the history of the Modern Movement itself,
were opened up for heated discussion at the evening lecture meetings of
the riba, or at the aa.
115
Maguire & Murray,

St Pauls, Bow
Common, Tower
Hamlets, London,
195860.
Church Design
The popular historian A.J.P. Taylor closed the decade by declaring Belief
is over. That was the keynote of the Fifties . . . a wonderful decade with
all the old nonsense being shovelled underground.42 This was not actually true, and the decade saw an increase in church attendance, and a
growth in construction in all denominations. Was religion a curiosity
for study, or could it become relevant to the future of Modernism? The
116
Gillespie, Kidd & Coia,

St Paul, Glenrothes,
Fife, 19567.
Gillespie, Kidd & Coia,
St Peters College,
Cardross, Argyll,
195768, photographed in 1994 in
a ruinous condition
that has grown
progressively more
severe, despite the
protection of A grade
listing, since the
buildings were abandoned in 1987.
liturgical movement in church design in Germany and France originated before the war, and Le Corbusiers pilgrimage chapel at Ronchamp,
opened in 1958, was one of its products, shocking to those who imagined
Modernism as something fundamentally secular. Stirling, who wrote on
it for the Architectural Review, found it disturbingly contemporary in
its applied art.43 The liking of Team 10 members for anthropology led to
increased awareness of building customs and superstitions, the doorstep,
the street, the kraal, the longhouse, people carrying a whole roof to put
over their house etc, as Voelcker wrote in 1965.44 The Smithsons and
Colin St John Wilson (the son of an Anglican bishop) were among the
entrants in the competition for Coventry Cathedral, with large undivided
spaces for worship owing nothing to Anglican tradition. The rst church
to carry some of these ideas into practice was St Paul, Bow Common,
designed in the years 195860 by Robert Maguire and Keith Murray, members of The New Churches Research Group, another of whose members,
Peter Hammond, published the manifesto of their thinking, Liturgy
and Architecture, in 1960.
St Paul demonstrated New Brutalist principles to perfection, with
its attention to the quality of space for movement of people within its
square plan based on early Christian tradition, achieved with relatively
cheap materials honestly displayed, although enriched with mosaic.
The liturgical thinking behind it went back to the Christian Socialism of
Conrad Noel, the Red Priest of Thaxted, in the 1920s, and the open area
of the oor was a deliberate reference to Thaxted without the need for
Gothic detail. When Coventry Cathedral opened in 1962, the public
ocked to see it, but critics preferred Maguires and Murrays more austere approach.
Some of the most radical and adventurous new churches of the 1950s
and 60s were built in Scotland by Gillespie, Kidd & Coia, a Glasgow
rm with a long history, latterly directed by Jack Coia, a stylistically
117
labile Glaswegian of Italian extraction who

had established rm connections with the
Roman Catholic diocese before the war. A
young architect, Isi Metzstein, a refugee
from pre-war Berlin, was joined in 1953 by
Andrew MacMillan; they were allowed to
have their way with the design of buildings,
and the results were seen in the church
of St Paul, Glenrothes (1954), which was
strongly influenced by modern German
churches in its focus on effects of light
and space rather than decoration and
association. Coia acted almost entirely as
the man who got the commissions (his
ofce was strategically next door to the
Catholic Diocese headquarters) and his
assistants went on to produce a stream of
churches and other buildings, working
with a verve and freedom scarcely comparable south of the border, culminating
in the Seminary of St Paul at Cardross, a
massive single building based on an ingenious cross-section, reminiscent in some
respects of Le Corbusiers monastery of
La Tourette.
H. A. Mealand (City
Planning Officer)
and Sir Leslie Martin
(LCC), Route XI,
London Wall, City
of London, 1955;
ofce blocks by
various architects.
Good morning America, how are you?

In 1953 the London correspondent of Newsweek estimated that one out
of every three Englishmen was more or less antagonistic to anything that
came from America, from Buicks to businessmen.45 Like it or not, the
United States, having won the war alongside the British, was an unavoidable inuence in the post-war period, from the promotion of freedom
through modern art to jazz, television cartoons and comic books. The
guardians of British culture from F. R. Leavis before the war to Richard
Hoggart and Raymond Williams after it found all this alarming.46
America, still expensive and difcult for British people to visit, was
exciting because it was different, and Independent Group members
demonstrated their freedom by collecting comics and incorporating
them in their art. This enthusiasm was the sweet coating on a serious
interest in the architects role in mass communication, something to
which pre-war Modernism had given little thought. Until well into the
118
Denys Lasdun and

Partners, Royal
College of Physicians,
Outer Circle, Regents
Park, London,
196064.
1950s, the taste-makers of architecture and design despised streamlining

as an earlier generation despised Art Deco, but the new imagery represented a different kind of modernity altogether. ig member John
McHale, who came back from the States in 1955 with a suitcase full of
precious comics, recognized that advertisements, lm stars and rock and
roll musicians all constituted a new type of high-speed expendable ikon
to replace totems, masks, a ritual dance, a poem or a cathedral, which
in the past had provided useable images, and which the Modernists
thought they had abolished.47
For the Machine-made America issue of the Architectural Review in
May 1957 McHale designed a cover collage of infra-grilled steak, premixed cake, dream kitchens, dream-cars, machine-tools, power-mixers,
parkways, harbours, tickertape, spark-plugs and electronics. This was
intended to show how in terms of quantity, the us is now the homeland
of the modern movement, and quantity, backed by wealth, industry and
technical skill, is the prerequisite of architectural quality today.48 The
pages on individual architects were tellingly arranged in descending
order of age, beginning with Mies (Frank Lloyd Wright was omitted at
his own request). In 1955 the lcc instigated a development scheme for
a new street, London Wall, alias Route 11, anked by six tall, sheer, glass-
119
Alison and
Peter Smithson,
The Economist Group,
St Jamess Street,
Westminster, London,
19624.
clad slabs in echelon, similar in effect to the controversial redevelopment

of the Htorget in Stockholm under Sven Markelius (194666), with its
ve trumpet blasts. Glass curtain walls and their detailing, famous in
Machine-made America, celebrated the rst time in the history of
the modern movement that a common vocabulary of form, pattern and
proportion is becoming acceptable to architect, builder and client and
public.49
London Wall was devised to include a complete network of upperlevel pedestrian walkways, a version of the idea that occupied Team 10
members in the later 1950s as a solution to the problem of increasing
motor trafc on narrow European city streets, rather than the grids of
American downtowns. The Pedway aimed to create a more vital and
active zone at the upper level, with the inclusion of shops and kiosks. In
Team 10 schemes, such as the Berlin Haupstadt competition entered by
the Smithsons with Peter Sigmund (19578), the pedestrian network was
more complex, overlaying the grid of streets with a gure more like an
Abstract Expressionist doodle, indicating desire lines between points.
None of these systems was ever completed to the point where their viability could be properly assessed.
A completely different impulse came from Louis Kahn, whose
message of formal austerity and massive structure linked to ideas of
universal cultural meanings was inspiring, not least because it reasserted
the architects irreplaceable skill, not as a technician but as a poet. The
kind of monumentality that Kahns Yale University Art Gallery (1955)
portrayed was close in character to the rened version of Brutalism
developed by Denys Lasdun in the second half of the 1950s, which culminated in what he considered his breakthrough building, the Royal
College of Physicians in Regents Park (195965). The brief, for large
ceremonial spaces, and the relatively generous budget enabled Lasdun,
in the phrase he applied to architecture in general, to oscillate between
reason and feeling.50 Lasduns building is eminently programmatic, but it
is much more than this, as implied in his view of the design process as
a shift from the notion of organisation to organism and even a microcosm of the city.51 Kahns planning ideas, represented in his scheme for
Philadelphia (1953), resembled his buildings in attempting to nd
expression from the order of movement, equally a long-term feature
of Le Corbusiers designs. This approach was increasingly reflected in
Lasduns work, and inuential on the Smithsons, who were also transxed by American culture, in the development of a theory of the signicance of the spaces in between.52
The Royal College of Physicians, in common with early Brutalism in
general, seemed quintessentially European in its appeal to timeless values
120
and apparently irreconcilable with consumer culture, although the

emphasis on an atrium space in the college was similar in intention to
Victor Gruens designs for both open and covered multi-storey shopping
centres with their own parking, a building type as yet scarcely visible in
Europe, shown in the Machine-made America issue of the Architectural
Review. The SmithsonsHouse of the Future for the Ideal Home Exhibition in 1956 was one response in a populist context, and an attempt to
win the market for mass-produced homes by space-age seduction. As
Banham wrote, they tried to design a house that society would want
badly enough to make mass-production feasible smart, slick, styled-up,
mechanically advanced, gimmicky and expendable, like a car.53 It made
a good exhibition piece and, like most attempts to see into the future,
combined a mixture of accurate foresight and wild miscalculation. The
project ended there.
The Smithsons architectural journey acquired upward mobility with
the Economist complex in St Jamess Street, the heart of the revived
establishment of gentlemens clubs and traditional luxury shops, far
removed from American mass culture. Sir Geoffrey Crowther, who had
developed the modern reputation of this long-established magazine,
wanted a tenth-floor penthouse flat. To achieve this within the plot
ratio of 5:1, dictating that what was taken in upward thrust of buildings
must be given back in terms of lower-level construction on the same
site, a larger site was acquired, and the Smithsons were invited, at Leslie
Martins suggestion, along with a more conventional rm, George, Trew
& Dunn, to submit proposals. The Smithsons alternative to a slab-andpodium scheme was accepted in 1960, and the building was completed
in 1964. The tall tower stands away from St Jamess Street, onto which a
smaller corner building fronts with polite scale. A third separate building in the opposite corner completes the family of objects, with Boodles
Club as an elderly guest tucked in to complete the table, but attention is
deliberately directed towards the raised plaza (a name favoured in the
usa). Seldom can so small a space have been invested with such a weight
of architectural meaning. In London, where the spaces between buildings have tended to be accidental, it had a special signicance in reversing the order of gure and ground, and as a short cut it offers a pleasing
progression, recognized by Gordon Cullen, who reviewed it for the
Architectural Review, as a perfect demonstration of the principles of
Townscape, the aesthetic despised by the Brutalists. Banham criticized it
for excessive conformity to its surroundings and the cladding of roachbed Portland Stone, writing that the Established solutions even the
modern ones are bankrupt, and we need a new set of principles, not a
new set of conventions.54 Nairn asked how a space like this was actually
122
going to acquire life.55 All the Smithsons good intentions achieved little
more real urban activity than the later notorious Paternoster Square, the
Economist Buildings down-market City cousin, lling the bomb site to
the north of St Pauls Cathedral. The American critic Peter Blake criticized the papier mach Portland Stone, but Brian Henderson recalls
that it was the rst London building he did not feel ashamed to take
American visitors to admire, and Alvin Boyarsky, a Canadian pupil of
Colin Rowe, considered it a time bomb ticking away for the moment
when it can exert, by its explosive example, a direction for the rebuilding and inlling of a city such as London.56
By the time that Banhams book on The New Brutalism was published
in 1966, much of the architecture across the world by the Smithsons
contemporaries, often described as the third generation, could be connected to the moves made in the 1950s by a small splinter group in Britain.
It was, he wrote,
an extraordinarily exciting period in the evolution of ideas in
Britain, both in the portable arts and in architecture one of
those unrepeatable episodes whose importance is discernible
even at the time, although their full consequence cannot be
appreciated until much later.57
Was the Economist Building actually the ticking bomb of New Brutalisms
demise at the moment when it seemed to have succeeded? Could their
visions of social improvement really work on such an apparently shallow
grounding, however urgently and wittily delivered in words? In 1957 Peter
Smithson revealed how, in a typical ciam scheme, the whole social
structure is treated almost as an art gambit which can be moved about
rather than being a serious matter for the people who actually have to
live there, but was their alternative, politely islanded in the heart of
Establishment London, more than a pleasant diversion?58
Opinions differed. Robin Middleton, reviewing Banhams book in
Architectural Design, believed that the Economist Building was a perfectly logical outcome of Brutalist doctrine and that Brutalism marches
on.59 To a large extent, he was right, partly because Brutalism can be
extended to cover so many things the right to be difcult in pursuit of
architecture as an art, truth to materials, social engagement and regional
character all of which have assumed increasing importance since the
1950s. In the early twenty-rst century, projects like the Sugden House
and the Economist Building continue to inspire young architects concerned with such questions.
1 2 3 Po e t i c s : T h e M o ra l D i l e m m a o f M o d e r n A e s t h e t i c s
chapter four
Production: White Heat and

Burnout
Sir Basil Spence

and Partners
(J. S. Bonnington),
Sunderland Civic
Centre, Co. Durham,
197073.
In 1959, eight years after Winston Churchill had supplanted the post-war
Labour Government of Clement Attlee, the Conservative Party continued in power with its fourth successive general election victory. The
returning Prime Minister, Harold Macmillan, an Edwardian and a First
World War veteran, managed to display not only the skills of political
survival but also the ability to ride the currents of change in society.
Although Britain experienced less economic growth during the 1950s
than the defeated countries of France, Germany, Italy and Japan, the
growth was at least continuous, putting into the distance the economic
swings of the inter-war years and enabling Macmillan to make his
famous statement, at a public meeting on 20 July 1957, that most of our
people have never had it so good. In 1959 Queen, a fashion magazine
owned by a privileged young rebel, Joscelyn Stevens (later Rector of the
Royal College of Art and Chairman of English Heritage), published an
issue to celebrate the arrival of a consumer boom, as if in preparation
for something new on the horizon.
This chapter recapitulates aspects of the 1950s from a different angle
to the previous one, that of architectural production rather than thinking, and carries the story into the 1960s. While few people heard or
understood the arguments about architectural theory between New
Brutalists and New Empiricists, millions were affected by the new housing, ofce buildings, urban renewal schemes and roads that delivered the
long-awaited modern age. Since the end of the war, despite the continuing threat posed by the Communist bloc, and the consequent heavy
investment in military manpower and hardware, the increase in material
progress in the West bred a new condence about the need for modernity in Britain, including the freedom to exercise consumer choice.
Internationally, Britain had very little weight left to swing, as became
clear when Macmillans predecessor, Anthony Eden, was forced to capitulate over the Suez crisis in 1956 because the American president,
Dwight Eisenhower, refused to support the Anglo-French military
intervention in the canal zone, and threatened economic sanctions.
New worries soon occurred. Even though Stalin, Britains and Americas
wartime ally and peacetime adversary, died in 1953, the Soviet suppression of the independent Communist regime in Hungary in 1956 showed
that little had substantially changed behind the Iron Curtain. On 13
August 1961 the ddr leader, Walter Ulbricht, began building the Berlin
Wall overnight to stem the ow of emigration to the newly prosperous
Federal Republic. In 1962 Nikita Krushchev and John F. Kennedy were
facing each other down with nuclear weapons as the gaming counters in
the Cuba Missile Crisis. Britain was Americas client in its attempt to
remain among the nuclear powers, and the Aldermaston Marches were
organized annually between 1958 and 1965 by the Campaign for Nuclear
Disarmament (cnd) and its Committee of 100, gaining 100,000 supporters in Trafalgar Square at the end of March 1965.
International tension continued to mount in the 1960s. Mao
Zedongs China was a closed and hostile society, fear of which drew the
United States into covert and then overt engagement in Indo-China,
where American policy was committed to halting the spread of Chinese
Communist inuence, known as the domino effect. The start of the
Vietnam War is ofcially dated 1965, and although the Labour Prime
Minister, Harold Wilson, resisted Lyndon Johnsons attempts to draw
Britain into military engagement, the impact of the war on American
society became increasingly disturbing in Britain, a process that culminated in the Grosvenor Square riots outside the us Embassy in 1968. The
Middle East, where Britain maintained post-imperial links with Israel
and the oil-producing rival states of Iraq and Iran, showed how the location of oil reserves underlay international politics throughout the postwar period. In Britains own backyard, the unnished history of Irish
independence returned with a vengeance after 1966 with the start of the
troubles in Ulster and their seemingly endless continuation.
In the domestic politics of Britain, the simple diagram of the decade
is one of alternation between Conservative (195164) and Labour
(returned twice in 1964 and again in 1966) governments, and then a
reversion to Conservative in 1970. In the 1950s the relative consensus
existing between the two major parties was symbolized in the imaginary
gure of Mr Butskell, created by the Economist in 1954, who combined
aspects of the Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer and would-be
leader, Rab Butler, and his Labour predecessor, Hugh Gaitskell. Butler
was influential in framing the Education Act of 1944 that set a new
pattern for expanded state education, locally administered, developing
from a three-tier system to include what was seen as a more inclusive
model in the Comprehensive School, the rst 300 of which were opened
by 1964. Gaitskell died young in 1963, making way for Wilson as a younger
126
leader, skilled in economic manipulations and keen to present Labour as

a party of scientic and social transformation, a kind of consumerist
sequel to Atlee. Images of modern architecture formed a natural backdrop for his vision of Britains future.
The Town and Country Planning Act of 1947 followed the recommendations of the wartime Uthwatt Committee by imposing a tax of
100 per cent on the increase in value through development, a charge
known as betterment. This unprecedented measure could have changed
the face of post-war Britain by diverting the prots of development to
the state, but it was alien to Conservative thinking, and, in a generally
popular move, Macmillan deleted this part of the Act in 1953 on the
grounds that betterment was difcult to understand and administer.
This allowed the business of development to proceed as usual, with the
difference that local authorities were required to draw up local development plans and refuse to grant permissions for new buildings or uses
that varied from the plans or the existing uses. This remained effectively a nationalization of land, and a rather arbitrary check to development.
Building licences were a wartime measure to direct scarce resources into
government projects. In peacetime they continued to restrain private
construction, until abolished by Macmillan in 1954 as a further part of
what he called his bonre of controls.
The altruistic but arduous period of government-led post-war reconstruction, limping rather than striding since the withdrawal of American
Marshall Aid in 1947, was ended. Churchills order to clear the Festival
buildings from the South Bank site immediately the exhibition closed in
October 1951 was a symbolic gesture of rupture with the Atlee governments paternalistic vision. After 1954 all kinds of building work grew
exponentially in a new condition of dualism, in which the state still commissioned more than at any previous time, while a boom in commercial
property development soon began. The backlog of reconstruction and
rehousing dated back to the Depression years, and many reasonable
people seem to have expected a complete renewal of the built environment, bar a few historic relics. Until the mid-1960s, therefore, there was
a widespread presumption that any kind of development, if not necessarily modern architecture itself, was bound to be good.
The relaxation of controls was necessary if only because, as part of
their election strategy in 1950, the Conservative Party Conference had
made a commitment to build 300,000 houses per year. As H.C.G.
Matthew comments, This was difcult to achieve, and implied possible
distortion of industrial investment, an increase in ination, and even
some effect on supplies for rearmament and the Korean war.1 Macmillan
was appointed Minister of Local Government and Planning and enjoyed

(22 November 1967).
the sense of heroism that this commitment conferred on his role. Already
in 1952, nearly 240,000 new houses were built with the encouragement of
government subsidies, a gure that rose to nearly 350,000, representing
a mixture of public and private sector, by 1954, when the controls were
scrapped.
Compared to the semi-derelict condition of Britain at the end of the
war, the changes were palpable. At the same time, expectations rose. The
phenomenon that the American economist J. K. Galbraith described in
his book The Afuent Society (1958), with its consumerist attitude, was
beginning to emerge in Britain after nearly two decades of short supplies, high income tax, lack of entrepreneurial imagination and air, and
absence of consumer credit. Class division was reinforced by the differing abilities to nd personal expression through spending and acquisition, until the dam broke and everyone could join in. When Macmillan
handed over his role in 1955, two years before succeeding Anthony Eden
as Prime Minister, the government was already reducing subsidies as an
economy measure. The problems associated with the supply of public
housing could therefore be traced back to the diminishing means available for satisfying rising expectations.
Housing: Going Up
With the release of height restrictions in the early 1950s, Britain experienced one of the forms of modern architecture that held especial potency in the public mind. The story of the 1960s could be told as one of rise
and fall, of hope and disillusion, relating to tall buildings of all kinds,
whether for ofces, hospitals, housing or even, in the case of Essex, university accommodation. High rise is the aspect of 1960s housing that is
remembered above all others. Given the number of reasons for not making tall buildings for residential use in the public sector, it is necessary to
assume that there was some deeper compulsion than mere novelty to
realize the vision of a city of towers, up to forty years after Le Corbusier
had rst woven his spell. Perhaps pent-up frustration with a Modern
Movement that had developed through the twenty years between 1930
and 1950 without being allowed to pass through this experimental phase
provides some explanation. Between the Scylla of dense low-rise urban
streets, from which politicians were still able to win votes by promising
to release the people, and the Charybdis of Subtopia and suburban
sprawl, which threatened so many values dear to the political and artistic establishment, the high rise set amid greenery was a form of get-out
clause. Britain was keen to shed the image of its past, and high rise signalled progress in unambiguous terms to observers overseas. The means
128
and the opportunities were present, and combined to create a critical mass sufcient to give
this form of housing a self-propelling impetus.
Catching up on the backlog of housing and
accommodating the baby boom was a problem
for every country after the Second World War.
The memory of the British experience has remained one of shame and regret, tempered with
explanations and excuses and occasional denials
that there was ever anything wrong with high-rise
housing. The wisdom of Elizabeth Denby, noted
in chapter Two, failed to penetrate the consciousness of architects and planners deeply enough to
prevent what have subsequently been seen as selfreinforcing mistakes that resulted from a wilful
dissociation between people and their physical
environment. As Lionel Brett said in 1961, the
affluent society posed the great philosophical
question that haunts the architects subconscious
the ashpoint at which Architecture and Politics
meet: Should people have what they want, or
what they ought to want?2 Architects believed
they ought to want high-rise flats. The people
soon began to think differently.
There is an argument, put forward by Stefan
Muthesius and Miles Glendinning in Tower Block
(1994), that architects were marginal to the highrise housing process, however much they hoped
for engagement in it through the construction
industry and work with local authorities, and
however much they took the blame for disasters
later on. Writing in 1974, E. W. Cooney saw evidence of enthusiasm among architects at one time
and, later, a good deal of doubt and disillusionment.3 High rise could take the form of slabs or
towers. Slab blocks appeared most frequently in
pre-war drawings and in early post-war building
schemes such as Churchill Gardens, and they
never ceased to be a signicant element in most
housing schemes. Another form of the early 1950s
was the y-plan, usually found in rather undistinguished architectural form, with the major
Frederick Gibberd,
The Lawn, Mark Hall
Moors, Harlow, Essex,
195051.
LLC Architects
Department (Colin
Lucas), Oakland
Court, Ackroyden
Estate, Wimbledon
Park, London,
195054.
exception of Skinner, Bailey and Lubetkins Bevin Court, Islington

(19514), which is on a grander scale and contains at its centre the most
magnicent staircase in the whole of British at building.
Towers had a special attraction for architects, however, and at Harlow
Frederick Gibberds The Lawn (195051) was, at ten storeys, a novelty
justied by the wish to retain seven oak trees, which would have been
felled in the course of a standard low-rise development. Gibberd also
wanted to create variety in the New Town, and The Lawn reected similar point blocks in the Stockholm suburbs. At the Ackroydon Estate,
Wimbledon (195054), Oakland Court and other lcc blocks were eleven
storeys high, and the plan form was a t shape, which pioneered the use
of internally ventilated bathrooms, a change that gave architects the
freedom to arrange ats more compactly in slender towers. The lcc was
partly able to pursue its own course because, unlike other local authorities, its nancial borrowing was approved directly by an annual Bill in
Parliament, rather than through individual government departments.4
Mixed development, as demonstrated by Gibberd at Harlow, corresponded to the picturesque interpretation of Modernism, and offered a
130
more exible range of accommodation, with larger houses with gardens

for families and high rise for those without children, who would appreciate the light, fresh air (a signicant consideration before the Clean Air
Act of 1962), views and privacy, giving more pleasure to more people . . .
a new kind of space, surprise views, as Frederick Gibberd said at an riba
Symposium on high ats in February 1955; or as Herbert Tayler of Tayler
and Green put it, an escape from a uniform pinkish grey hell of standard post-war housing.5 Both parts of the Alton Estate at Roehampton
were mixed development, for which Sweden offered examples. Most of
the early lcc high-rise blocks were on the edge of parkland, which
allowed them breathing space and offered rewarding views for the residents. Holford promoted the same arguments for inner London,
attempting in vain to break the height barrier in schemes for which he
was a planning consultant at St Pauls and Piccadilly Circus.
High residential buildings remained more expensive than houses
(twice as much per unit in some cases), but in 1955 speakers at the riba
Symposium were keen to nd ways to bring down the costs and justify
their increasing use, aesthetically, economically and in terms of population density. They expressed concern about the loss of agricultural land
if lower densities were adopted, not only in terms of loss of amenity,
but also in terms of the adverse balance of payments resulting from
increased food imports. Biodiversity and ecosystems were as yet unfamiliar concepts in architectural and planning circles, but the Conservatives
were the party of farming and landowners, whose interests they were
bound to uphold. Where new housing replaced existing slums, the original population might have to be rehoused in the same area, since the
New Towns programme was slowing down, for similar reasons of saving
farmland. New Town growth required the relocation of industry, as the
Barlow Report hoped to encourage, but despite incentives many industries preferred to stay in the cities, rather than risk losing their existing
workforce, for whom new housing had to be provided.
By 1958 government enthusiasm for height was tempered by a general
desire to pull back from the whole public housing programme, which
had always been anomalous for a Conservative administration. By 1956
the emergency had been going on for ten years and the sense of urgency
was declining.6 New housing starts dipped after 1957, but rising population, loss of existing stock through slum clearance and the increase in
the number of separate households contributed to a new awareness of
crisis, with late Victorian streets of rented terraced bye-law housing
acquiring the name twilight zones.7 In the dying days of Macmillans
successor, Alec Douglas-Home, the Housing Act of 1964 authorized local
authorities to intervene and improve conditions in the private rented
131
Production: White Heat and Burnout
sector, a sensitive subject after the posthumous exposure (in relation to

the Profumo affair) of the notorious landlord Peter Rachman, whose
activities had sparked the Notting Hill race riots of 1958. The Housing
Corporation, an intermediary funding body between government and
housing providers, is one of the 1964 Acts lasting legacies. The graph of
new housing began to rise again, and the incoming Labour Government
of Harold Wilson, not to be outdone, set a target of 500,000 new homes
per year by 1970. This tted Wilsons famous promise to forge a new
Britain in the white heat of the technological revolution. The preelection rhetoric combined images of technological expertise with those
of social liberation, and high-rise ats offered a perfect manifestation of
the linkage.
Only after Wilsons return with a stronger majority in 1966 (the year
of Cathy Come Home, a television drama exposing the still-appalling
conditions of private rented housing) did house building begin to take
off, despite the worsening economic situation that drove local authorities harder to nd cheap ways of building. Between 1966 and 1968 there
was a boom in medium rise (ve to nine storeys), because seemingly by
accident the government was permitting almost unrestricted subsidies.
In 1964 the government set up the National Building Agency under the
former lcc architect A. W. Cleeve Barr, specically to review systems
building techniques from some 400 alternatives developed by eager
contractors. The involvement of architects in these systems was limited
to the layout of blocks and the choice of cladding panels, but many
shared the excitement about nally leaping forward from the longderided inefciencies of site labour. This transition reopened the breach
between mechanist and humanist philosophies, between efciency
and compassion. It was not that each necessarily excluded the other.
The Hertfordshire schools showed how system building could be
humanized, but the poetic transformation made by New Brutalism
gave encouragement to architects who wanted to achieve a striking or
existentially alienating effect of repetition and bleakness in the name of
economy.
It did not matter whether or not this effect was genuinely cheap. In a
form of accountancy suited to the short-term aims of politicians, First
cost, the capital sum expended to produce the building, was usually the
only measure, with operation costs and future maintenance ignored. As
with the pre-war enthusiasm for efciency, value was calculated from a
balance sheet, but was also read back from the visual form, in which
frills, such as the landscaping and careful adaptation to site demonstrated by rmjm at the clasp-built York University, could look like waste
when applied to housing.
132
Sam Bunton, Red

Road Flats, Glasgow,
1962.
The very tallest ats, which attracted

especial criticism for this reason, were not
system-built. Red Road, Glasgow (19629),
a group of 2731-storey towers by Sam
Bunton, an architect with a love for
American ideas and methods, was steelframed and covered in asbestos sheet; it was
the highest social housing in Europe at the
time. Bunton declared that housing today
isnt domestic architecture its public
building. You mustnt expect airs and
graces.8 Red Roads London equivalent was
the 31-storey Trellick Tower (1967), built for
the lccs successor body, the Greater London Council (glc), by Ern
Goldnger as the crown of the mixed-development Cheltenham Estate in
North Kensington. The tallest-ever London housing block, it is robustly
built using concrete poured on site rather than prefabricated and has
felicities of design that could be expected from an architect of
Goldngers training and background. It was a bespoke building, in the
lcc tradition, not a mass-market product, but for many years the difference seemed insignicant.
The Gorbals area south of the River Clyde in Glasgow was a notorious
slum, and although its stone-built tenements might, in the following
decade, have been saved for rehabilitation, there was no alternative in the
1960s mind to clearing buildings and streets together and starting again.
Robert Matthew contributed a mixed development of towers and lower
blocks between 1958 and 1964, while Basil Spences Hutchesontown c
(Queen Elizabeth Square) development (19616) was the more architecturally striking, a version of Le Corbusiers Unit dHabitation, borrowing an earlier Corbusian idea of hanging gardens to create elevated open
spaces between ats. Exacerbated by the harsh climate and construction
faults, the good points of the ats were overweighed by the problems. As
the job architect said,
What we did not realise when we were building things of this
nature is that they involve very high maintenance cost. And that
cost was impossible for the local authority to deal with.9
The problems were considered so intractable that the Queenies, as the

blocks were known, were demolished, amid much publicity, in 1993.
Despite extensive use of prefabrication, encouraged by government
subsidies for tall buildings, high ats never competed in cost with
Newham Borough
Council (using the
Larsen-Nielsen
system), Ronan Point,
Freemasons Estate,
Newham, London,
1966. Photographed
by Gillian Daniell,
then an art student
in London, on the
morning of the gas
explosion in 1968.
Sir Basil Spence,

Glover and Ferguson,
Queen Elizabeth
Square (Hutchesontown C), 196066.
medium- and low-rise housing, to which system building was better suited. With this knowledge, it is hard
to understand the reasons for the sudden popularity
of high rise. Several essentially unrelated factors seem
to have converged, including an aesthetic ambition on
the part of architects, partly for themselves and partly
for the future tenants, and a renewed concern about
building over too much green-eld land, less to protect
amenity than to protect agricultural production and
its role in the national balance of payments. Added
to this were the political motives of having dramatic
results to show at election time, and in some cases
retaining a Labour-voting population inside an electoral boundary rather than dispersing them to new
towns, where their votes would be lost. In a wider
sense, the 1960s was a period in which technology was
assumed to be benign and all-powerful. This was a
worldwide trend, and system building was an international movement. With its powerful labour unions and trade practices
in Britain, the construction industry had been resistant to modernization in many respects during the whole century, and here was an opportunity to subdue it.
Only after the peak of high-rise building with 20,000 ats in 1967 did
these dark secrets emerge. The decline resulted in part from the governments belated effort to correct its over-liberal subsidy regime, but also
from a slow absorption of user feedback. Not all of it was negative, at
least initially, but there were so many inherently weak points, such as
non-functioning lifts, which multiplied the potential for isolation. In
addition, lack of close neighbourliness among residents created opportunities for vandalism and crime. Poor management and maintenance
by local authorities magnied small problems into large ones.
It was impolitic to admit to making such large and expensive mistakes, at least until the clamour became an uproar, triggered by a single
isolated incident, the accidental gas explosion at Ronan Point, a 23storey Larsen-Nielsen block in Newham, East London, on 16 May 1968.
Causing four fatalities, this collapse of the corner of the block revealed a
fault in the system, and also the slipshod way that it had been built by
contractors and their labourers. Criticism mounted, but blocks already
planned and nanced had to make their weary way through to completion regardless.
134
Coming Down
The instrument used to change direction after 1967 was the cost yardstick, which prescribed an optimum density as a curb to excessive highrise development. The result was a return to medium-rise schemes,
often consisting of linked balcony-access blocks in pale imitation of
Park Hill. This was almost a full circle to walk-up balcony-access blocks,
after every alternative had been explored and found wanting. The
Aylesbury Estate in Southwark (Borough Architect F. O. Hayes, 196777)
was one of the largest and most notorious of the new-style developments.
As Bridget Cherry commented, an exploration can be recommended
only for those who enjoy being stunned by the impersonal megalomaniac creations of the mid c20.10
In 1959 Leslie Martin and Patrick Hodgkinson published a proposal
for medium-rise, high-density housing based on a site in St Pancras. It
repeated arguments from the 1930s that the high densities of Georgian
terraces proved the viability of contained streets and connected houses,
although the building type itself could be rened through a stepped section to offer better quality private outdoor space than the traditional
balcony. The St Pancras housing manager appreciated the contrast that
their scheme offered with the hygienic stillness and television silence of
the new housing estates, although he commented that the proposed
open planning inside the ats and maisonettes might be too advanced
for tenants only just about out of the aspidistra stage and still only
mid-way through the open re and nice tiled surround stage.11
The basic thinking of this proposal, backed by impressive mathematical calculations of the type that Martin introduced to Cambridge in the
post-graduate Centre for Land Use and Built Form, fed the opposition
to high rise that developed among architects, well ahead of Ronan Point,
when their autonomy was taken away by system builders and local government planners.
At Lillington Street, Pimlico (196172), Darbourne and Darke also
interrogated the cross-section, here rising up to eight storeys without
looking either like a slab or a tower. The intention was to remove the
institutional quality from public housing, with high-quality landscaping
and a brick even redder than Ham Common, with concrete oor plates
grinning through in the manner of Maisons Jaoul, partly as a tribute to
a ne vigorous Gothic church next to the site by G. E. Street. Colin
Amery and Lance Wright wrote in 1977:
Pre-Darbourne and Darke housing is visibly institutionalised.
Housing estates were separate and however salubrious and
136
Darbourne and Darke,

Lillington Gardens,
Pimlico, London,
196172.
spacious, visibly apart from the organic spontaneity of ordinary

living . . . Under the impulse of collectivisation in the fties the
home had become transmogried and absorbed into something
bigger than itself. Homes became clutches of serviced cells. Slowly,
in many aspects of this rms work these are being drawn back
into a unity and you have the image of home once more.12
Low-rise housing was capable of achieving new higher-density forms

as well. The Cockaigne Housing Groups development at The Ryde,
Hateld, Hertfordshire, began in 1962 when Michael Baily, the transport
correspondent of The Times, advertised for supporters to join a co-operative venture to work out afresh the real needs of the family of today
and the type of structure which would best answer them.13 In the years
19636 the architects, Phippen Randall and Parkes, built a tightly knit
collection of single-storey l-shaped courtyard houses with communal
amenities. The Ryde showed a debt to Le Corbusier, but not as the promoter of high rise. Both Lillington Street and St Bernards, Croydon, by
Atelier 5 (196670), in common with many other projects of the 1960s,
derived their stepped and jumbled forms from Le Corbusiers wartime
Rob et Roq housing project in the south of France. Atelier 5, a Swiss
practice, was invited to design St Bernards for the builder-developers,
Wates, producing a tidy compact mass of houses with pedestrian access
on two levels.
The Dunboyne Road Estate, Hampstead (19669), by Neave Brown,
was one of many experiments in housing form carried out by Camdens
Phippen Randall
and Parkes, Cockaigne
Housing Group,
The Ryde, Hateld,
in-house architects under Sidney Cook. Dunboyne Road sits as a compact and intricately planned three-dimensional grid of layered uses, from
parking at the base, up into ats and maisonettes, and terraces of public
and private gardens. Brown went on to design the much larger Alexandra
Road estate in 1969 (constructed 19728), where the architecture makes
its own mountain slopes in a gentle curve aligned to the adjoining railway line. Its sweep of repeating units is undeniably sublime, but construction became notoriously expensive owing to difculties of ination
in the 1970s, exacerbated by the non-standard nature of the process. The
reputation of the most expensive council housing in Britain belonged to
Gordon Bensons and Alan Forsyths Branch Hill, Hampstead (19746),
the cost of which was partly caused by the value of the secluded and
wooded site (on which there was a covenant against building more than
Camden Borough
Council (Neave
Brown), Dunboyne
Road Estate, Fleet
Road, Camden,
London, 19669.
138
Camden Architects
Department (Neave
Brown), Alexandra
Road Estate, Swiss
Cottage, London,
196878.
two storeys), and partly by the same difculties as Alexandra Road. It was
perhaps the most idyllic of the Rob et Roq derivatives.
Patrick Hodgkinsons studies in the late 1950s eventually bore fruit
at the Brunswick Centre (196872), in the heart of Bloomsbury. Like
Alexandra Road, it was offered and welcomed as an alternative to a
tower block, beginning as a private scheme in which Camden later took
a share. The scheme consists of two parallel lines of an extruded stepped
cross-section of ocean-liner dimensions, combining ats with a pedestrian shopping street in the middle, a cinema and ample car parking.
The stepped ziggurat section, rooted far back in the Modern Movement
but increasingly popular in the 1960s, leans backwards in an inverted v.
The desirable location lifted the ats from a depressed condition by the
end of the 1990s, leading to a substantial refurbishment involving
Hodgkinson in the years 20046.
At Harlow, Neylan and Unglesss Bishopseld (1963) created a central
civic space raised over parking and ringed by three-storey ats on a minor
Patrick Hodgkinson,
Brunswick Centre,
Bloomsbury, London,
196772.
hillock, with Mediterranean lanes leading

off in different directions, in complete
contrast to the mixed-development neighbourhoods of the 1950s. This was a direct
response to the thinking of Team 10 about
association, based on the assumption
that if people lived close to each other,
they could halt the alienation of modern
consumer society and rediscover some
sense of community. The same move
towards tighter housing was set as a policy for Cumbernauld, the New Town for
Glasgow overspill, planned on a hilltop
site by Hugh Wilson in 19589. This was
complemented by a multi-level town centre, designed by Geoffrey Copcutt, which
acted as a Stadtkrone (city crown) in the
manner of Patrick Geddess or Bruno
Tauts expressionist interpretation thereof. Cumbernauld town centre and the
Brunswick Centre were both described
as megastructures, a word that began to
gain currency around 1964, when a number of projects internationally displayed
the characteristics of size and multiple
and mutable functions inserted into a
more or less permanent framework, and the capability of being extended
indenitely, usually in the form of a linear extrusion.14 Of the two,
Cumbernauld was more radical in its open-ended form. A megastructure
might include housing as one of its functions, but despite the desirability
of combining housing with shops, the compartmentalized and irrational
nancing arrangements made this difcult.
The whole question of housing in the 1960s remains highly controversial. There were so many genuine problems that for many years the
whole body of work was rejected in one piece. Blame was difcult to
apportion among designers, contractors, politicians and housing managers, all of whom made mistakes in good or bad faith. The failure of
Modernist housing led to a serious loss of self-esteem among architects.
The professional magazines reveal an extended period of self-questioning from the late 1960s onwards, challenging not only the ideas of the
immediate past, but extending right back to challenge the orthodoxies
of the Modern Movement as a whole.
140
Geoffrey Copcutt,
Cumbernauld Town
Centre, 19648.
Copcutt recalled the
full proposal, like a
jeweller fashioning
precious metal, I hammered cross-sections
and shaped landscape
to forge an urban
morphology, contrasting it with the built
scheme, a filleted
version of the rst
phase.
The historian and journalist Nicholas Taylor made one of the rst
major attacks on production housing in 1967 in the Architectural
Review, a magazine that had never abandoned its concern with the gentle philosophy of the picturesque and its respect for places and their
past. As he stated at the beginning of his text, Housing is a nineteenth
century concept. This is both historically and philosophically true. The
social concept of housing provision from the top down was unchanged
from the grudging philanthropy of the Victorians, and the recipients
were still expected to like it and be grateful, even in an age of consumerism and choice. When the provision fell so far short of efciency,
and the rise of vandalism began to have an effect, crisis resulted, but the
alternatives were not well understood. In terms of action, Taylor and
other contributors recommended the rehabilitation of houses of the
type that were then being pulled down as slums or twilight zones. Better
landscaping and denser settlements were put forward as alternatives, as
at Lillington Street, but, as Taylor complained, Visual images of community have time and again been used as a substitute for reality.15 As old
social networks split apart, community was desired more intensely, but
no easier to manufacture purely out of building forms.
Ofce Development and the Private Sector
Under the London Building Acts, street elevations were typically at a
uniform height of 80 feet, and any inhabited oors above this level set
back in steps. Internal light wells provided a dim outlook for many ofce
141
Easton, Robertson,
Cusdin, Preston and
Smith, Shell Centre,
Belvedere Road,
Lambeth, London,
195363.
Basil Spence and

Partners (Andrew
Renton), Thorn House,
St Martins Lane,
Westminster, London,
19579. Described by
Sir Nikolaus Pevsner
as one of the best
office buildings of
its date in England,
Thorn House was
remodelled by
Rentons successors
at RHWL Partnership
in 198890 as Orion
House.
workers. Buildings of this type were heavily

criticized by J. M. Richards in the Architectural Review as contrary to the urban
ideas of Modernism. The height limit of
the Building Acts was replaced by the concept of plot ratio, rst proposed in 1947 by
William Holford. This permitted buildings
to rise higher, but not to ll a given site with
more than the oorspace of an equivalent
building under the old regime. The Royal
Fine Art Commission was doubtful about
breaking upwards, but Richards argued
that there is nothing wrong with height
as such and that a few slim skyscrapers,
between which the City panorama could be
seen and enjoyed would be less obstructive
than large acreages of building of perhaps
half their height.16 Richards noted the
emergence of the fourteen-storey Great
Arthur House in the Golden Lane housing
estate, and that some tall ofce buildings were beginning to get planning
permission.
It still took some years before taller buildings cut through the skyline.
Leslie Martins plan for the South Bank in 1953 allowed for a 25-storey
tower for Shell. Howard Robertsons rm, Easton, Robertson, Cusdin,
Preston and Smith, which had a reputation as moderate Modernists
before the war, took the commission, and tried unsuccessfully to go
higher. The building was stone-clad from top to bottom, and vaguely
reminiscent, at least in the lower blocks, of Gio Pontis much sparkier
Montecatini building in Milan of 1936. Ian Nairn grouped it with prewar skyblockers, as a set of giants, borrowing Blakes opinion of
Reynolds, hired by Satan to depress art.17 As the Macmillan years unfolded, London became the epicentre of the ofce boom, and tall buildings
were one of the devices available to developers and their architects when
seeking planning permission from the lcc and interpreting the complex
regulations to give the maximum lettable space. As Oliver Marriott wrote
in 1967,
Holfords scheme of plot ratio zoning was designed as a set of
theoretical limits on density of workers in given areas. Nobody
dreamt that the developers would want to build as much on a
site as the plot ratios allowed.18
142
Demonstration
by Anti-Ugly Action
against the unfinished Kensington
Public Library,
London, designed by
Vincent Harris, 1958.
This is some indication of the lccs lack

of preparation for the ofce boom. While
the guardians of taste in the architectural
magazines were generally more pleased if a
commercial development was modern than
otherwise, it soon became clear that modern
could mean many things, not all equally
praiseworthy. While the Economist Building
used the plot ratio to give space back to
the passing pedestrian, Thorn House, St
Martins Lane, by Andrew Renton of Basil
Spence and Partners (19579), although
celebrated as a fullment of Richardss
intentions in his article of 1954, had less obvious benets.
In 1957 any architect, especially in London, guilty of persisting with
a pre-Modernist elevation, whether overtly historic in character or not,
laid themselves open to a visitation from Anti-Ugly Action, a group
mainly composed of students from the Royal College of Art stainedglass course, with some Architectural Association students in tow. They
devised a novel form of street theatre involving parading a cofn for the
death of modern architecture in front of a completed building, such as
Bracken House and the Kensington Public Library (by Vincent Harris),
and shouting Its an outrage. They caught the publics attention, if only
because one of the leaders of the group, Pauline Boty, was not only a
talented early exponent of Pop Art, but also glamorously blonde, and
probably added vigour to the attempt to unseat the (mostly) elderly
academic architects.19
One attraction of commercial development for young architects
was the possibility of getting things built quickly, and by the beginning of the 1960s developers were not all cautious conservatives.
Rodney Gordon was a student at the aa under Peter Smithson and,
like many of his contemporaries, joined the lcc Architects Department. When after a few years one of his colleagues, who had been
moonlighting for Owen Luder, one of the youngest developers architects with his own practice, invited Gordon to meet Luder with a view
to designing a competition entry for a shopping centre at Elephant
and Castle, the bait of designing a major shopping centre was too
strong to resist.20 The developer for this scheme was Alec Coleman,
who explained his philosophy to Gordon: A developer is like a prostitute, youve got it . . . you sell it . . . Youve still got it. Gordon and
Luder worked on Eros House, Catford (195962), an ofce building in
a south London suburb, where Gordon maximized the plot ratio in a
144
Owen Luder Partnership (Rodney Gordon),

Tricorn Centre,
Portsmouth, 1966.
novel way, expressing the structure and services on the outside of the
building envelope in a manner that bridged between Kahn and the
High-Tech manner still in the future. The same team developed shopping centres in Portsmouth and Gateshead, both of which notoriously
introduced a certain brand of New Brutalism into the commercial sector,
with dramatic effect.
Commercial architecture could therefore be more creative than some
of the virtuous architecture of the welfare state, even if Banham declared
that the character was only skin deep. In Birmingham, the Post and Mail
building (19625; demolished) by a local practice, John Madin Group,
was a notable example of the Miesian tower-and-podium type. The
Burnet Tait practice continued in the hands of Gordon Tait, who was
initially inspired by Lubetkins more decorative side, and proved to be a
designer of considerable formal invention and control, even though he
was never rated among the leading architects of the time. His elegant
G. S. Hay (CWS) and

Gordon Tait of Sir
John Burnet, Tait and
Partners, Co-operative Insurance Tower,
Miller Street,
Manchester, 195962.
25-storey tower for the Co-operative Insurance Society ofces in

Manchester (with G. S. Hay, 195962), admittedly a bespoke rather than
a spec building, did not suffer from the good taste, administered at the
hands of the Royal Fine Art Commission (rfac), that cut down the Shell
Building and Robert Matthew, Johnson-Marshalls New Zealand House
in Haymarket to their detriment. Taking its cue from soms Inland Steel
Building in Chicago, it continued the long-standing sense of a linkage
between the northern cities and the United States stronger than the
usLondon connection.
The developers architect par excellence in the 1960s was Richard
Seifert, a former student of Richardsons at the Bartlett School of
Architecture, who might have remained part of an undistinguished
majority of practitioners had he not found a distinctive niche on returning from war service in the Royal Engineers, and formed an alliance with
the developer Harry Hyams, beginning with the semi-traditional
Woolworths Building on Marylebone Road in 1955. With a fresh design
input from his partner George Marsh, Seifert designed Centre Point
(19637), a slender ofce tower on New Oxford Street, with pre-cast
concrete panels and sculptural piloti derived from Marcel Breuers later
works, such as the unesco headquarters in Paris. While the un-let building became a symbol of unearned developers prots, since its capital
value accumulated free of rates while it remained empty, it was possibly
the rst project by a commercial architect to be widely admired as a
design by Ern Goldnger, among others, who called it Londons rst
Pop-art skyscraper.21 The opportunity to develop Centre Point came
about because of the lccs desire to effect a road-widening scheme,
which it was unable to implement without some form of private-sector
partnership, and the council therefore deliberately avoided submitting
the scheme to what they anticipated would be a hostile rfac.
A different form of collusion between the lcc and developers
occurred on Euston Road, where the lcc intended to build an underpass, not knowing that the developer Joe Levy had already obtained
planning permission for ofces on a small but essential pocket of land.
Levy milked the situation, rst to get lcc help in site assembly for a
larger development in a neglected corner of London close enough to the
centre to present an attractive ofce site, and then to exceed the plot
ratio for his Euston Centre (196272; architects Sidney Kaye, Eric Firmin
& Partners), a curtain-walled tower, slab and podium development in
green-tinted glass.22
In the 1960s British people were still excited by tall buildings. They
queued to go up the Post Ofce Tower in Howland Street in 1967, before
an ira bomb in 1971 caused it to be closed to visitors. As with housing,
Richard Seifert and

Partners (George
Marsh), Centre Point,
Tottenham Court
Road, London, 19616.
a backlash began soon after this date, since towers were increasingly
seen as exploiting land values and cluttering the skyline. Seifert gathered
further opprobrium (and some grudging admirers) as he went on to add
some of the tallest buildings in the City of London in the 1970s, including the 200-metre-high National Westminster Bank (197081; now Tower
42). After this, towers went out of fashion until the abolition of plotratios in 1993, prompting a proposal by Norman Foster and Partners for
the Swiss Re tower on the site of the former Baltic Exchange, damaged
by the ira Bishopsgate bomb on 24 April 1992.
Universities
Compared to housing and ofces, universities were a less controversial
area of development, but equally typical of the 1960s in their accelerating pace of change and expansion. The children of the baby boom were
given primary schools in the early 1950s, and secondary schools in the
late 1950s. By the 1960s they would reach university age, and the Robbins
Report of 1963 proposed that higher education should be available to all
those capable of beneting from it, supported by tuition and maintenance grants that, while they lasted, made the student experience a statesponsored release from the realities of economic life. During the decade,
the number of universities rose from 22 to 46, with the new ones largely following a pattern of being sited on green-eld campuses, usually the
park of a defunct country house, a mile or two outside the towns with
which they were associated. This model resembled a British boarding
school (including playing elds), reecting a new town faith in the
benets of natural surroundings and a desire to get away from the Red
Brick image of the late Victorian and inter-war civic universities. The
intention was to house most students on the campus with all their facilities, and it was assumed that sufcient sites in city centres, retrospectively a better solution both for students and cities, would not be obtainable fast enough.
When Keele University was founded in 1949 near Stoke-on-Trent, its
faintly neo-Georgian early buildings by Howard Robertson and J. A.
Pickavance were seen as a failure architecturally. To prevent any recurrence, later universities were given consultant architects from the start,
selected by recommendation rather than competition, and mainly limited to the younger level of established London practices. The Royal Fine
Art Commission made a determined and ultimately successful effort to
wean the longer-established Nottingham, Exeter and Durham universities off their preference for neo-Georgian and traditional buildings by
McMorran, Vincent Harris and Marshall Sisson.23
The University of Sussex, designed by

Basil Spence and opened in 1962, was slightly ahead of the pack of seven universities
that were under simultaneous construction
in the rst half of the decade. The architecture was typical of Spence: theatrical,
warm-hearted and cleverly composed from
sources fashionable at the time, chiefly
the Maisons Jaoul. Later architects were
more cautious about grand gestures, and
the opposite end of the spectrum included
York, built by Robert Matthew, JohnsonMarshall using the clasp system developed for schools, and Warwick, by Yorke
Rosenberg Mardall, a smooth International
Style grid of white-tiled rectangles, carefully
zoned and linked by a lower-level road.
Architects enjoyed the similarity of campus
planning to city planning, and increasingly
saw universities as analogies of towns. At
Lancaster, Shepheard, Epstein and Hunter
created a rectangular agora sheltered from
the wind by three-storey buildings and
equipped with a long range of steps of the
type that Beaux-Arts architects provided
Basil Spence and
Partners, Falmer
House, University
of Sussex, 196062.
Yorke Rosenberg
Mardall, master-plan
model for the
University of Warwick,
Coventry, 1963.
150
Architects CoPartnership,
University of Essex,
Wivenhoe, 19626.
in front of the monumental libraries of

American universities, little suspecting
that the fashion of the baby boomers was
to sit on the ground rather than on chairs
or benches. At Essex, the design by Kenneth
Capon of Architects Co-Partnership consisted of a series of town squares, in which
individual academic departments purposely
lost their separate identity. The students
were given tall towers of black brick to mark
the skyline north of Colchester, and allow
them the shortest possible journey from
bed to lecture hall. At the University of
East Anglia, Denys Lasdun snaked a ziggurat concrete megastructure across the
contour overlooking a lake, backed by a
teaching wall.
The care taken in designing and building
the 1960s universities remains an impressive testimony to a brief period of marital
harmony between the British establishment
(represented by bodies such as the University Grants Commission) and
the architectural profession. Like the students, modern architects were
being treated for the rst time as responsible adults. By 1968, as with
Denys Lasdun and

Partners, the ziggurats in construction,
University of East
Anglia, Norwich,
19627.
151
housing, there was a turn of opinion against these utopian schemes as a

result of experience. Not everything was the fault of the architects. The
social changes of which the universities were a manifestation themselves
created a more critical climate in relation not only to the physical form of
the buildings, but also to the wider ideas and attitudes that they represented. The campus revolutions of the usa, sparked initially in Berkeley in
1964, spread to Britain in the years 19679. Few universities were completely unaffected, but events at Essex (where the police were called in as
late as 1974) and the lse became national news stories. Even so, the buildings themselves revealed avoidable shortcomings, ranging from the impossibility of creating a balanced society cut off from ordinary life, especially
when so little provision was initially made for agreeable social spaces, to
specic problems with stained concrete (East Anglia), falling tile cladding
(Warwick), sound-proong and lifts (Essex). A book of 1972 entitled
Building the New Universities by Tony Birks was balanced but not uncritical. In 1974 Lord Annan, the Provost of Kings College, Cambridge, who
had appointed a controversial Vice-Chancellor at Essex, Albert Sloman,
reported that Numbers of staff and students wrote to me to condemn
the architecture of the University and to lay at its door the blame for the
unhappy life and hence for the disturbances.24 Muthesius comments that
no architecture could have been better devised for revolution, the more
residential and dense the campus, the easier it was for the militants to
organise themselves.25
Public Architecture
In the 1930s the design of town halls and similar local government buildings began to reflect Modernism, although never in the latest form.
The Victorian and Edwardian traditions of elaborate decoration were
modied by the influence of Stockholm City Hall by Ragnar stberg,
completed in 1922, and Hilversum Town Hall by W. M. Dudok (1930).
McMorran and Whitby were among a handful of architects who continued to build in a traditional style of load-bearing brick up to the completion in 1968 of Suffolk County Hall in Bury St Edmunds, to which Whitby
brought a fresh approach to picturesque grouping absent from the axial
formality of pre-war town halls. John Brandon Jones, an enthusiast for the
work of Philip Webb and Lethaby, was inuenced by one of H. P. Berlages
more conservative followers, A. J. Kropholler, at Hampshire County Hall,
Winchester (195960). At Brentwood Town Hall (1957, extended 1983) and
Staines (1960), his designs appeared old-fashioned and were built against
the advice of the rfac, but they anticipated the return to a regional brick
style in the 1970s at Hillingdon Civic Centre and other buildings.
152
McMorran and Whitby,

Suffolk County
Buildings, Bury St
Edmunds, 1968.
Local government reorganization, the

perceived need for more car parking and
increasing numbers of local government
staff stimulated much new building without
the drastic cost constraints applied to
housing. Cornwall County Hall, Truro
(19626), designed by the County Architects Department in a style with appropriate borrowings from Le Corbusier, was
among the most successful, although it
was the private rms that tended to attract
notice. At Gravesend Civic Centre by H. T.
Cadbury-Brown and Partners (1964), a
severe style with concrete cladding panels
was chosen, although the interior was carefully considered in terms of open space and
light. Sunderland Civic Centre (196870),
by John S. Bonnington (of Sir Basil Spence,
Bonnington and Collins), was sited in a
park, and described as an open town within a town.26 Ramps and gentle steps encouraged a feeling of welcome and accessibility.
A much bolder scheme for a new Civic
Centre in Liverpool by Colin St John Wilson,
working independently of Leslie Martin, was
prepared in 1965, after he had been picked from an international shortlist. The site was large and central, and the project contained the rst
modern atrium conceived as public space. It fell victim to government
cuts at the end of the decade. The idea of the atrium had a great future,
however, initially in the new public space of the late twentieth century,
the covered shopping centre or mall. These initially tended to comprise
the bottom end of the market, but architects of repute became involved
by the end of the 1960s in schemes such as Lion Yard, Cambridge (Arup
Associates, 196872), and the Brunel Centre, Swindon (Douglas Stephen
and Partners, 196675). Both schemes tried to mesh into the existing
surroundings, without offering any direct architectural similarity. The
Brunel Centre made one of the most successful attempts, at least before
Milton Keynes, to transform commerce into civic space, with a grand
arched galleria in the manner of Milan.
Working with Martin, Wilson had already begun in 1962 to plan a
more celebrated non-event of 1960s architecture, the British Museum
Library (as it was then known), originally intended to occupy the whole
block of streets south of Great Russell Street. Here, according to the rst
scheme, there would be an abundance of newly created public space,
introducing the kind of thinking then replacing purely functional attitudes towards the city, including some of the forgotten symbols of a
city: its entry points or gates, its ceremonial ways or public squares and
the opportunity that exists of recreating these by the process of building.27 The project failed owing to a combination of factors: government
cost constraints; a rising tide of conservation opposition to the demolition of a useful and attractive part of London; and a change in the brief
to include more library stock and services, resulting in a project that
became too big for its site. This may conceivably be the way to build a
library, wrote the Architectural Review, emphatically it is not the way to
rebuild a central piece of city.28 Despite the waste of time and effort,
Peter Hall believes that it quite suddenly reappeared in a different light
as relative planning success, owing in this case to the decision to build
on a different site (see chapter Six for the continuation of the project).29
Alan Bennett welcomed the demise of the British Museum Library in
The Listener, with the question, Have you ever seen a second-hand
bookshop in a new building?, and commented: London is not to be
tidied up.30
In the same year, Leslie Martins plan for Whitehall was published,
which added pedestrianization at the expense of one of Londons familiar processional streets. Sir Leslie is more concerned with how things
could be than with how they are wrote Terence Bendixson in The
Spectator. Get the facts and measure them is his cry.31 But this dogged
belief in the calculation of optimal outcomes ignored public attachment
to this important symbolic heart of government. Here, again, the desire
to revalue previously disregarded buildings such as Sir Gilbert Scotts
Foreign Ofce led to the abandonment of the scheme and the eventual
transformation of the existing buildings into highly serviced modern
ofces, with their ceremonial interiors restored.
Cars, Conservation and Covent Garden
In his special issue of the Architectural Review, Outrage, in 1955, Ian
Nairn recorded a cry of pain about the degradation of the countryside,
where the blind and casual spread of ugliness, a universal levelling down
and greying out, that post-war planning was supposed to prevent was
shown to be rampant. It raised the question of sense of place, reinforcing the demand of the Townscape article of 1949 that people should
use their eyes rather than refer to abstract theory.32 The publication of
Townscape in book form by Gordon Cullen in 1961 signalled the con154
tinuing need to stop the rot by more holistic design practices. The
American urban theorist Kevin Lynch contributed to developing new
concepts for understanding places in The Image of the City (1960).
Against this background of pessimism, Jane Jacobss The Death and
Life of Great American Cities (1961) was a planning book unlike any written
before, dealing directly with issues from the viewpoint of an informed
non-specialist who could help professionals to see through the contradictions into which they had been boxed by Modernist ideology, and
the degradation they were causing to the public realm through excessive
zoning and tidying up.
Many of the problems identied by Lynch and Jacobs stemmed from
the erosion of the public realm by motor trafc, especially the growth in
private car use. Most modern architects felt obliged to try and accommodate rather than resist the car, but as early as 1957 a new critical attitude
was apparent. The book Mixed Blessing: The Motor in Britain, by an architect and planner, Colin Buchanan, concluded that cars had produced
a picture of death, and injury, pain and bereavement, noise and
smell, and of vast winding trails of serious damage to urban and
country amenities with vulgarity, shoddiness and the plain squalor
of mud, dirt and litter . . . In fty years the motor has turned our
transport system inside out without a single contribution to the
civic and building record; there is nothing in this country that
could conceivably be called the architecture of motor transport . . .
Apart from war, it is difcult to think of any previous activity of
man that has wrought this kind of dual havoc.33
To begin with, British cities developed ring roads on an American

model, to ease trafc ow while cutting off the centre from the inner
suburbs and accelerating decline. The national motorway network was
inaugurated with the Preston bypass in Lancashire in 1958, followed by
the rst section of the m1 in 1959. As in America, although less blatantly,
the rise of the car led directly to the decline of public transport. The railway system, nationalized in 1948 and loss-making after 1960, was pruned
after the Beeching Report, Reshaping the Railways, of 1963. Although
some admirable design work was done within the regional architects
ofces of British Rail up to the late 1960s, the system as a whole became
increasingly run down.
After something of a false start with Owen Williamss unpopular
designs for the m1 bridges, motorway architecture improved. Landscape
architects, a profession that was rising in independent signicance during the whole post-war period, were employed in the choice of routes
and their planting schemes, with Sylvia Crowes book of 1960, The
Landscape of Roads, making a timely contribution of good sense. Sir
Colin Anderson, a noted design patron from the 1930s (Orient Line
ships), chaired the commission in 1962 that selected signage from Jock
Kinnear and Margaret Calvert.34 The system put Britain at the front of
the international league in one step, and is still in place more than 40
years later. Thus non-architectural Modernism contributed to removing
some of the squalor of the roads noted by Buchanan, in the same way
that Alec Issigoniss Mini Minor became a British peoples car, typifying
the lateral thinking of the 1960s.
Most major British towns and cities commissioned plans from consultants in the post-war period, and all of these were concerned with
trafc ow.35 The schemes were on ground level, with roundabouts at
intersections. American cities showed a new future with elevated urban
motorways and stack crossings where ow need not be interrupted.
Buchanan commented that, while appearing exciting, they are ruthlessly destructive of ground uses and areas, and it is difcult to view with
equanimity the prospect of similar measures applied to our cities.36
Despite this warning, urban motorways in cuttings or on piloti began to
appear in British cities during the 1960s as an aspect of Comprehensive
Redevelopment, a phrase that was the key to unlocking central government funding. As Ian Nairn remarked in 1960, the northern industrial
cities of Britain, being largely of nineteenth-century growth, were much
more like American cities than any others, and similarly suffered from a
ring of urban blight between the commercial centre and the suburbs,
thus providing the typical location for an inner ring road.37
Birmingham and Coventry were cities where cars and their components were made, and for them a suitable display of roadway was a matter of pride. Glasgow was gripped with a road-building fever as part of
its designation of 29 Comprehensive Redevelopment Areas in 1960. One
of the engineers involved, James McCafferty, has commented:
a strong element of civic pride was evident: Glasgow was, after
all, the nations largest city and its commercial, industrial hub.
And there were also comparisons with the relative inactivity of
England in this eld.38
The Glasgow Herald announced that the city had produced a blueprint for the rst urban motorway in Britain, probably in Europe, and is
turning now to consider the proposals for an outer ring route.39 By 1974,
however, trafc predictions were reduced in line with economic crisis,
and the Land Compensation Act of 1973 made councils liable for the
156
Kenneth Browne,
illustration from
Traffic in Towns
(Buchanan Report),
1963.
inevitable drop in the value of properties next to new roads. Even though
the inner ring road was never completed, it established a pattern of car
use to the detriment of public transport.
The Newcastle inner ring road and associated developments owed
much to the personality of the Leader of the Council from 1959, T. Dan
Smith, a Labour politician with a belief in modernization as the pathway
to socialism and making Newcastle a major cultural city on the western
seaboard of Europe.40 Visually, the natural contours allowed for a motorway scheme that in parts had its own drama, but opposition was created
by Professor Jack Napper at the School of Architecture, especially against
the eastern section, which would destroy the Royal Arcade and produce
a tight necklace to strangle the city.41 Smiths collusion with the corrupt
architect John Poulson, who also led to the downfall of the Conservative
Home Secretary Reginald Maudling, eventually landed both men in
gaol, bringing the ring road and similar developments elsewhere into
further disrepute.42
Following a distinguished performance at the Public Inquiry on plans
for Piccadilly Circus, Colin Buchanan was commissioned in 1961 to undertake a study that resulted in the report Trafc in Towns (1963), with a
talented design and research team. The Steering Group (aptly named,
chaired by Geoffrey Crowther of The Economist and including William
Holford and T. Dan Smith) highlighted the public/private dichotomy
exposed by the car, a monster of great potential destructiveness in public terms, and yet one that symbolized personal emancipation. By the
1960s northern cities had abandoned their traditional tramways, as the
American cities tore up their streetcar tracks, and, unlike London, they
had no powers to take control of suburban rail services. The penultimate
paragraph of the Buchanan Report called for a sixth sense of motorised
responsibility as an almost heroic act of self-discipline from the public.43
From a later viewpoint, it is odd that so little attention was given at
this time to the improvement of public
transport as an alternative to private car use
and a means of reclaiming the streets for
pedestrians. The operation of Parkinsons
Law in terms of new trafc taking to the
roads in proportion to roads becoming
available was also ignored when making
projections of growth. When it came to controversy over the London motorway box
proposed by the glc, it was the economic
superiority of the Tubes and buses, better
maintained in the capital than elsewhere
out of necessity, that made its abandonment

tolerable.
In London, conservation of a very basic
kind, based on the desire of largely underprivileged people along the route to defend their
homes, was one of the factors that led to the
abandonment of Ringway One in 1973. Other
factors were rapidly mounting property and
construction costs, which skewed the original
costbenet predictions created to justify the
scheme. It became increasingly ludicrous to
try and sell the attractions of raised walkways and underpasses once these had been
experienced in practice. Whether in the sudden interruptions of the City of London
pedway or the fragmented pedestrian links
between bus stops and the Town Centre at
Cumbernauld, these were clear signals of danger and distress.44 Stanley Kubricks choice of
underpasses at the glcs demonstration estate
at Thamesmead as a location for the young
thugs in A Clockwork Orange (1970) conrmed
what everyone knew.
During the same period, the glc was
under attack for its plans to redevelop the
Covent Garden area in preparation for the
closure of the old fruit and vegetable wholesale market in 1973. The Covent Garden story
is a microcosm of the whole shift in thinking
that occurred in architecture and planning in
the course of the 1960s. Despite its central
location, Covent Garden was little known or
explored by most Londoners, and initially the
glcs intentions were modest. As property
values increased, it became necessary to create
more development value, and in the process,
in order to win the status of Comprehensive
Redevelopment Area, new road proposals
were included around the perimeter, leading
to further destruction of original streets. A
team of architects at County Hall continued
to revise the scheme through the second half
158
GLC Covent Garden
Plan, southern
section, 1969.
of the 1960s, with an increasing reliance on the contribution to be

made by private developers (who had in any case been busy assembling
sites) towards its implementation. These planners, a commentator wrote
in 1971,
had learned well from Lewis Mumford, Kevin Lynch and Jane
Jacobs to respect the complexities of the city; never would they have
committed the solecisms of the pioneers of modern architecture.
Nevertheless, they were conditioned to ruthlessness. They thought
of Covent Garden as obsolete.45
Louis Hellman,
cartoon with accompanying notes in
Architects Journal
(31 January 1973).
(1) 20,000.
(2) All houses built
before 1914.
(3) My wife has a car
too!
(4) Pressure from
small but powerful
motoring lobby.
(5) I couldnt have
driven direct from
Kings Langley to
the South Coast at
weekends!
Not only urban freeways but also substantial car parking anticipated
visitors from outside the area arriving to enjoy the conference centre; and
hotels, supported by government funding at 500 per room, left very little
of the original streets and the people who lived and worked in them.
Suddenly, one of the planners, a 30-year-old Irish architect, Brian
Anson, broke ranks, publicizing his sympathies for the existing residents, who were mostly elderly and lived in poorly serviced, if strongly
built, walk-up flats in the area. The glc could no longer afford to
rehouse all those their constituents who wished to remain. Besides
residents, there was a network of small businesses, protable in their
way as well as picturesque, that beneted from the low rents.46 Another
architect, then a student at the aa, Jim Monahan, helped to found the
Covent Garden Community Association. The Vicar of St Martins in the
Covent Garden
protest, 1972.
Fields, Austen Williams, joined in, and gave

convincing evidence at the Public Inquiry
held in 1971, which marked the beginning
of a rapid climb-down by the glc (leaving
a fragment of its scheme on the ground in
Drury Lane, a meagre parody of the
Economist Building). Covent Garden
remained in temporary limbo, but gradually the developers properties were refurbished and re-let at higher levels, and the
Market reopened in a model restoration as
an American-style Festival Market in 1980.
After the demise of the glc in 1986 the
market was sold to property investors, with
the effect that most of the interesting shops originally courted to move
in left as the rents went up.
The Covent Garden story became national news, interwoven with the
new trends of student activism, a developing awareness at ofcial levels
of the need for public consultation and a resounding identication of
modern architecture no longer with compassionate left-wing causes, but
as the instrument of property and power. Helped no doubt by its convenient location, it was adopted as a cause by the Architectural
Association, which itself had just escaped the cold embrace of amalgamation with Imperial College in South Kensington. What is interesting
in retrospect is the gathering together of new ways of thinking, from the
physical as well as the social sciences, as a means of giving insight into
cities that were not considered in the 1950s.
In Jane Jacobss book of 1961, the nal chapter, The Kind of Problem a
City Is, drew on complexity theory, the alternative to the two-variable
solution dominant in the whole rationalist period of European thought. It
was this simplistic mode, Jacobs believed, that underlay the way planners
thought, in deance of the evidence. Their desire for tidiness meant that
they failed to see the order present in organized complexity, which was
what Jacobs demonstrated with her famous analytical description of life on
a street in Greenwich Village in New York. To this day, Jacobs wrote,
city planners and housers believe they hold a precious nugget of
truth about the kind of problem to be dealt with when they attempt
to shape or reshape big-city neighbourhoods into versions of twovariable systems, with ratios of one thing (as open space) depending
directly and simply upon a ratio of something else (as population).
160
Growing awareness of this fundamental shift in scientic thought began

to penetrate general thinking, and around 1970 Architectural Design began
to include extracts from scientic papers about complexity, citing both
the fashionable cybernetics theory of Norbert Wiener and the complexity
theories of Bertalanffy and Lancelot Law Whyte, the scientist who had
become involved in the Growth and Form exhibition in London in 1951.47
What was there left for the modern architect to hope for? In a book
review of 1971 entitled Fifty Years of Phantom Pregnancy, Martin Pawley
described him as a gure it is beyond the power of reason to save . . . We
weep to see him groaning in phantom labour over his drawing board.48
Reviewing Parameters and Images by Lionel Brett, a leading spokesman
for modern architecture and a future President of the riba, Pawley summarized the message that Modern Architecture . . . has failed to deliver
the goods over the last half century.49 When Richard Seifert appeared in
a programme on Thames Television called Living Architects, Pawley
recognized that he had stolen the language of Modernism, literally and
metaphorically, and nothing could restore its imagined moral integrity.
People on chat shows now dare to openly criticize the pack-ice pedestrian plazas of Cumbernauld, he continued, high rise living is held to be
conducive to madness, and today the phrase modern architecture has
a lot to answer for is uttered menacingly in public bars throughout
the land.50
Louis Hellman,
cartoon in Architects
Journal (20 June 1980).
161
chapter ve
Happiness: The Reintegration

of Architecture
The apocalypse of modern architecture at the end of the 1960s was more
unexpected, more profound and more deeply destructive of existing ideas
than anyone could have predicted. As Udo Kultermann summarized the
situation in 1980,
There was, throughout the world, a loss of condence in what
had been regarded as established architectural values; these were
challenged by the social failure of prestigious housing projects,
by the energy crisis, by the fact that voices proclaiming that at
least some architectural emperors were dressed in new clothes
were becoming increasingly audible.1
Fred Lloyd Roche,

Stuart Mosscrop
and Christopher
Woodward, Shopping
centre, Milton Keynes,
19759. Perspective
by Helmut Jacoby.
These trends were already in motion, but economic recession following

the Yom Kippur War of 1973 between Israel and Egypt, and the subsequent
steep rise in world oil prices, triggered a recession and the worst ination
rates ever known in Britain. If the conditions for producing buildings
were becoming difcult during the 1960s, they suddenly became innitely worse. Not only prices, but also strikes in many industries created
uncertainty about the future. Building conservation, still a minority concern in the 1960s, made economic sense in the 1970s, since a new construction project would almost inevitably produce a meaner result than any
existing building. To this bottom line could be added the attractions of
appeal to an increasingly conservation-minded press, planning establishment and public, and new arguments in favour of tourism, energy saving
and the avoidance of waste.
The political implications of happiness are being discussed in Britain
at the time of writing and have entered the discourse of architecture.2 It
has even been calculated that in 1976 people in Britain were happier than
at any time subsequently, showing how, at this time, despite a lack of the
material benets that came later, something unusual was going on.3 The
Modern Movement was meant to make people happy, but it offered a
limited set of ways of doing so, and underestimated the complexity of
Clough Williams-Ellis,
Portmeirion, Gwynedd,
Wales, 1926 onwards.
human responses to such compulsion. This chapter links the 1960s to

the 1970s by tracing aspects of architecture that recognized a new attitude towards people and their needs, parallel to the turbulent social
changes of the period that mainstream Modernism largely ignored.
Arguably, it was the non-Modernist architects, equally utopian in their
way, who studied the problem of happiness in the Modernist period.
With his village development at Portmeirion in Wales, begun in 1925,
Clough Williams-Ellis, acting as both entrepreneur and architect,
intended to show how a beautiful piece of coastline could be developed
without doing damage to its amenities. In its cross between stagy classicism and vernacular, brightly coloured with limewashes, Portmeirion
resembled the type of model village often built for international exhibitions, and was supplied with good food and good company. WilliamsEllis, a socialist who knew modern architects as friends but never got far
with the style, believed that happiness was a basic human right, and
that it was the primary job of architecture to help people towards it.
Appropriately, it was in the 1970s, at the end of his long life, that
Portmeirion was reappraised and seen as an exemplar for picturesque
planning and for the freedom to use architectural styles.
The preaching tone of New Brutalism, with its self-punishing enjoyment of hardship and the jealous watchfulness of the elect, seems to
bear out the analysis of it as a new architectural Calvinism. The seaside
was recognized in British culture as an exception to the prevailing
Puritanism, both in codes of behaviour and in architectural freedom,
and it is not surprising that the avant-garde Archigram group, apparently
164
the diametrical opposite to Williams-Ellis, made frequent reference to

the seaside as a corrective to urban gloom and the Protestant work ethic.
There seems to have been a growing awareness that part of the business
of modern culture was to shine light into the dark recesses of the British
soul. In 1964 The Listener commented that a renewed public interest in
planning was of a piece with the passing of Puritanism and of what has
come to be called, with pride or horror, the new morality. Perhaps, it
speculated, a culture more at ease with its physical self would be reected in an improved public realm, made for enjoyment.4 The Festival of
Britain made its attempt to establish a new architecture of pleasure, and
was not unsuccessful, but this was seen as threatening to Modernisms
masculinity. Charles and Ray Eames were among those who showed
how Modernism and pleasure were not incompatible aims, and in 1966
Peter Smithson gave the view that they made it respectable to like pretty things. This seems extraordinary, but in our old world, pretty things
are usually associated with social irresponsibility.5 The beginning of the
1960s saw the beginning of many forms of liberation, as a new irreverence, wit and permissiveness began to permeate British culture. The
rising Pop Art movement, including Pauline Boty of the Anti-Uglies,
was anti-establishment but also non-political. A leader in The Listener
in 1966 commented on a script by the design methods expert Bruce
Archer that pop art fashions and designs are ousting our old functional principles. Old-fashioned Germany, still wedded to Bauhaus

(25 September 1968).
1 6 5 H a p p i n e s s : T h e R e i n t e g ra t i o n o f A r c h i t e c t u r e
principles, by contrast, regards our new fashions in taste as an aberration which will soon cease.6 The new cycle of taste lasted a long time
and left a permanent mark on the ethos of Modernism.
Part of the unavoidable problem was the frequently miserable quality
of life in utopian Modernist buildings and environments. James Stirlings
residential building for Queens College, Oxford (196671), rapidly became
notorious for the discomfort of its rooms. New towns were designed to
deal with a quite different set of problems from those of going out for the
evening, as a visitor to Cumbernauld reported in 1968:
Its not Cumbernaulds fault that it happens to be in Scotland,
but at 10 p.m. the Golden Eagle, the Kestrel and the Falcon
all close, and this is it, as far as Cumbernauld Town Centre is
concerned. On the upper terrace the Abatone sh bar keeps
going until eleven. After that the centre is deserted, except for
a few drunken stragglers weaving their way down the centre of
the spine motorway. (After all, its the best lit route out of the
centre, and theres scarcely a car to be seen, except for the odd
learner driver practising u-turns round the piloti) . . . Its not
good enough and it neednt have happened that way.7
In October 1964 the mp Tom Driberg, who knew how to nd his
pleasures in town, declared in the House of Commons:
Human beings are made and are entitled to enjoy a vast range
of activities which may include creative work but which may
more often be activities that might be dismissed as mere pleasure
or fun. Do not let us dismiss fun as mere.8
Cedric Price, Fun

Palace, Lea River site,
London, 19615.
Fun Palace, interior
perspective.
Petula Clarks rendition of Tony Hatchs Downtown, written in response

to a rst visit to Broadway, Manhattan, celebrated euphoric freedom in
the crowd among the city lights and sold three million copies in Britain
in 1964, yet in the 1960s few people seemed able to see the point of
towns, and the individuality of many of them was declining in the face
of low-quality mass leisure, comprehensive redevelopment and ring
roads. Independent thinkers began to follow Jane Jacobs in believing
that, as Theo Crosby wrote in 1967, the city of the newly afuent must
be full of old world values.9
The later pages of the same aa Journal that reported Dribergs comments contained images and description of the greatest of the legendary
images of happiness through architecture from the decade, Cedric Prices
project for a Fun Palace. This was created in 1961 in collaboration with the
166
theatre director Joan Littlewood for a site in Stratford, the neglected East
End centre where since 1953 she had made the almost derelict variety
house, the Theatre Royal, a destination for audiences across the city. The
Fun Palace was mentioned by name in Dribergs Commons speech. Price,
an architects son from Stoke-on-Trent who studied at Cambridge and the
Architectural Association, became famous for building virtually nothing,
and made this fastidious refusal to compromise part of his persona. His
approach to architecture was described as a philosophy of enabling (a
word that spread in the 1980s to the Community Architecture movement). Royston Landau has commented on Prices afnities to Jeremy
Benthams philosophy of Utilitarianism, at whose core was an unsentimental and entirely secular idea of happiness.10 For Price, this was to be
found in the idea of a freedom to be useful. Joan Littlewood shared his
vision of individual capacity and uniqueness. The Fun Palace, in John
Ezards words, was a childhood dream of a peoples palace, a university
of the streets, re-inventing Vauxhall Gardens, the 18th-century Thamesside entertainment promenade, with music, lectures, plays, restaurants,
under an all-weather dome.11
Architecturally, the Fun Palace, which would have covered 20 acres on
the banks of the River Lea, was dened architecturally in straight lines and
right angles,
a great open framework of steel lattice girders and towers,
surmounted by a travelling gantry crane. It is highly exible in
use, can be open to the sky or closed with blinds. Within it, can be
slung complete auditoria, studios, workshops or restaurants, with
access by mobile radial escalators and tower lifts. Halls and galleries,
snack bars and entertainment areas, linked by walkways, can be
built and exchanged at will. People of all ages and interests will nd
space to enjoy their leisure, to relax or be active, at day or night.12
Prices next projects, such as the Potteries Thinkbelt and the Pop-Up
Parliament, while thought out in complete technical detail, usually
involved drastic changes to existing buildings and habits of life that
rendered them even more politically improbable. The former, a proposal
for an alternative university in his home district of Stoke, combined a
highly astute critique of the physical form that higher education was
taking in the new universities with a requirement to be site-specic and
machinery-intensive that was scarcely necessary to full the purpose.
In fact, the Open University, conceived in 1962 and opened in 1969, one
of the prime achievements of the Wilson administration, served a much
wider constituency without needing any special architecture at all.13
168
Pleasure-zone board
game, illustration to
Montagu Country,
Cedric Prices contribution to the NonPlan special issue
of New Society, 26
March 1969.
The possibility that planning, as conventionally exercised, might be the

problem rather than the solution lay behind Non-Plan: An Experiment
in Freedom, a proposal made by Price and three other writers, Reyner
Banham, the planning academic Peter Hall and the editor of New Society,
Paul Barker, in 1969. Barker was inspired by a study of American suburbia
in its most despised form, The Levittowners by Herbert Gans (1967), which
showed that life was actually pleasant and fullling for the inhabitants.
The British were afraid of freedom, he thought. Why not, we wondered,
recalls Barker, suggest an experiment in getting along without planning and seeing what emerged.14 Non-Plan was conceived in 1967, and
published in New Society in March 1969, and its inuence will be discussed below.
Price continued to be an inspiration to younger architects (and nonarchitects) up to his death in 2003. The Fun Palace design happened in the
same year as the rst issue of Archigram, originally a two-sheet magazine
by a range of recently qualied students that grew in fame and physical
size. Over the course of the rst three issues (up to 1963), the group, coming from the aa School and the Regent Street Polytechnic, consolidated as
Warren Chalk, Peter Cook, Dennis Crompton, David Greene, Ron Herron
and Michael Webb. These core members were working during 1963 in an
Peter Cook, Plug-In

City: Maximum
Pressure Area,
section, 1964.
ofce established by Theo Crosby, under the contractors Taylor Woodrow,

for the purpose of redesigning Euston Station, until their project was
refused planning permission and a more conventional one substituted.
Each member brought different talents and products to the magazine and
the projects, which were also published in mainstream journals. With
Archigram, the Pop movement arrived in architecture, carrying baggage
of technological utopianism from Buckminster Fuller, but, unlike him or
Price, not caring much whether it would actually work in real life. Peter
Cooks Plug-In City offered all the excitement that was missing from
Cumbernauld. The concepts of movement dened this architecture,
whether the movement of its own separate parts, of the restless fun-seekers within, or, in the case of Ron Herrons Walking City, by the whole
structure. Unlike New Brutalism, with its deep crust of specically architectural knowledge, this encounter between new technology and new
social patterns carried no burden of historical memories, other than
Lemuel Gullivers ying kingdom of Laputa.
Archigram and Price both had fleeting contacts with members of
the European Situationist International, by comparison with which they
appear grounded and pragmatic. What they shared was a belief in the
power of the imagination to transform the individual and the environment simultaneously.
Like Price, the members of Archigram were still being fted by students forty years later as people who had expanded the territory of
architectural thinking. Ron Herron built the greatest number of projects, which, while excellent in many respects, did not carry a strong
170
GLC Architects
(Sir Hubert Bennett),
Special Works Division
(Group Leader Norman
Engleback) with
Warren Chalk, Ron
Herron, Dennis
Crompton and John
Attenborough,
Queen Elizabeth Hall,
South Bank, London,
196067.
Archigram stamp. The new lcc (glc by the time of opening) arts complex on the South Bank, consisting of two concert halls and an art
gallery, was a project of long gestation by a team including Chalk, Herron
and Crompton under the Group Leader Norman Engleback. While the
buildings had atmosphere and presence, they were the antithesis of
the Royal Festival Halls suavity, locked in embrace by the Haupstadt-style walkways, many of which seemed to go nowhere pleasant
or useful.15 The complex was deliberately unresolved in compositional
terms, a demonstration of the Brutalist / Team 10 concept of crumble
and a fragment of a new city that was never fully plugged in. When the
Hayward Gallery nally opened in July 1968, the Architects Journal aptly
captioned it Love-Hate Complex.16
Instead of building, Archigram members were largely absorbed by
teaching and developing their science-ction comic world with images
of immeasurable structures, individual living pods and even a log in the
country, lying innocently on the ground, providing all the wiring necessary for long-distance communication. For a time, there was an ofce
and a project for the Monaco Entertainments Centre that might even
have been built. As Simon Sadler concludes in his recent study of
Archigram, the boring Modernism of the late 1950s and 60s against
which the group rebelled was in fact on the point of self-destruction.17
Their vision of the future stood on a cusp between socialism and consumerism, and, after the failure of revolutions across the world in 1968,
it had little choice but to move towards Pop hedonism. Reviewing a
collection of pieces from the magazine, published in 1972, in tandem
with Learning from Las Vegas by Robert Venturi, Denise Scott Brown and
Steven Izenour, Martin Pawley showed irritation with Archigrams refusal
to confront the real world.18 Already, however, Peter Cook was contradicting this assumption by recognizing some of the same banal realities
of popular culture that Venturi and his colleagues were famous for
glorifying, such as John Portmans Regency Hyatt hotels, brash and
vulgar developers architecture with atria and wall-climber lifts that,
after some cultural cleansing, were later among the typical features of
British High tech.
In Notes on Camp (published as an article in 1964 and collected
in book form in 1966), the American writer Susan Sontag anatomized
the subculture taste that later broke out all over Swinging London at
the time of Sergeant Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band (1967) and
Michelangelo Antonionis lm Blow Up (1968). Camp is a solvent of
morality, she wrote, It neutralises moral indignation, sponsors playfulness.19 Archigram bore some traces of being an angry movement, but
its style was really about camp, a quality seldom entirely absent from
171
H a p p i n e s s : T h e R e i n t e g ra t i o n o f A r c h i t e c t u r e
Modernism, but deeply subversive of its aspiration to high culture status. In 1971, in a multi-media presentation Arcadia, involving music by
Delius, Satie, Milhaud, Marlene Dietrich and Emerson, Lake and
Palmer, Cook mixed images from English rural pastoralism, Art
Nouveau, Disneyland and the Modern Movement. Such promiscuous
combinations were typical of the Pop pin-up boards. Cook enjoyed
shocking Modernist orthodoxy by enthusing over super-cinemas of the
1930s (of the type that A. J. Price, the father of Cedric Price, designed
for Harry Weedon) and the Hoover Factory. Of the latter, Cook said:
[it] not only borrows from the best sources (like Poelzig) but colours
it green and orange and allsorts.20 Im glad we can begin to relax, Cook
said, the mood of innovation is interwoven with mystery and the
organic: camp reacts to the nature of things.21
Cook was alert to the poetry of everyday life in England, and proposed a quietly technologised folk-suburbia. As he admitted, Most of
us are, or have been, suburban at some time. Its a nostalgia, a lovehate,
a temptationirritation.22 Cooks mood, the same one that the Beatles
captured in Penny Lane (1966), reected the more literal pastoralism
into which the London scene had morphed after 1968, often involving
a ight to the country, for which a new clothing company, Laura Ashley
(founded in rural Wales in 1963), provided the perfect wardrobe in the
manner of a costume drama starring Julie Christie. Anticipating British
householders favourite 1980s home improvement, Cook wrote:
Conservatories . . . represent technologies grappling with the vagaries of
the English climate; they were extensions of the basic building structure
that provided a totally different environment.23
The 1960s and 70s saw the development of many forms of architectural theory, some of it coming from the same people who were rst
active in the 1950s in trying to go beyond the simplistic interpretations
of Modernism. British journals and architectural schools were still
resistant to this kind of critical and cultural theory, and the major
British participants, Alan Colquhoun, Kenneth Frampton, Colin Rowe
and Anthony Vidler, migrated to teaching jobs in the usa, where
Frampton and Vidler were on the editorial board of the influential
magazine Oppositions, begun in 1975. In Britain, by contrast, theory was
often represented by those born and / or educated elsewhere, including
Leon Krier, Demetri Porphyrios, Charles Jencks and the proprietor of
Architectural Design after 1975, Andreas Papadakis, who changed the
look and attitude of the magazine by promoting Postmodernism and
the revival of classicism. Aldo Rossis The Idea of the City, published in
Italy in 1966, but in English only in 1982, was signicant in highlighting
the historic idea of typology in relation to the history of cities, a theme
172
Peter Cook, Hedgerow

Village, illustrated in
Towards a Quietly Technologised folk-suburbia,
1972. The original caption
reads: COEXISTENCE?
ROMANTICISM? First
thoughts on Q.T.F.S.
(Peter Cook, 1971)
(left to right): (a) Smart,
air-conditioned, sophisticated with nice, comfy
caravan satellite. (b)
Once you have crosswalls you can do it yourself, The architectural
students dream painted hardboard etc. (c) As
found, log cabin syndrome. (d) Wooden posts
as minimum-megastructure, anything can
be slung within. (e) Paper
sleeping-bag as domesticity. (f) Travelling-man
syndrome.
explored in Colin Rowes and Fred Koetters Collage City, written in 1973
and published in article form in 1975. These ideas were inherent in
Stirlings change of architectural direction around the same time, leading
rst to his design for Derby Civic Centre (1970), in which his assistant
Leon Krier played a signicant role, and, through a series of unexecuted
projects in Germany, to his competition victory in Stuttgart for the Neue
Staatsgalerie in 1977.
From 1971, the Architectural Association School under the chairmanship of the Canadian Alvin Boyarsky cultivated an international
mix of ideas and personalities. In the words of Robin Middleton,
Boyarsky transformed the aa into the setting for the most vibrant
architectural culture to be found anywhere in the world.24 Students of
the period such as Rem Koolhaas, Zaha Hadid, Daniel Libeskind and
Bernard Tschumi became international stars both of theory and design
in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Tschumi has commented that an economy that was extremely difcult for those who wanted to build was
extremely good for research and education.25
While the aa became progressively disengaged from the world of utility, objective methods of architectural research remained current at the
Cambridge School of Architecture and at University College, London,
under Leslie Martin and Richard Llewelyn-Davies respectively. While
their ndings were universalized and abstracted through mathematics,

they also contributed to the transformation of Modernism, although they
needed the input of the human sciences to quantify the cultural aspects of
architecture. Geoffrey Broadbents Design in Architecture (1973) tried to ll
this gap. Computers were expected to help, less, perhaps, by the complexity of the calculations they could perform than by the alternative logical
pathways that they suggested. Broadbent went on to explore the semiotics
of architecture, a new application of an academic discipline from the
nineteenth century. Charles Jencks, an American history student at the
Bartlett, also found in the theory of language one of the ways of reassembling the fragments of Modernism into a morality-free chart of owing
possibilities. The June 1967 issue of Arena (the renamed AA Journal) on
Meaning in Architecture, edited by Jencks and George Baird, was the
starting point for a long-running exploration of these issues in Britain,
later identied by Jencks as the core of a postmodern theory of architecture.26 In the book derived from his doctoral thesis, Jencks argued for a
live plurality as the only possible historiography and approach to the
present, and redened quality in architecture in terms of density of meaning.27 Old Modernism began to look like a line of dominos. Once the rst
one fell, it knocked down the next until none was left standing. By the
time that Peter Cook was dreaming of a suburban shack city built around
a new airport in Essex, he had changed their pattern completely.
A broad range of eclectic options began to open up once the repressive lid of Modernist Puritanism had been lifted. The Language of PostModern Architecture, Jenckss rst work on the theme in 1977, celebrated
multivalent communication, regardless of other conventional architectural qualities, matching the mood of image-based fashion from the late
1960s. In 1974 the Smithsons chose the title Without Rhetoric for a book
of essays, but Jencks suggested that, since some form of statement was
unavoidable, architects should consider what they were saying through
their buildings: We must go back to the point where architects took
responsibility for their rhetoric.28
Morality and Architecture, another crucial text of 1977, by the
Cambridge architectural historian David Watkin, aimed to discredit the
belief that Modernism was the correct and only architecture of progress
and the automatic expression of the spirit of the age. With Nikolaus
Pevsner as his chief target for criticism, Watkin struck at the inconsistencies and lack of philosophical depth in the British reception of
Modernism since the 1930s. His own preferences were for a revived
classicism, so he did not consider it necessary to look further into the
Modernist canon itself, as other writers were beginning to do, in order
to recognize its pluralism.
174
Milton Keynes
For beleaguered English architects, the new town of Milton Keynes, constructed through the worst years of the 1970s, made a bridge between the
post-war welfare state and the new social, economic and artistic world
of late capitalism that was coming into being. While the earlier New
Towns were prescriptive in what was seen as a benevolent way, Milton
Keynes reected new ideas about the consumer society and the range of
architecture that it should allow. Even today, mention of Milton Keynes,
designated in 1967, following the rejection by Hampshire County
Council of a glc overspill project at Hook, is a sure way to raise a
laugh.29 It has become nonetheless one of the most successful and popular new towns, and currently the subject of massive expansion.
The master-plan competition was won by the practice of LlewelynDavies, Weeks, Forestier-Walker and Bor. Their proposal was inuenced
by the writings of the American sociologist Melvin Webber, who commended Los Angeles as the model for future cities on account of the
priority given to cars and roads in a low-density settlement, described
as a non-place urban realm. The objectives of the master plan were
listed as:
1. Opportunity and freedom of choice
2. Easy movement and access, good communications
Llewelyn-Davies,
Weeks, ForestierWalker and Bor,
master plan for
Milton Keynes, 1969.
3. Balance and variety

4. An attractive city
5. Public awareness and participation
6. Efcient and imaginative use of resources
Starting a new life

at Milton Keynes,
envisaged as a game
of snakes and
ladders, 1975.
Up to this point, it had been assumed that working-class people

did not own cars, but the Mini and other cheap models changed that.
Studies of existing New Towns demonstrated that the post-war ideal
of the neighbourhood as a social unit was less important than what
Webber dened as the community of interest between individuals
who might be geographically scattered across a wide area. Ease of
access was therefore more important than actually living side by side.
The plan took the form of a grid of roads, loosely laid over the heavy
and unproductive clay, at approximately one-kilometre intervals (metrication was a hot issue, applied to buildings, but never to the distances
on road signs). At the projected Hook New Town in Hampshire, for
which Milton Keynes became a substitute, the idea of putting pedestrians on a raised deck in the central area dominated. Milton Keynes
was not only a virtually flat site, but it was also waterlogged, so the
roads remained at ground level throughout, with roundabouts for the
junctions.
The thinking behind this plan was not solely derived from Webber or
exclusive to the problem of planning a New Town. In the partnership,
John Weeks had developed since the early 1950s an interest in indeterminacy as a positive attribute of the planning of buildings, allowing for
changes in use, rather than locking a plan and structure into a single
pattern of use, according to a crude form follows function model.
This was behind the practices design for a large research hospital at
Northwick Park, Harrow (1961), where, in a manner similar to early
Brutalist principle, the route through the buildings (on foot above or by
car below) is the invariable element, and the actual enclosed spaces to
either side are expected to grow and change. Flexibility was a popular
theme in tune with the 1960s and the general hope and promise of liberation. Weeks wrote in 1971: as we know, the shape or appearance of
buildings is not very important in the general scheme of things.30 At
Northwick Park, new medical facilities were added over the course of
time, and the original design was able to absorb them without major
disruption. To demonstrate a different level of indeterminacy, the elevations had unevenly spaced mullions to prevent the formation of repetitive
patterns.
Derek Walker, appointed Chief Architect to Milton Keynes in 1970,
described himself as a maverick in public service, and he gathered a
176
team of young designers. Earlier new towns tried to replicate the feel of
traditional market-town shopping streets in their pedestrianized cores.
At the centre, Milton Keynes was more like a Beaux-Arts scheme in
modern dress, employing axial vistas and grand features such as crescents. Two long covered shopping centres, built and initially managed by
the Development Corporation, were designed by the Americans Fred
Lloyd Roche (an architect and also the General Manager of Milton
Keynes) and Stuart Mosscrop, with Christopher Woodward (a veteran of
the Smithson ofce and the Buchanan Plan). The contrast between their
stainless-steel glitz and the rough and externally unwelcoming
Cumbernauld centre could hardly be greater. Cars were treated in a
commonsense manner, with roads and parking provided where they
were needed and integrated into the design at ground level, rather than
hidden or segregated.
Writing about the stylistic choice made for the covered shopping mall
in the centre, Robert Maxwell explained that the open-ended indeterminacy implied by the plan needed a low-prole architecture, an architecture
that does not claim to provide in itself new laws for the entire city.31 To
avoid being merely commonplace, a controversial design based on a tight
grid in plan and elevation was chosen. The Architects Journal called it
rigid, boring and inhuman, but by the standards of later shopping
architecture it was a model of civic dignity and a sign of Milton Keyness
determination to be different. The shopping building recognized the
importance of shopping as the major civic activity by incorporating
covered and open spaces for community use and events.
Neo-Vernacular and Critical Regionalism
The housing at Milton Keynes departed from the master plan by retreating to the centre of each square, rather than acting, as originally intended, more like a network of linear cities with shops at the intersections.
This is generally considered a weakness, for it reinforced the isolation of
each residential area. Housing designs were commissioned from young
and work-hungry practices, and Milton Keynes became a catalogue
of the varied styles and tendencies of the 1970s, predominantly the
neo-vernacular of Martin Richardson, Edward Cullinan and Richard
MacCormac, but also encompassing the early High tech of Norman
Foster. Neo-Vernacular was one of the great architectural events of the
1970s, although its origins go back to the beginning of the Modern
Movement or earlier, with crucial books in Britain by S. O. Addy, C. F.
Innocent and Iorwerth C. Peate reecting the interests and values of the
Arts and Crafts period. Bernard Rudofskys book of 1964, Architecture
178
Peter Aldington,
Turn End houses,
Haddenham,
Buckinghamshire,
19648.
Colin A. St John
Wilson, with M. J. Long,
Spring House, Conduit
Head Road,
Cambridge, 19657.
Without Architects, made non-pedigreed architecture fashionable again

and the term vernacular was extended from traditional rural buildings
to include anonymous folk-art of any period, including the industrial.
F.W.B. Charles, a pre-war assistant of Walter Gropius, became an expert
in the timber-framed buildings of the West Midlands and was instrumental in the foundation of Englands rst open-air museum of building at Bromsgrove. Increasingly, sophisticated investigation into genuine
vernaculars overlapped with the semiological investigation into architectural language.
The relationship between Modernism and the vernacular is a complex subject, with a long history. It was often the result of an architect
settling in a particular part of Britain and admiring traditional rural
buildings. In the 1950s Tayler and Green (described as post-modern by
Nikolaus Pevsner as early as 1962) were pioneers in adapting local style
without making it too much of a reproduction of the past. In the 1960s
Peter Aldingtons tightly clustered group of three houses at Haddenham,
Buckinghamshire (19648), was a deliberate response to a local tradition
of rammed earth walls along the edges of roads and between gardens.32
The planning idea behind this project had much in common with Team
10s exploration of village form, and similarities to courtyard housing
projects by Jrn Utzon in Denmark.
The Cornford House in Cambridge of 1965 by Colin St John Wilson
with M. J. Long was a step towards a complex reinterpretation of traditional domestic form, entirely different in spirit from Wilsons own
house in Cambridge of 1962, which reected how Alvar Aalto derived
formal and sensual nourishment from pre-industrial building. Wilson
was also struck by the theories of the Norwegian Christian NorbergSchultz, which looked back to vernacular for its essential authenticity. At
the University of Surrey, Maguires pitched-roofed and clustered Stag

Hill Court housing (196970) was an alternative to the impersonal hall
of residence, contrasting strongly with the late Bauhaus style of the
teaching buildings on the same site by bdp of 19669. Maguire claimed
that it inuenced the design of student housing across the world. The
Norwich-based practice of Fielden and Mawson introduced a highly
inuential adaptation of vernacular with steep roofs at Friars Quay,
Norwich, in 1974, which in retrospect looks like the unwitting source of
a ood of inferior imitations.
The project that above all others symbolized the vernacular turn was
Byker, the large housing development in Newcastle upon Tyne by Ralph
Erskine, instigated by a Conservative council in 1969 in reaction against
the previous regime of tower blocks. A refreshing wind blowing from
Sweden, where Erskine, English by birth and training, had worked after
he was contentedly cut off by the outbreak of war while on holiday in
1939, Byker contained all the antidotes needed to take away the bitterness
of system-building failure. Erskines English work included Clare Hall,
Cambridge, a post-graduate college taking the form of a picturesque
cluster of residential buildings around communal facilities, fully integrated with its own landscaped courtyards and pathways, using colour
and decoration. If this scheme resembled Cullens Townscape drawings,
it was no coincidence, since Erskine and Cullen studied together and the
book was one of his favourites.33
Ralph Erskine
Associates, Byker
Wall, Newcastle upon
Tyne, 197380.
180
Ralph Erskine
Associates, Clare
Hall, Cambridge,
19689.
Three further Erskine projects followed Clare Hall in 1969: a housing

estate, Studlands Park, for the construction company Bovis near
Newmarket, and two in the north, of which Byker overshadowed the
uncompleted low-rise housing at Killingworth, an unofcial new town
outside Newcastle. In all of these, Team 10 ideas were interpreted in a
regional manner closer to Giancarlo de Carlos work in Italy than to
other members of the group. There was no specic vernacular to which
Byker referred, but by setting up an ofce with an English member of
the ofce, Vernon Gracie, on the site of an old undertakers shop, Erskine
engaged with his end users in a way that went well beyond any previous
attempts. The wall, backing onto the road and metro rail line, was a
given of the brief, but Erskine was able to break down its monotony with
surface patterning and colour-stained timber balconies.
Meanwhile, during the period 19736, Erskine built the Eaglestone
housing area at Milton Keynes, but cost increases during a period of
unprecedented inflation compromised the intended quality of the
181
Martin Richardson,
housing, Great
Linford 5, Milton
Keynes, Buckinghamshire, 19737.
Robert Matthew,
Johnson-Marshall
(Andrew Darbyshire),
Hillingdon Civic Centre,
Middlesex, 19738.
project, which was only half-nished. More

striking as a personal testimony to the
transformation of housing architecture
between the 1960s and 1970s was the housing at Great Linford (1973 and 1976) by
Martin Richardson. After working under
Colin Lucas at the lcc, Richardson became,
almost by accident, an expert in the LarsenNielsen prefabricated system, and built 3,500
dwellings at Hunslet, near Leeds (196470),
which were later demolished. He already
knew that was the wrong direction. By contrast, the Great Linford scheme, in amongst
the prettiest of the existing villages on the
new town site, was the result of an attempt
to make a place that is simply quiet and
agreeable to live in.34
Pitched roofs were the most potent
symbol of the dividing line on the path
between Modernism and Vernacular. Monopitch roofs, or split dual pitch (letting light
in at the apex), were considered modern,
but in the 1970s the sheltering familiar roof
returned for a combination of symbolic,
practical and economic reasons. At Milton
Keynes, as well as in housing by Cullinan
and MacCormac Jamieson, pitched roofs
could be found in housing at Great Linford
by Stephen Gardiner (who was also well
known as an architectural critic). At
Hillingdon Civic Centre (19738), Andrew
Derbyshire of Robert Matthew, JohnsonMarshall adopted a vernacular style of brick
and tile, with an emphasis on roof forms. rmjm had never done anything like this before. Robert Maxwell called it a hybrid with all the
disturbing aspects of a multi-headed monster.35 Equally shocking to
the old guard was Ealing Broadway Centre (197985), a shopping mall
with bold brick towers, more Carcassonne than Corbusier, by the multidisciplinary practice bdp, hitherto straight Modernists, but on this
occasion letting rip with the private dreams of Francis Roberts, a
romantic non-believer in Modernism, in response to public demand for
an alternative to the standard shopping mall.
182
Maurice Naunton and

George Garrard, Noak
Bridge, Basildon,
Essex, 1975 onwards.
Such high-prole projects gave encouragement to designers of buildings at all levels. After 1949, the average speculative suburban house
showed marked differences from its pre-war neo-Tudor and Georgian
equivalents, closer in character if not quality to Tayler and Greens
designs. Arthur Edwards has called it the Anglo-Scandinavian style and
characterized its use of contrasted textures, such as weatherboarding,
tile hanging and pantiles, as a dull pattern of architecture, for pennypinching is almost inevitably dull in its results.36
In 1973 Melville Dunbar and other architects employed by Essex
County Council published their Design Guide for Residential Areas. It was
mainly aimed at creating denser, more urban effects in housing, responding to long-standing criticism of the prairie planning of the new towns,
resulting from the old requirement for 70-foot road widths, which was
conveniently abolished the same year. More controversially, the Design
Guide hoped to re-establish local identity, suggesting that developments
shall generally employ external materials which are sympathetic in
colour and texture to the vernacular range of Essex materials and hoping that within the constraints of the Essex discipline the good architect
should be able to produce elegant 20th century architecture. This invitation to vernacular design killed off the post-war Anglo-Scandinavian
style all over the country, and developers began to apply a supposed
regional character of a very loose description thereafter, nding
approval from most local authorities. The results were mostly dreadful, but
in Essex itself some exceptions can be found. On the edge of Basildon at
Snape Maltings,
Suffolk, original
buildings c. 1860,
converted to concert
hall by Arup Associates, 1967, with
later extensions by
Penoyre & Prasad,
1999.
Noak Bridge, two architects from the Basildon New Town Development
Corporation, Maurice Naunton and George Garrard, decided for a
change to design a place they might themselves want to live in. To achieve
this, they had to get waivers of regulations for almost every design
decision, so regulation-bound had housing become by 1975, although the
Design Guide gave them backing. Noak Bridge stands as a testimony
that local character, even on a tight budget, can operate with a hidden
ingenuity of planning to keep parked cars off the streets and make a
walk-able neighbourhood. In this, it anticipated the targets set by the
Prince of Wales for the development of Poundbury at the end of the 1980s.
Conservation drew attention to the aesthetic qualities of brick. One
pioneering scheme was the conversion of the principal building at Snape
Maltings in Suffolk as a concert hall for the Aldeburgh Festival in 1967, by
Derek Sugden of Arup Associates, the engineer who in the 1950s had commissioned a brick house from the Smithsons. Taking the shell of the malting shed as found and cleaning the brick to reveal a rich patina of age,
Sugden then introduced detailing that satisfactorily bridged the gap
between reproduction and Modernism, and set a new style for building
conversion, in line with the way that architects and design-conscious
house owners were beginning to strip plaster off brick and sand and stain
their pine oorboards.
184
Neo-vernacular was seen as a danger to good architecture, however: dull, hack, with a few tricks attached, quasi-archaeological,
highly wrought or semi-Disneyland.37 The thinking mans neo-vernacular had a different name, Critical Regionalism, which was originally derived from the philosopher Paul Ricoeur (1961), and applied
to architecture in 1978 by the European theorists Alexander Tzonis and
Liane Lefaivre, in relation to a group of young German architects.38
In 1981 an essay by Tzonis and Lefaivre with Anthony Alofsin established some lines of discussion, followed in 1983 by Kenneth
Framptons rst treatment of the same theme.39 The critical component, a reference to Kant and the Critical Theory of the Frankfurt
School, was intended to distinguish the movement from purely nostalgic forms of regionalism, especially those associated with Nazism and
Fascism earlier in the century. The phrase, coming from such authoritative positions, helped to make these concerns safe for disenchanted
Modernists.
Neo-Modernism, Self-Build and Ecology
A third tendency in the housing at Milton Keynes was represented in
housing at Nethereld (19727) by the Grunt Group, the slang term
for drafted us infantrymen in the Vietnam War, pinned on them by
Peter Cook at the aa.40 The core of the group comprised Christopher
Cross, Jeremy Dixon, Michael Gold and Edward Jones, and the repetitive plain style of their work was evident as students and in an
unbuilt competition scheme for housing at Portsdown Hill, Hampshire.
In 1965 they joined the rm of Armstrong MacManus, whose Regents
Park Estate (19579) shows the restrained picturesque manner of
Armstrong MacManus before the Grunt Group joined them. The
Clipstone Street housing for Westminster (196671) and two long terraces of housing in Gospel Oak, Waxham and Ludham (196972)
represent regression to an earlier form of Modernism, of a piece, perhaps, with the historical and nostalgic mood of the time, and related
to Aldo Rossis well-known Gallaratese housing scheme in Milan of
196773. This work was appraised unflatteringly by the German-Swiss
migr Walter Segal in 1972, who accused them of a glib return to the
anti-sensual moralism of the early Modern Movement: The voice of
purism in the 1970s sounds hollow and puritans merely make us
uncomfortable.41
Segal himself was for many years a marginal if respected presence in
British architecture, but, by a series of unplanned moves, he enjoyed a
new fame during the last decade before his death in 1984. Simple houses
were the focus of his attention, but he

avoided involvement in the great public
housing boom of the 1950s and 60s. In
1962 he needed a temporary house while
constructing a new one to accommodate
the step-family resulting from his second
marriage, and out of economic necessity
built it himself, using the simplest means
of timber frame and panels. Ten years on,
this became the prototype for two housing
developments in Lewisham, the brainchild
of the journalist-turned-local councillor
Nicholas Taylor, scourge of Modernist housing in the Architectural Review in the
1960s and author of The Village in the City
in 1970. The sites were owned by Lewisham
Borough Council, but were so steep that it
was uneconomical to develop them using
conventional building techniques. Segals
method made it possible for the future
occupiers to save money by investing their
own time in making the buildings. Several
were unemployed, and thus learned new
skills. All of those involved got to know
their future neighbours before moving in,
thus creating the kind of bonded community that modern architecture was accused
of preventing. Segal was often present on
site, and although some freedom was allowed in interpreting his designs, he retained
control over the still essentially Modernist
character of the buildings.
Segals initiative was applauded and
publicized by members of the gentle
anarchist tendency in British architecture,
whose ideas of self-help and self-sufciency
gained a wide following in the 1970s as
national governments struggled to control
their economies in an unstable world.
Walter Segal reviewed E. F. Schumachers
classic text Small is Beautiful in 1973, commenting:
186
F. G. McManus
and Partners,
Waxham and Ludham,
Mansfield Road,
Gospel Oak, London,
196972.
Walter Segal assisting self-builders at
Lewisham, c. 1977.
Cretan windmill,
erected at the Centre
for Alternative
Technology,
Machynlleth, Wales,
c. 1976.
Alex Pike, Autarkic
House, Cambridge,
1974.
it is gratifying to read an author who insists on human freedom,

however nebulous and limited; for we are getting tired of being
told that there exists no real freedom in the world, an assertion
which, undoubtedly, is based on ulterior motives.42
Schumachers book was a timely contribution to the growing literature of alternative economics and social models, which consolidated the
revolutionary yearnings of the 1960s into achievable aims. Architects
began to accept their own role in improving the quality of life through
using resources more carefully, although the origins of ecological or
green architecture go back further, to the pioneering heat exchanger
tted in Edward Curtiss Solar House at Rickmansworth in 1956, and the
use of passive solar energy using a Trombe wall at Wallasey School in
1961 by the architect Emslie Morgan.43 The availability of cheap oil and
electricity in the 1960s marginalized these issues for a while. The threat
of global warming from carbon emission, under investigation from
1958, was still almost unknown, but the oil crisis and the miners strike
of 19734 brought these issues to the fore again.44 In his presidential
address to the riba in 1972, Alex Gordon discussed Long Life, Low
Energy, Loose Fit (abbreviated as ll/le/lf), which was not only a way
of saving energy but also an alternative to the idea that form follows
function in terms of tting a building to a single use, and expecting its
demolition if that use changed in the future.45 This idea could be sold to
business clients as a sound investment. Rehabilitation of historic buildings as open-plan spaces followed as one of the consequences.
For the most part, however, energy saving was the territory of the
counter-culture inherited from the 1960s, supported by occasional
visionary businessmen such as Gerard Morgan-Grenville, the founder of
Edward V. Curtis,
Solar House at 14
Beacon Way,
Rickmansworth,
the Centre for Alternative Technology in an abandoned quarry at

Machynlleth in North Wales in 1974, which had a strong architectural
basis, adopting Walter Segals self-build methods and trying different
means of power generation. Buckminster Fuller re-emerged as an elderly but irrepressible witness to the future, appearing at Westminster
Central Hall in 1970, where he spoke for two-and-a-quarter hours nonstop, and again, supported by Cedric Price, at a Think-in organized for
the World Design Science Decade in 1977. Fullers geodesic domes
became a symbol of alternative living, especially in the usa. Stewart
Brands Whole Earth Catalogue (196872), published by Penguin in
Britain, helped to spread the word. At Cambridge University, Alex Pike
began to develop the Autarkic house at the Martin Centre, and built a
test model in 1974.46 Experiments in solar water heating were made at
Central London (formerly Regent Street) Polytechnic by Steven Szokolay,
and applied in Milton Keynes, where the rst of two batches of demonstration low-energy houses was built in 1981 in Bradwell Common,
including two Autarkic houses, by Donald Forrest.
The counterculture also encompassed the urban squatting movement
that gained pace in London, combining a criticism of local authorities for
allowing houses in their ownership to remain empty and unused, with
a desire, usually on the part of young educated middle-class people, to
make common cause with local working-class populations by stimulating
188
Farrell/Grimshaw
Partnership, Service
Tower, International
Students Club,
Paddington, London,
1967. This innovative
pod structure by
Nicholas Grimshaw
(right, standing next
to Buckminster
Fuller) rivals Reliance
Controls as the first
High-Tech building
in Britain.
a sense of community. The story of Tolmers Village, an area around

Drummond Street, near Euston, demonstrated the potential for social
and architectural transformation of the urban development process.
Students from the nearby Bartlett School of Architecture at University
College, London, began researching a community that had already united in opposition to a covert development plan by Joe Levy, intended to
match his Euston Centre on a nearby site. They drew public attention to
collusion between Levy and the Labour council (leader Frank Dobson) to
remove most of the existing population. As at Covent Garden, campaigners stressed the inherent virtues of having residential populations of
mixed income and housing tenure integrated in the inner city, contrary
to the assumption that nobody wanted to live there. In a bold move in
1973, the journalists Benny Gray and Christopher Booker (author of a
recent book, The Neophiliacs, which moralistically discredited the 1960s
belief in progress) set up their own property company to challenge the
Levy proposals with a real alternative. This suspended the Levy scheme
until new legislation in the form of the Community Land Act under the
newly elected Wilson government in 1974 allowed Camden to exercise a
compulsory purchase of the crucial property, at which point lengthy
negotiations began about redevelopment. During this period, some of
the original group of students, plus many others, moved into empty
houses and created gardens, festivals, organic food shops and similar
activities typical of the hippy movement. Eventually, with Camden as
developers, a low-rise architectural scheme by Levitt Bernstein
Architects replaced the primary architectural set piece, Tolmers Square,
with typical brown-brick housing of the period, and a mirror-glass
ofce block facing the main roads, signalling a pyrrhic victory, since
many businesses were driven out by higher rents. Nick Wates, one of the
student squatters, wrote The Battle for Tolmers Square (1976), a valuable
analytical account of the different stages, and began a career in enabling
local communities to take more control of their own future through
Action Planning.
In 1969, responding to public concern about architecture and planning, a government report on Participation was published, known as the
Skefngton Report. This set the tone for the rise of local involvement
and later community architecture, as an attempt to overcome the
anonymous and often misdirected efforts of local authorities. Where the
Westway, the major completed section of the Motorway Box, passed an
existing community in decaying housing known as the Swinbrook
estate, the tenants persuaded the glc to rebuild their accommodation
between 1971 and 1984. Ninety-three per cent of the tenants participated
in a consultation, and as a result the existing street pattern was largely
retained. In other respects, the community was disrupted and no comparable level of tenant involvement followed. Working in Basildon,
Ahrends, Burton and Koralek employed a social psychologist, Peter Ellis,
on the later phases of the Chalvedon housing area, building in brick
with timber facings and pitched roofs. After his early success in house
design, Peter Aldington formed a partnership in 1970 with John Craig,
an artist then working in advertising with no training as an architect but
a genius for liaising with the client and abstracting the dynamics of the
project as a catalyst for design. A book of 1980, Architecture for People,
featuring Aldington and Craig, Erskine, Darbourne and Darke and
Walter Segal, represents some of the achievements of the 1970s in correcting the mistakes of the past and nding a related set of architectural forms in which to do so.
High Tech
The Californian Case Study Houses, mostly built of steel and glass, were
relatively little known in Britain before the early 1960s, except to architects such as John Winter who had worked in the States. Lighter, both
physically and intellectually, than the classics by Mies van der Rohe such
as the Farnsworth House, they were one strand of inspiration that eventually led to High Tech, the movement that was in formation during the
1960s and broke through during the 1970s as a living and continuing
stream of pure Modernism.
Richard Rogers and Norman Foster returned from studying at Yale in
1962, and had such problems with builders using conventional materials
and methods in their rst joint projects that both chose thereafter to
work as far as possible with light and dry materials that clicked together
on site. Typical clients came from industry, such as Reliance Controls,
whose factory at Swindon was designed by Team 4, the practice including Rogers, Foster, Georgie Wolton and Wendy Cheesman (19656). Here,
in Bryan Appleyards words, Foster and Rogers were to discover most of
the elements that would compose the originality of their mature styles.47
Unlike the controlling aesthetic of Hunstanton School, Reliance suggested a more exible ethos appropriate to the time, including an egalitarian
attitude to working practices. Plan and structure had the simplicity of a
diagram; technical innovations were made with lightweight steel cladding;
and the result was proclaimed to be quick and cheap. The practice divided,
and Richard and Su Rogers, working independently with the technical
support of John Young, developed a theoretical zip-up house, published
in 1968, in the Buckminster Fuller tradition of factory making and rapid
site assembly. It proposed the use of Neoprene gaskets to seal the windows,
190
not for the rst time in architecture, but in a deliberate way that set
the tone for future technology transfer. Foster picked up a number
of industrial clients, combining a rather blank architectural look
with 1960s colour schemes. A single-storey ofce building at Cosham,
Hampshire, for ibm (197071) was entirely clad in tinted glass on the
outside, virtually disappearing with reections, with full air conditioning to maintain the mainframe computers in a steady state. Fosters
housing at Bean Hill, Milton Keynes (19713), differed from the other
schemes there in attempting a form of system building, with a timber
frame and aluminium cladding. It was cheaply built, and suffered for
it, even losing its landscape budget and the potential softening of the
gaunt repetitive rows. Still, even with pitched roofs added in the early
1980s, Bean Hill completes Milton Keyness catalogue of 1970s architectural trends.
The breakthrough building for Foster was the ofces for Willis
Faber Dumas in Ipswich, completed in 1975, with its sheer but undulating three-storey glass wall, without visible support. For Banham,
Fosters building turned the tables on all the spoilers of modern
Team 4, Reliance
Controls, Swindon
(demolished), 19656.
191
Frank Dickens,
cartoons showing
the advantages
for employees of
relocating to the
Willis Faber Dumas
Headquarters.
Foster & Partners,

Willis Faber Dumas
Headquarters (now
Willis Limited), Friar
Street, Ipswich,
Suffolk, 19715.
architecture contextualists, energy conservationists, craft-lovers and

concrete-haters since it answered their objections, apparently without
deviating from the forward path of Modernism. In designs such as
Lloyds at Chatham and the Central Electricity Generating Board at
Bristol, both of 19738, Arup Associates made an important contribution to the development of ofce typology, with their grid plans of
repeating pre-cast concete elements, but Fosters space-frame roof and
deep service oors were more apt for cutting to shape on the irregular
Ipswich site and made better photographs. Willis Faber gave a new look
to the wide spans and deep column-free oor plates of open-plan ofce
interiors that followed German and American working practices.
At Ipswich, open-plan ofce typology was merged with the escalators
of a department store, the atrium of a John Portman hotel and the visibility of a transport interchange, all images of escape from the clammy
grip of what Philip Larkin called the toad work. To show the Willis
Faber workforce, who were being moved out of London, the benets of
their new building, Foster commissioned cartoons from Frank Dickens,
whose suited, moustached and hatted businessman Bristow, familiar
from the Evening Standard, skipped in the street outside the glass sheath,
Foster & Partners,

The Sainsbury Centre
for Visual Arts,
University of East
Anglia, Norwich,
19748.
sat down coolly in the air-conditioned spaces and avoided long journeys
down corridors.
Foster was selected by Sir Robert Sainsbury to build a museum for the
Sainsbury Collection at the University of East Anglia, combined with a
faculty of Art History, and a staff club and public restaurant. Fosters
building stood well apart from Denys Lasduns concrete megastructure
and its gathering damp stains. Clad in aluminium, it presented a form of
aircraft hanger with one large internal space, a solution that some commentators felt was poorly adapted to the functional brief, but which still
had undeniable panache and a quality of euphoria long absent from such
buildings. Where Lasduns building, and most new university buildings
since the 1960s, had signalled that academic work was a solemn duty, and
that even relaxation could not admit the frivolity of the everyday, Fosters
project included a pleasant airy restaurant, open to the public and also
serving students and staff together. Even the quality of the food was
superior to the normally abysmal catering of the mid-1970s, although
this may not have been solely the architects responsibility. It is hard to
imagine anyone penetrating the campus of Essex or Warwick in search of
a recreational lunchtime gallery visit with friends, but the Sainsbury
Centre projected invitation.
Richard Rogers made a spectacular transition from commerce to
culture when, in 1968, in partnership with Renzo Piano, he won the
competition for a new art museum and cultural centre in Paris on the
Plateau Beaubourg. The competition scheme was closer to Prices Fun
Palace than the built design, with a less prominent external structure
and more intermediate oor levels. The external load-bearing structure
of steel tubes was thickened during the design process to create columnfree changeable internal spaces, which proved to be unnecessary for
the operational needs of the building. The Centre Pompidou found
its imagery not in the ashing billboards proposed in the competition
scheme, but in brightly painted coloured service pipes and the snaking
plastic tube of its escalator. On close analysis, this new hedonistic,
almost childish, version of Modernism used function largely as a form
of decoration, but it changed the sense of what a cultural building could
become.
High Tech never established a theoretical basis or felt the need for one.
In this, it was typically British, appealing to a combination of pragmatism
and unreasoned emotions that had no logical connection, but worked if
not examined too closely. It borrowed or was lent pieces of theory about
urbanism, the social uses of space, energy saving and mass production
that seemed relevant, although they could equally well be used to support
other architectural outcomes. Its self-image as the authentic line of
Modern Movement development after Postmodernism depended on a
rather narrow reading of Modernism itself, of the type proposed by
Reyner Banham at the end of Theory and Design in the First Machine Age,
in which he identied technology as the sole validating factor. As the
diversity of architecture and planning ideas in the 1970s demonstrated,
modernity was alive but no longer universally accepted as an unmixed
blessing, while Modernism fragmented into a new kind of eclecticism.
The benet, and the justication for this chapters title, was that spaces
opened up in the previously rather tight culture of Modernism through
which a better view was obtained of the world beyond, and the architectural means through which it might still be ameliorated.
chapter six
Conscience: The Architecture of

Fruitful Anxiety

in Architectural
Review (April 1989).
From the perspective of the future, the period after 1980 will offer as
much scope as any other in this book. It already feels like a dened era
in world history, irrevocably changed from what went before. From the
perspective of Britain, there have certainly been storms in the teacups of
the rareed world of architecture that have spilled over into the public
mind and left their mark. To all appearance, the architectural story is
one of near-disaster followed by triumphant recovery for Modernism.
There is evidence that the recovery resulted from a hard process of
learning and experience. Modern architecture is less unpopular now,
and there is no widely accepted alternative to it, but it still has a marginal place in the national consciousness. Britain occupies a far more
prominent place in the international architectural scene than in 1980,
but this is partly because many of the best British architects have
achieved their best work overseas.
In May 1979 Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister, leading
Conservatives who presented themselves as the party of hard-headed
efciency in the form of monetarism, run by experienced businessmen. In retrospect, it appears that they were opportunistically making up their policy week by week in response to events, often without
great consistency, but their victory, reinforced in the elections of
1984, 1987 and 1992, showed the inability of Labour to present voters
with a credible alternative. The 100-year-old problem of failing British
manufacturing was solved by removing subsidies from uncompetitive
nationalized industries, including coal, steel and car manufacture, and
subsidizing the social cost with the revenues from North Sea oil. Films
such as The Last of England by Derek Jarman (1987) turned protest into
aesthetics, evoking fascist violence and homoeroticism as the mood of
the time.
Privatization of former state-owned utilities from telephones to railways purported to offer choice to customers, pushing up standards of
service. It was in tune with the spirit of the age that the riba changed its
Code of Professional Conduct in January 1981, in response to the shrink-
ing of public-sector employment, and the view that the existing codes
preventing architects from advertising or engaging in property development and the construction business were no longer valid.
Eric Lyons, whose work with span exemplied the potential of architect and developer collaboration, wrote:
The tacit acceptance by riba/arcuk that architects and architecture ought properly to be part of public daily life means that there
now remains but a small rational step to take. That is to liberate
architects from the promotional constraints that are manifestly
impractical, inconsistent and against the spirit of our time.1
Lyons was the founder chairman of the Association of Consultant
Architects in 1973, the successor to the Association of Private Architects.
The ethos of the organization was one of professional responsibility and
accountability, combined with outreach to potential clients. Although
they were now permitted to do so, architects seldom took to paying for
advertising space for their practices, but their attitude had to become
more proactive if they were to prosper in the changing business climate.
They began to nd and develop their own opportunities for work, nurturing clients and acting as enablers, in place of the old way of waiting
for a client to arrive with a brief in hand. Roger Zogolovitch (a founder
partner with Piers Gough of czwg) was one of a small number of architects who became developers, nding himself able to control the process
of architecture with integrity, enjoyment and imagination at the opposite
end of the scale to that former shadow of a professional the development architect of yesteryear.2
Another way to get work by merit rather than recommendation was
through architectural competitions, which were encouraged by Michael
Heseltine, who as Minister of Environment from 1979 to 1983 brought a
strong interest in architecture to the job, saying in 1980:
I know that people are often sceptical about architectural
competitions because of the risks associated with them expense,
delays, wild designs. But if the competition is properly run, the
cost should be insignicant set beside the cost of the building.
There need be no unacceptable delay.3
It also became possible for architectural practices not only to become
limited companies, but also to go public on the stock exchange, in order
to raise additional capital for a type of business that had historically
always been undercapitalized.
198
The change in the professional code was timely, since public employment dropped drastically with the governments moratorium on funding
new public housing. The Labour government in the 1970s had already
begun to see subsidized housing as a default mechanism limited to places
where the market could not provide. Even before Thatchers campaign to
centralize government, the Urban Fund was set up as a mechanism to pay
for housing and urban regeneration directly from central government
rather than through local councils, which were increasingly seen as
inefcient, corrupt and mired in the problems of public housing.
The Conservatives went further, and in 1980 offered tenants in public housing the right to buy, which they took up enthusiastically, with
generous discounts of 33 per cent on the value of the houses. In addition,
the tax rebates on mortgage payments made home ownership of all
kinds an obvious option for anyone with the means. Token though it
was, the choice of the style of your own front door, permitted to freeholders but not to tenants, became a mark of freedom.
Architects in public ofces were the victims, and many of the generation who had started their careers in the 1960s never developed independent careers after losing their salaried jobs. The glc housing
department was almost empty by the time that the council was abolished
in 1986. Housing specialists with higher proles, such as Neave Brown
and Martin Richardson, found work in the Netherlands in the 1990s,
while others who had made a start in housing, such as Benson & Forsyth,
diversied into other building types. The one local authority architectural department that managed to evolve under the new conditions and
create and commission high-quality work was Hampshire County
Council, where rising population supported by the growth of defence
industries and other technology required new schools. According to
standard practice, these would have been built with the clasp system,
but owing to the Conservative council Leader (197693 and 979), Freddie
Emery-Wallis, and his support for an outstanding County Architect
(197392), Colin Stanseld Smith, it turned out differently. Each school
was individually designed, either by members of staff, such as Nev
Churcher, or by practices ranging from the High Tech of Michael Hopkins
to the Romantic Pragmatism of Edward Cullinan and Peter Aldington.4
Stanseld Smith was keen to match architects to the sites and the divergent views of the head teachers involved. Hampshire demonstrated
that public-sector architecture could be fully compatible with the
individualistic spirit of the times, but caring and socially responsible
with it, and Stanseld Smith was awarded the riba Gold Medal in 1991,
elected President of the riba and knighted for the achievement of the
department.
Jeremy Dixon, housing

in Lanark Road, Maida
Vale, London (19813).
The 1980s was known as the Me decade, and a new attention was paid
to tenants preferences in housing, which tended towards the small scale,
vernacular and intimate. As Alison Ravetz reported on research of the time,
There is a strong dislike of drabness, monotony, a non-homely
scale and any distinction of size or material, any oddity of
design, that make an estate look like a camp or barracks.5
Hampshire County
Council (Nev
Churcher), Woodlea
School, Bordon,
Hampshire, 1992.
If council housing was built at all, it now tried to t in with existing urban
patterns and to look as little like council housing as possible. Jeremy
Dixons Lanark Road scheme in Maida Vale (19813), containing small
starter ats, was built on a Westminster City Council site in partnership
with the developer Michael Taylor as a way of circumventing the housing
moratorium, and exemplies the new direction, since it was designed for
sale to the tenants. A neat pastiche of early Victorian paired villas, the ats
contrast with the three eighteen-storey lcc towers of 195964 that stand
in front of them. Equally striking is the development in Dixons work itself
since his participation as a member of the Grunt Group in the design of
the ultra-anonymous Nethereld Housing at Milton Keynes (19713).
In Liverpool, where during the 1980s depopulation had made land

cheap, the extreme left-wing City Council built two-storey brick houses
in culs-de-sac on the sites of the heroic inter-war brick ats by Lancelot
Keay and later tower blocks, replicating as far as possible the product of
the free market. In London, where property prices rose steeply through
the 1980s, the effects of the national rise in homeless households from
5,000 in 1977 to more than 45,000 in 1990 was visible in the number of
street sleepers.6 Deprived of the capital to build new dwellings, local
authorities tried to full their housing obligations by paying high prices
for substandard bed-and-breakfast accommodation for families.
Edward Heaths Conservative government (197074) had hoped to
replace public authorities with housing associations as the major
providers of rented housing, through the provisions of the 1974 Housing
Act, which channelled public money to them rather than to councils.
Their share of rentals rose from 470,000 in 1981 to 1,588,000 in 2001 at a
time when private rentals remained static. They were in the business of
commissioning new housing, but in contrast to the ponderous bureaucracy of old-style public housing, they aimed to introduce a new broom of
efcient management after the tenants moved in. The practice of Pollard
Thomas Edwards, formed in 1974, was one that grew up on this new
patronage. The founder partners all wanted to work in housing, but not
in the old way. Instead of creating large-scale redevelopments, they realized the potential of smaller sites, often weaving in their new work with
retained and converted historic buildings, losing the stigma attached to
council housing largely through its architectural form. They built in the
forms that people would buy if they were buyers, something the old
social architects would have seen as a betrayal. Later, Pollard Thomas and
Edwards enabled developments that mixed nance and ownership by
councils, housing associations and private developers, the last being a role
that they themselves took at times.
There remained large housing estates all over the country whose
deterioration from the late 1960s contributed to the whole crisis of
condence in public-sector housing. Small changes brought genuine
results. Electronic entryphones and other security measures made
amends for the absence from all public housing of permanent on-site
concirges, not included as part of housing management in the 1960s.
Some local authorities changed the image of their housing with decorative
facings in brick and Postmodern skyline details to disguise the identity
of the hated ats and provide an external layer of insulation.
Pollard, Thomas and
Edwards, Field Court,
77 Fitzjohns Avenue,
London, 19778.
202
Public Building in the Age of Privatization

In an often-quoted interview for Womens Own magazine in 1987, Margaret
Thatcher said: there is no such thing as society.7 In the eyes of architects,
her enthusiasm for self-reliance resulted in a counter-productive meanness of attitude towards state expenditure on building; this had not been
seen, even in the worst times of nancial stringency, since the infamous
Liberal First Commissioner of Works in the 1870s, A. S. Ayrton, had persecuted George Edmund Street over the construction of the Royal Courts
of Justice. This was a parallel made by Colin St John Wilson in telling the
story of the British Library after 1975, a project that demonstrated national attitudes towards architecture during the nal quarter of the twentieth
century.8
The rise and fall of the scheme to place the Library next to the British
Museum in Bloomsbury was outlined in chapter Four. In 1976 the site of
the St Pancras goods yard was purchased from British Rail and a new
chapter of the saga began. Wilsons new design was ready in 1977, and it
was announced that construction would begin in 1979. In response to
the disastrous strikes that had delayed the Barbican in the City of
London, the Worlds End housing in Chelsea and the glcs last big redevelopment, Thamesmead, the Library was broken down into three
separate construction phases, becoming supposedly less vulnerable to
union activity, although not exempt from other contractual problems at
a higher level. The incoming Conservative government, prompted by its
fear of the unions and relative unconcern about cultural issues, was
determined to break it down even further. Construction began in 1982,
under a stop-go funding system described by Wilson as like pulling a
plant up by its roots to see if it was still alive and then cutting a bit off
before shoving it back in the ground.9
The consequent delays lasted, symbolically perhaps, beyond the seemingly endless period of Conservative rule, until the Library opened in the
autumn of 1997 under New Labour. In 1988 the government announced
its intention to sell off the remaining ve acres of the site, so that the full
scheme can never be realized, although a modest addition of a conservation building was begun in 2005. In terms of architectural semiotics, the
Library is teasingly complex, a building with a cloaked personality from
outside, but which opens up within, undeniably romantic, but avoiding
monumentality and sentiment. The quality of materials and nish, so
much at risk during these years, was sustained, and it has become a solid
and well-used addition to national life. Wilsons commitment to generous public space set a standard for lottery-funded arts building projects
at the end of the 1990s.
204
Colin St John Wilson,

The British Library,
Euston Road, London,
197397.
The commissioning of works of art for the building from Eduardo

Paolozzi, Ron Kitaj and others denotes the movement of the rebels of
the 1950s into the establishment of the 1990s. During the 1980s public art
was widely seen as a way of making buildings and public spaces more
expressive and popular. Art galleries became one of the dening building types of the 1980s and 90s in Britain, combining technical requirements with a call for sensitivity to public perception, existing architectural context and works of art themselves. In Frankfurt, a clutch of new
museums by international architects during these years gave the city a
much higher prole, and other European and American centres took
note. The National Gallery was keen to build an extension on a government-owned bombsite adjoining the existing building in Trafalgar
Square, an easy-enough operation in earlier years, but since, as The
Times commented, the era of public patronage, so strong since the last
war, was over, it was deemed necessary for the development to pay for
itself.10 A competition called for developers to fund the galleries on the
upper level in return for gaining the use of the ground oor, on a lease
of 125 years. Seven designs were short-listed, and members of the public
were invited to vote on their preferences, selecting Ahrends Burton and
Koralek (abk), Arup Associates and Richard Rogers. The pattern of vot205 Conscience: The Architecture of Fruitful Anxiety
Barry Gasson
Architects, Burrell
Collection, Pollock
Park, Glasgow,
197283.
ing was confusing, however. The Rogers design was among the most
popular and the most unpopular at the same time, and the Gallery itself
preferred a design by Skidmore, Owings and Merrill that was disliked by
the architectural advisers. abk, in some respects a compromise choice,
were instructed to prepare a new scheme, and it acquired a prominent
tower, capped with masts and banners. After a public inquiry, this was
allowed to proceed, but immediately afterwards, on 30 May 1984, the
Prince of Wales made the scheme a subject of particular criticism in a
speech at the riba Gold Medal ceremony, which was one of the decisive
moments of the decade. It was already in the doldrums, but the royal
reference to a monstrous carbuncle on the face of a much loved and elegant friend killed it.
The situation was retrieved by the offer of funding from the three
Sainsbury brothers, who were beginning to assert themselves as architectural patrons in their own supermarket grocery business. This removed
the government and the developers from the equation, and put the
Gallery trustees in a position of greater control, anxious not to repeat the
mistakes of the rst round of designs. Where else but in late twentieth
century Britain could the asco of the National Gallery extension have
taken place? asked the Architects Journal, although it went on to comment
that the Burrell Collection in Pollock Park, Glasgow, which was won in
206
Venturi, Scott Brown,

The Sainsbury Wing,
National Gallery,
Trafalgar Square,
London, 198691.
competition in 1978 by Barry Gasson and

John Meunier, and completed in 1984, was
arguably the most successful museum to
be built in Britain for a century.11 This building, a hangover from an earlier age of public
order, represented the anti-monumental,
vernacular-inspired style of the 1970s, and
has retained a lasting respect.
For a second National Gallery competition, an invited short list from Britain and
America included James Stirling and Piers
Gough. All the schemes typied a high tide
of cultured Postmodernism very different
from the brassy Rogers offering. The selected design was by Venturi, Scott Brown
and Rauch of Philadelphia, the practice
of Robert Venturi, whose book of 1966,
Complexity and Contradiction, has as good
a claim as any to being the foundation of
Postmodern architecture. Venturi declared
his interest in Sir Edwin Lutyens, whose
attraction to Italian Mannerism had gained
him several illustrations in Complexity and
Contradiction at a time when his classical work was deeply unfashionable
in Britain.12 For anti-Modernists, the rehabilitation of Lutyens became a
symbolic campaign, and in 1981 an exhibition of his work, designed by
Piers Gough, was held at the Hayward Gallery. Despite misgivings on the
part of the Arts Council that sponsored it, it proved to be immensely
popular. The Sainsbury Wing was mannered and clad in Portland stone.
Beyond this, it had little in common with Lutyens, and by the time it
opened in July 1991 enthusiasm for Postmodernism was fast fading.
The Prince of Wales
Prince Charless speech at the ribas 150th anniversary award ceremony
in 1984 articulated a deep public mistrust of modern architecture that
had not been placated by the changes of the 1970s. In the words of his
biographer, Jonathan Dimbleby, the princes instinctive traditionalism
had long been offended by what he saw as the ugly and impersonal
environment that post-war architecture had imposed on the urban landscape, and especially on the inner cities.13 From the support he gained,
it was clearly a widespread view.
Rod Hackney (right)

at Black Road,
Macclesfield, 1984.
Apart from the National Gallery, the

prince singled out another project still at
a sensitive planning stage, condemning
the glass stump more suitable for Chicago
than the City of London that the developer Peter Palumbo was seeking to build at
No. 1 Poultry, to a design made some years
earlier by Mies van der Rohe.14 While this
project had been welcomed when rst presented to the press in 1969, it had taken the
whole of the 1970s to assemble the site, which included several listed
buildings. A long and high-prole public inquiry, in progress during
May 1984, divided the architectural world and created a climate of controversy about Modernism, contextualism and the preservation of the
urban grain of small dense streets as something inherently desirable.
The Mies project was rejected, although Palumbo was offered the opportunity to come back with a different design. A decade after the inquiry,
James Stirlings and Michael Wilfords more contextual project for the
site was unveiled, but deemed an anti-climax.
In the 1980s the onset of each spring brought news of riots from communities far removed from the aesthetic niceties of the capital. St Pauls,
Bristol, was rst, in April 1980, followed by Brixton, London, in 1981 and
Toxteth, Liverpool, in July the same year, the month of the Prince of
Waless wedding. In this situation, the Community Architecture move-
Louis Hellman,
Journal (27 February
1985).
208
ment, dating from the 1970s, offered an appropriate vehicle for the
princes desire to become involved in architecture at a grass-roots level.
Rod Hackney, a little-known architect in Cheshire before the date of the
famous speech, was singled out with Edward Cullinan as representatives
of the new people-friendly trend, and acquired instant fame. The prince
undertook some visits with Hackney, describing how it is only when
you visit these areas . . . that you begin to wonder how it is possible that
people are able to live in such inhuman conditions. The problems were
caused in part by the rapid collapse of the British manufacturing industry in the 1980s, and the prince stressed the value of the skills that residents had acquired when restoring their homes in Maccleseld. Was
this, as Lionel Esher asked, a change as profound as the one we associate with the Renaissance, but almost its mirror image . . . the retreat from
heroic plans, from mass solutions and from self-indulgent architecture,
like other British retreats, not a defeat but a victory?15 For architects,
there was a major lesson to learn about communication with users and,
as Nick Wates put it, a change of attitude away from the elitist vision of
the architect as team leader to that of mediator and active participant in
a team.16
The most lasting contribution by the Prince of Wales was Poundbury,
a model project for an urban extension at Dorchester, Dorset, on land
owned by the Duchy of Cornwall, where he was able to inuence the way
that development would take place. From an idea rst launched in the
late 1980s, the rst phase started on site in 1993, attracting inevitable criticism from the architectural world for its use of historic regional styles.
The fact that these were designed and executed to a higher standard than
Leon Krier (master

planner), Poundbury,
Dorchester, Dorset,
1989, phase one, 1993
onwards.
normal made them more threatening to the Modernist cause. Leon

Krier, a former assistant to James Stirling who declared his alienation
from modern architecture and much of the modern world in brilliant
lectures and cartoons, was and remains the master planner. The radicalism of Poundbury lay in its planning concept rather than in its architecture, which successfully reversed most of the space requirements for cars
imposed by planners on behalf of road safety since the war, thus achieving higher densities, more considered public spaces and a feeling of a
European rather than an English or American settlement. Separate zoning of residential and commercial areas (including light industry) was
abolished, so that residents could nd employment in walking distance
of home, while also having access to ne countryside on foot within a
few minutes.
As Dennis Hardy explains,
Kriers notion of modernity is everything that modernism is not.
Whereas the latter is collectivist and alienating, the former is
essentially democratic; while modernism builds in concrete, glass
and steel, a more traditional approach will use materials gathered locally; the one fragments the city into functional zones, the
other seeks to bring the various parts together; modernism
builds high, traditionalism uses height only for buildings of civic
importance or as landmarks.17
These generalizations could be challenged, but Poundbury raises questions of denition usually left unanswered. A large number of its proposals, or their equivalents, are now widely adopted in urban design.
Poundbury, however, is not democratic by process of choice, since the
Duchy imposes its preferences on developers working there. There is no
difculty about this, except among Modernist critics, since the houses
have always sold well. The use of representational styles from the preModernist period sticks in the throat of most architects, but the reasons
for this cannot objectively be found. If Poundbury gives you the creeps,
you are probably a Modernist.
The New Right and Style Wars
The anti-Modernist mood that was so pervasive in the 1980s almost
inevitably favoured a wider return to more literal renderings of classicism, thought by many to be a dying art. There were a few younger conviction classicists like Quinlan Terry, the successor to Raymond Erith
following the latters death in 1973. Richmond Riverside for Haslemere
210
Erith & Terry,

Richmond Riverside,
19858.
Terry Farrell, Comyn
Ching Triangle, Seven
Dials, Westminster,
London, 197885.
The corner building
is new, the remainder
refurbished.
Estates (19858) enabled Terry to step out of the country-house world

in which classicism had largely been conned since the 1950s, and offer
the picturesque quality of Portmeirion to an appreciative public. This
looked for a time as if it might herald a run of similar projects, but
while the classical counter-proposal by John Simpson for rebuilding
Paternoster Square was successful in halting a selected scheme by Arup
Associates in 1988, its successive reworkings by Terry Farrell and William
Whiteld, and the long delay in construction, launched it nally in 2002
as something substantially different from the rst Simpson scheme. As
public space, it seems as successful as it could be in a non-residential
area, and the lack of distinction in the individual buildings by
MacCormac, Eric Parry and others does not diminish its effectiveness as
a neutral background to St Pauls Cathedral.
Terry Farrells reconstruction of the Comyn Ching triangle of
Georgian houses near Covent Garden (197885) was a model of the urban
thinking that combined restoration of old buildings with new work, and
restored the original street lines and heights. Farrell argued that the housing crisis could be solved better by property management of what existed than by new construction, which was usually too rigid in plan to
allow for adaptation. He foresaw the architects future role chiefly as
resource management of old buildings and welcomed this as a labour
211
Conscience: The Architecture of Fruitful Anxiety
intensive activity, challenging to the imagination and involving the

architect in strategic areas he has all but abandoned to other professions.18
Farrell irted with classicism in the popular temporary garden centre
for Clifton Nurseries in Covent Garden (198081), but it was a playful
engagement, like his masterpiece of billboard architecture, the tv-am
headquarters in Camden Town, where the nials were made in the form
of breakfast eggcups. Piers Gough did something similar in a witty but
urbane reinterpretation of the Georgian terrace type for the developer
Kentish Homes.
In 1980 the rst Venice Architecture Biennale, The Presence of the Past,
indicated the internationalism of the anti-Modernist movement, although
nowhere outside Britain did it make such inroads into public consciousness or the architectural establishment. The princes conviction that the
past offered superior models for most things was widely shared in the
1980s, pervading television, advertising, branding and even pop music.
Modernists were a beleaguered minority, but the view of Jrgen Habermas,
that modernity was an incomplete project, began to gain credence as
Postmodernism revealed its limitations, and the work of the Modernist
masters began to be explored in greater depth.19
By 1986 the architectural establishment was on the rebound, and the
symbolic vehicle for the counter-attack was the exhibition Foster Rogers
Stirling curated by Deyan Sudjic at the Royal Academy in London, where
the emphasis was less on style or technology than on the issues of public
Foster Associates,
model of Hong Kong
and Shanghai Bank,
Hong Kong, 197986,
at the exhibition New
Architecture: Foster
Rogers Stirling,
Royal Academy of
Arts, London, 1986.
212
Louis Hellman,
Journal (27 June
1984).
space and urban development. Fosters project for a new bbc building in
Langham Place with a public way through it introduced concepts of
permeability missing from his earlier designs. Stirlings extension to the
Staatsgalerie in Stuttgart, designed in referential quasi-classical language
belonging to the world of Rossi or Colin Rowes book, Collage City (1978),
had recently opened to great acclaim and formed the centrepiece of his
display, somewhat at odds with his High Tech stable mates. The Lloyds
Building in Leadenhall Street by Rogers, completed in the course of 1986,
brought the innovations of the Pompidou Centre to London, no longer as
a peoples palace of culture but as a temple of capitalism, the symbolic
monument for the revival of Modernism in the high period of
Thatcherism. Fosters Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank in Hong Kong did
something similar on the far side of the world. Was this actually modern
architecture? Not according to the elderly troublemaker Berthold
Lubetkin, who described Lloyds as an assembly of nuts and bolts, scrap
iron, celebrating a confusion of fancy props, the glorication of ironmongery and triumph of mega-technology for its own sake.20 For the time
being, it was essential to banish concrete from view, and with projects like
Richard Rogers and

Architects, Lloyds of
London, Leadenhall
Street, City of
London, 197886.
the Inmos Microprocessor Factory (1982) at

Newport in Wales by Rogers, the Renault
Distribution Centre (1983) at Swindon by
Foster, and Michael Hopkinss Schlumberger
Research Laboratories at Cambridge (1984),
High Tech consolidated its position as the
smart face of knowledge-based manufacture
in post-industrial Britain.
High Techs suitability as transport architecture led to Fosters glamorous Stansted
Airport (198691), whose lift to the spirits
provided the perfect setting for the ultimate
democratization of air travel in the 1990s.
Nicholas Grimshaws train shed at Waterloo
Station for the Eurostar (1994), set on a curve
with an elaborate carapace of overlapping
glass designed to shift and shake with the
train movements, was an obvious application
of the style to recreate the glories of Brunel
and Victorian engineering, and symbolize a
new proximity to Europe.
The completion of two Hopkins projects
in 19912 showed a change of direction in his
work in response to signicant symbolic sites
in London. The Mound Stand at Lords Cricket Ground (198491) achieved
a stylish match of contextual brickwork in the base, facing the street, with
a jaunty stretched canopy on top, a reproach to fake traditionalism with
real load-bearing brick. In these matters, conservatives and radicals might
join hands, as they had done in the rst generation of Modernism in
Britain. Hopkins followed this opening innings in the new game with the
partial rebuilding of Bracken House by Sir Albert Richardson, after it had
been saved from demolition by becoming the rst post-war listed building
in 1988, when its original owners, the Financial Times, followed the exodus
of the newspapers to Docklands.
Two ends of the architectural spectrum came together at Bracken
House, at a time when the rhetoric of resurgent Modernism remained
strongly anti-conservationist. Hopkins managed the reconciliation with
aplomb, and nearly all his subsequent work has shown the value of reintegrating solid construction with the High Tech stream, both in visual
and operational terms, since its thermal properties have come to be
increasingly signicant. Hopkins completed his journey to the heart
of the British architectural establishment with the new Glyndebourne
214
Richardson & Houfe,

Bracken House,
Cannon Street, City
of London, 19558;
central section by
Michael Hopkins,
198892.
Opera House (198994), reafrming equilibrium between high culture

in a general sense and the high culture of architecture, which, since the
completion of Denys Lasduns National Theatre in 1976, had temporarily
lost its voice and identity. In many ways, the path was set in these projects
for a new respectability for Modernism, achieved through use of traditional materials and forms, while stopping short of actually using
historical detail or decoration. For this trend, European architects such
as Rafael Moneo and Alvaro Siza provided exemplars. With this near
classicism, a truce was declared in the style wars, but there was also an
underlying feeling that individuals from a variety of positions could unite
in a shared ethical position and a joint opposition to the crudity of the
common run of commercial architecture.
Postmodernism was a different type of truce, but many doubted
whether its theoretical basis could be transferred into the new ethical
climate of the 1990s, since it was so widely considered as a supercial
eye-catching veneer applied to buildings lacking inherent interest. Because
of this condemnation, no architect now wishes to be called Postmodern,
even in retrospect. Arguably, Postmodernism nished too soon and
deserves a more discriminating appraisal, with the best examples celebrated for their intelligence and sensitivity. If any architect could carry
Postmodernism with conviction, it was James Stirling, apparently so
uncaring about any kind of ethics, public communication or explanation, but devoted to the building as a work of art on a take it or leave
it basis, as he had been at the beginning of his career against the background of the welfare state. Pleasing neither the historical purists nor
CWZG, China Wharf,

Bermondsey, London,
19828.
the puritanical anti-historicists, he scrambled the history of architecture into previously unimaginable conjunctions.
Piers Gough, fullling the promise of
his student years, was a more dashing version of Stirling (he called his work b
movie architecture) with bold gestures of
form and colour and over-scaled architectural jokes, as in China Wharf, Bermondsey
(19828), and The Circle (19879) nearby
in the regenerated Shad Thames area, and
the more ambitious Cascades on the Isle
of Dogs (19868). He avoided preciousness
in the use of materials, which some architects began to cultivate in the 1990s, but
usually hit all the urban buttons. Terry
Farrell brought a broad imaginative sweep
to several large projects whose weakness
lay in a lack of ne detailing and lumpy
massing. Alban Gate, his development on
London Wall on the former Route 11,
destroyed the unity of its 1960s Miesian
ofce slabs, while Embankment Place
(198790) realized the value of airspace
over Charing Cross Station, stitching together some of the pedestrian routes in the area at the same time.
John Outram created his own learned synthesis of historical references in brightly coloured patterned detail, with a pumping station in
Docklands (19858), which became another architectural emblem of the
period, while his New House at Wadhurst Park, East Sussex (197686),
classical in some respects, showed how decorative effects could just
about remain on the Modernist side of the divide. Even more than
Stirling, Outram was the joker in the pack of six British architects (all
London-based) presented in 1992 at the Venice Biennale. In the following years, he converted a Victorian hospital in Cambridge into the Judge
Institute of Management in a sympathetic improvisation on the rather
weak original buildings, with a product fantastically out of sympathy
with the tight-buttoned aesthetics of Cambridge, left or right.
A lesser-known example of English Postmodernism was the Civic
Ofces at Epping, Essex, by Richard Reid (198490), which combined
aspects of Lutyens and Venturi in a loose Townscape arrangement that
made a positive contribution to the town. This was the Italian Rationalist
216
John Outram,
Judge Institute of
Management,
Cambridge, 19916.
Richard Reid
Architects, Epping
District Council
Offices, Epping,
Essex, 198490.
aspect of Postmodernism (Reid was a former Rome Scholar in

Architecture), with a basis in theory. It used exaggerated and simplied
forms to which Stirling had shown the way, as did the sheltered housing
in Essex Road, Islington (198792) by John Melvin, for the Mercers
Company, in which the demonstrative architectural statement responded to several London traditions, while taking nothing away from its skill
in planning or quality of construction. A non-architect, Ian Pollard of
Flaxyard, was even able to make bad architecture amusing, with the
Marco Polo building at Battersea and a notorious store for Homebase, a
subsidiary of Sainsburys, in Warwick Road, Kensington (198890), which
parodied Stirlings Stuttgart gallery with Egyptian trimmings.
Postmodernism was damaged by its imitators in the same way as
Modernism had been before; it had access to a wide range of theory, yet
often resulted in supercial application of ideas. In retrospect, its overt
mannerism belongs in what, in a wider sense, could be called the long bmovie tradition, beginning with Elizabethan classicism and continuing
into late seventeenth-century English Baroque, with all the improper
but often engaging applied styles based on communication that have
been opposed to the Platonic versions of classicism and Modernism.
The opposition to Postmodernism was part of the resurgence of
architectural ethics in the late 1980s and early 1990s, constructing a platform from which architecture could be re-launched. This was achieved
partly by moving the architectural discourse outside the walls of its own
institutions and into the general press (for which the Prince of Waless
publicity was a boost), broadcasting and other institutions, such as the
Arts Council, where Peter Palumbo, as Chairman from 1988 to 1994, set
up an Architecture Unit.
Figures such as Edward Cullinan, Richard MacCormac and David
Lea, seen as modern successors to the Arts and Crafts Movement, were
more important for the recovery of credibility during the 1990s than the
big names of High Tech, Postmodernism or Classicism. Of these three,
Lea has been the least prolic but probably the most high principled,
admired for his rigorous use of sustainable materials with the kind of
sophistication of space and detailing that were usually missing from the
emergent Green Movement in architecture. Cullinan was a gure noted
in the 1960s who really made his name in the 1990s with projects such as
the Visitor Centre for the National Trust at Fountains Abbey (198892),
which offered the kind of decorative use of materials still desired in the
1980s, although falling out of fashion in the 1990s. It became increasingly important in the new climate of scrutiny and participation to be able
to talk a lot more often, and to explain projects to non-architects using
references they could understand. Where there was a way to situate the
218
Edward Cullinan
Architects, Visitor
Centre for the
National Trust,
Fountains Abbey,
North Yorkshire,
198892.
project historically, so much the better, and where the older generation
of architects might have looked for explanations based on economics or
performance, Cullinan was one of the many who developed a new language of architectural exegesis. His ofce was the seedbed for another
generation of practices such as Penoyre & Prasad and Short & Ford,
spreading the same values in the way that Norman Shaws pupils in the
1880s created a similar leavening in the architectural culture.
Richard MacCormac and his practice, mjp, became known for his use
of shallow pitched roofs, overhanging eaves and regional materials,
often developed into quite complex forms. He and Cullinan developed
ways of tting new buildings into historic contexts with enough references to keep the planners happy. As President of the riba (19913),
MacCormac was one of the rst for several years who had a high reputation as a designer. He organized a major exhibition, The Art of the
Process, arguing that
MacCormac,
Jamieson, Pritchard,
Cable and Wireless
Group Telecommunications College,
Coventry, 19924.
architecture is the least understood intellectual skill in the building

industry today, and that architects must respond to the changing
perception of the profession in society by demystifying and opening up to scrutiny what it is they actually do when they design.21
The nature of the gap between newly sensitized architects and their
more simple-minded clients comes across in Andrew Saints description
in the catalogue of MacCormacs own offering, the Cable and Wireless
Group Telecommunications College:
Cable and Wireless has long been teaching telecommunications
to students, many from the old colonies, on a bitty site in
Cornwall. It wanted something smarter and less hierarchical,
somewhere in middle England. It knew its technical needs and
had secured 10 business-park acres outside Coventry for its
college . . . mjps response was not to lead off with a simple
generative diagram. Instead, it dished up for discussion a menu
of mixed-use-places-in-isolation, ancient and modern: castles,
colleges, Palladian villa-farms and so on. But Cable and Wireless
was more at ease with decision-taking than with prolonged
debate. It wanted to get on with the job. Soon enough, mjp had
to hold its nose and jump.
220
Evans & Shalev,

Courts of Justice,
Truro, Cornwall, 1988.
As Saint went on to explain, a number of decisions were justiable on

purely rational grounds, apart from the green ceramic coating on the
roofs, inspired by a Han dynasty gure that MacCormac had seen in
Singapore.
Some architects who had begun as New Brutalists happily found an
outlet for a more representational approach in a climate less insistent on
abstraction. Eldred Evans was considered one of the major talents of her
generation, but her partnership with David Shalev had produced relatively few buildings before the Law Courts at Truro, Cornwall, completed in 1989, a building that retained essentially Modernist concepts of
light and movement through space, although it was almost axially symmetrical and entered beneath a vestigial pediment. This led on to the
commission for a new outstation of the Tate Gallery at St Ives, also in
Cornwall, which anticipated the lottery projects of the 1990s in its requirement to act as a symbolic focus for regional regeneration.
Something in the City
Commercial architecture was widely derided in the 1960s, but as the welfare state declined, it attracted more enterprising designers and patrons.
The 1970s recession was part of the key, since Stuart Lipton, then a
young developer, took time off in the usa and studied construction
methods that shortened the time on site by using steel frame rather than
concrete for the structure as part of a fast-track system, in which the
building might begin on site before all the drawings were complete. In
Arup Associates,
Finsbury Avenue
Square, Broadgate,
City of London,
19828; sculpture
Rush Hour by George
Segal, 19837.
contrast to the drawn-out, strike-prone accidents of a British site, this

became a revolutionary transformation that also changed the look of
buildings.
Lipton, in partnership with Godfrey Bradman, is chiey associated
with the Broadgate development, using the site of the demolished Broad
Street Station in the City and the adjoining new ground created by
claiming air rights (an American practice) over the tracks of Liverpool
Street Station. The rst phase, 1 Finsbury Avenue, by Peter Foggo of
Arup Associates (19824), marked a transition in the rms work from
external concrete framing to steel, with a frame fully erected in thirteen
weeks. After many years of crass commercial architecture, this building
brought a new sophistication, not only on the exteriors, but in the atrium
at the centre (a calm contrast to the busyness of the Lloyds spectacular)
and, unseen yet crucial, the wide oors of the open-plan ofces, each
with a deep service void to allow rapid and constant updating of electronic equipment.
The acknowledgment of the temporal dimension in ofce building,
both in construction time and operational use, was a major conceptual
shift, aided by the continuing researches of Francis Duffy, similarly
inspired by American practice. Never before, not even in Chicago in the
1880s, has the ofce building been so central to society nor loaded with
222
such signicance, Duffy wrote in 1981.22 The opinion was not exaggerated, although in 1988 he contrasted the British obsession with the extent
to which faades are decked out in classical motifs with a more practical attitude in Europe, where, as he noted, people buy ofce buildings
and rent homes, the opposite of Britain. Arups were stretched to complete the early phases of Broadgate, and the American rm som, no
longer under the spell of Mies, designed the later parts, where postmodern gestures began to creep in.
Even so, Broadgate represented a breakthrough on many fronts.
Godfrey Bradman raised money abroad to avoid the stiing restrictions
imposed by British institutional investors. Not only the public art, but
also the public spaces in which it stood, were completely new elements
in the scheme, congured in a comfortable and restrainedly picturesque sequence to avoid the agoraphobic dotting of buildings in a void
as at La Dfense in Paris, a development of similar period with a strong
urban form. The ideal of efciency, expressed as American know-how
with European polish, had come round full circle again. As Duffy
explained, the architects visible role was reduced, in most places, to a
10-centimetre thickness at the face of the building, where character
could be achieved by hanging slices of granite, not unlike Albert
Richardsons early borrowing before the First World War of the architectural vocabulary of Karl Friedrich Schinkel to clad steel frames
quickly and efciently.23
The deregulation of nancial services in 1986, known as the Big Bang,
was an event of worldwide importance, bringing additional business to
the City of London, owing partly to the accident of its ideal position
between the time zones of the two other major nancial centres of the
world. Half the volume of ofces in the City of London was rebuilt
between 1985 and 1993. This stimulated expectations for a secondary
nancial centre in the former dock area of the Isle of Dogs, part of the
vast areas of the London Docks that presented a spectacle of political and
nancial stasis throughout the 1970s. Then the London Docklands
Development Corporation was established in 1981 as one of a series of
Urban Development Corporations with wide discretion in terms of planning, inspired by New Societys Non-Plan issue of 1969, as well as by the
liberal economics of Thatcherism. Canary Wharf, the largest development, was the work of the American architect Csar Pelli for the original
developer, G. Ware Travelstead, forming part of a plan for a high-density
business centre laid out on a grid with a raised street deck, also involving
som. A Canadian developer, Olympia and York, took over the scheme in
1987, and completed the tower and adjacent buildings in 1991, when
recession stalled the scheme for several years. In 1995, after complaints
Ian Ritchie Architects,

The Watergarden
(Roy Square), Narrow
Street, Limehouse,
London, 19868.
about the dominance of American rms, Troughton McAslan contributed a building. Some modest, Erskine-like ofces were built at
Heron Quays by Nicholas Lacey, showing modest ambitions at the beginning of the development, but Docklands was brash and American, while
Broadgate was European in spirit and urban context, and perhaps each
was appropriate to its place. By the end of the 1990s it was clear that international nance could be conducted without as much marble, granite or
other kinds of stone facing as previously supposed.
Docklands also generated a quantity of private-sector housing, by
architects who included Jeremy Dixon and cwzg. At Roy Square,
Limehouse (1989), for the developer Roy Sandu, a leading member of
the London Hindu community, Ian Ritchie, normally a High Tech designer, produced a notable paraphrase of Georgian classicism that avoided
being pastiche or Postmodern.
Londons docks have not been the only area of waterfront regeneration, although the Merseyside Development Corporation, founded in
the early 1980s, has delivered nothing so spectacular in Liverpool apart
from the temporary Garden Festival in 1984, although Stirling converted part of the Albert Dock, a building he had admired as a student, into
Tate Liverpool (19846). Cardiff Bay offered a similar opportunity,
where the chance to build an opera house by Zaha Hadid was thrown
away following her competition victory in 1994. This has been described
as the greatest loss to British architecture over the last generation.24 A
temporary Visitor Centre in the form of a gleaming tube by Will Alsop
224
(1990) was for a long time the main representative of metropolitan

Modernism in the new quarter. In the late 1990s the two towns facing
each other across the River Tyne, Newcastle and Gateshead, enjoyed
their riverfront revival, culminating in two adjacent arts projects on the
Gateshead side, the Baltic, a our mill converted as an art gallery (2003),
and the Sage, a new building by Foster and Partners for music (opened
2005), with an elegant and attention-grabbing pedestrian bridge, by
Wilkinson Eyre (19972001), connecting them to the conserved and
regenerated north bank.
The alternative to the ofce in a redeveloped brown-eld area of existing city was the business park, situated on a virgin piece of green-eld
land, an idea borrowed from France and the usa. Out of sight and mind,
most buildings of this type were unremarkable. In the 1970s Cambridge
University began to develop its Business Park on the western side of
the city, close to the new m11 motorway, where Hopkinss Schlumberger
breaks the skyline. Firms such as cwzg began to publish smart and
memorable decorated sheds, for Aztec West, near Bristol, the second of the
type. Close to London, Stuart Lipton commissioned a master plan from
Arup Associates in 1985 for Stockley Park, Chiswick, a non-traditional
location inuenced by its proximity to Heathrow. Landscaping with trees
and water, works of art and taut, tasteful buildings were the hallmark,
creating an anthology of current architecture by Arup, Foster, Ian Ritchie,
Troughton McAslan, Eric Parry and Richard Rogers, up to 1990.
The shift represented at Broadgate towards a greater focus on
efcient delivery was part of a signicant overhaul during the period
19802000 of the way that architectural practices operated. Architecture
at the end of the 1970s was notorious for overspending, whether or not
this was avoidable. Following American practice, more intermediaries
came into the process to prevent this, such as project managers and
client representatives, displacing the architect from his former direct triangular relationship to the client and the contractor. Design and Build
packages were favoured by developers and public bodies for the assurances of tight control that they offered, but the architects control was
substantially reduced, with a loss of quality. To counteract doubts about
their performance, architects became less blas about their services, listening to such American analysts as Donald Schon, inventor of the
phrase reective practitioner, which became widespread in dening
one aspect of an architects offering, and Robert Gutman, a major inuence on Duffys thinking, who took a cool outsiders look at what architects actually did and separated their skills into separate strengths of
ideas, service and delivery, which were not necessarily found combined
in one individual or even one practice.25
Recession and Recovery

The Recovery of the Modern was the title of an anthology of writing from
the Architectural Review of the period 198095, published for the magazines centenary in 1996. As Michael Spens wrote in his introduction, it was
one saga in the set of wider circumstances over the past twenty
years that led to the survival and recovery of Modernism, as a
continuity of culture whereby the new is considered to be more
of a preoccupation creatively than what has been.26
Postmodernism, he argues, fell short of the equivalent cultural achievements going under the same name in other disciplines, and the alternative was found in a more international outlook and a renewed sense of
morality. Architects turned away from the demands of the public and
looked for approval from their peers. New Modernism was a more
gentle if still insistent strain, existing again in recurring pluralities . . .
and enriched as never before.27
The task was to use hard thinking and moral integrity to recover the
good bits of Modernism and leave out the bad, or somehow redeem them
through historical and theoretical interpretation. In 1986 E. M. Farrelly
described the New Spirit as tough, iconoclastic, streetwise; acerbic, often
aggressive and very highly strung.28 This was represented by the projects
of Nigel Coates and his nato (Narrative Architecture Today) group, which
were generally not buildings in the conventional sense, but schemes to
stimulate activity in public spaces, trailing with them some of the radical
chic of the Punk rock revolution of the mid-1970s. Projects by Hadid and
Alsop had similar intentions, seeking bizarre forms without human scale.
Some work qualied for the title Deconstructivist, another term taken
from literature, and adopted in architecture in 1988. The international
trend had an avid following as an alternative to Postmodernism, with
which it shared a desire to make Modernism more visually interesting,
regardless of issues of tectonics or structural rationalism, and to pursue
analogies between architectural form and linguistic structure. Deconstruction looked back to previously unexplored areas in the history
of Modernism, especially the Russian Revolutionary avant-garde. Rem
Koolhaas, a tutor at the Architectural Association in the late 1970s with
Hadid among his students, went to Russia to research architects such as
Ivan Leonidov, whose work was almost entirely in the form of unbuilt
projects. This encouraged Hadid to focus on presenting her competition
schemes as exquisite near-abstract paintings. Deconstruction aligned itself
with ne art on a formal and conceptual level, while retaining lofty
226
notions of its social signicance, which were emphasized in the rst major
European project in this manner, the extension to the Jewish Museum in
Berlin by Daniel Libeskind (1989), a design that also reected the cult of
the Russian avant-garde at the aa, where Libeskind was a tutor.
German commissions for English-based practices were a feature of
the decades following Stirlings Staatsgalerie, including several of his
own signicant later works. Other architects have included Grimshaw,
Rogers and Foster, who won the symbolically important job of rebuilding the Reichstag in Berlin as the seat of government for the reunied
Germany. In the former East Germany, Ian Ritchie designed a new
entrance for the Leipziger Messe, the major trade exhibition venue. Zaha
Hadids commissions have now included major buildings in Wolfsburg
and Leipzig. Ian Ritchie observes that maybe there is between one and
three percent more cultural awareness of architecture as an art in the
general populace than here and that can make a vast difference in terms
of the approach the public take towards new ideas.29
The worldwide expansion of theory in schools of architecture during
the 1970s and 80s meant that a return to Modernism at this point was
not a simple recapitulation, but involved a new awareness of the potential depth within the subject, with an intention to avoid the formulaic. In
Britain The Other Tradition was formulated as an antidote to monotony and loss of the sense of place. Peter Blundell-Jones contributed to the
rediscovery of its German heroes, Hans Scharoun, and Hugo Hring,
while there was a resurgence of interest in Alvar Aalto, a popular gure
among British architects since the 1930s, but latterly upheld as a hero of
modern resistance architecture and a strong inuence on Wilsons
British Library. Peter Davey, the editor of the Architectural Review from
1982 to 2005, was sympathetic to this trend and acknowledged the continuity from the Arts and Crafts Movement to Regionalism, which he
described as a philosophers stone that will transmute the mundane to a
built poetry that can unite us all, of whatever background, in homecoming.30 The Arts and Crafts belief in the haptic (an element largely ignored
in Deconstruction) was supported by the growing inuence of phenomenology in schools of architecture, especially in the teaching of Dalibor
Veseley from the 1980s onwards at the aa and Cambridge. This was part
of a global discussion in Finland, Japan, Germany and the usa, which
inuenced architects such as Eric Parry, a long-time enthusiast for Philip
Webb, in reworking Modernist precedents and gave British architects a
way into international thinking without losing their cultural roots.
Phenomenology as a philosophical movement involving thinkers such as
Edmund Husserl, Martin Heidegger and Maurice Merleau-Ponty aimed
to undermine and supplant the positivism of the nineteenth century that
Tony Fretton, Lisson

Gallery, Bell Street,
Marylebone, London,
198593.
fed the efciency doctrines of modern architecture and thus, for those
who cared, served as a way of addressing the mounting sense of global
ecological crisis, less by mechanical than by spiritual means. The school
of English Minimalism owed much to this perception, although it was
paradoxical that some of its rst products were fashionable restaurants or
shops for luxury goods, designed in the 1980s by David Chippereld,
Stanton Williams and John Pawson and Claudio Silvestrin. During the
1990s Minimalism, which was inherent in most of rst-generation
Modernism up to 1930, became a media phenomenon, appropriate for
the shallow contrition of economic recession, since it was far from cheap
to produce. While international in its reach, Minimalism was given a
local habitation in Herbert Ypmas book London Minimal (1996), where
Georgian fanlights and red pillar boxes provide a visual counterpoint to
empty white rooms.
Minimalism required high-quality nishes, which in an age of
deskilled building crafts added to its exclusivity, while providing a reassuring material weight to theoretical ideas. To pick a single gure acting
as guru, not just to Minimalism but to a younger generation in search
of the line of the future, rather as Philip Webb did for the Arts and
Crafts Movement, one might select Tony
Fretton, whose work became widely known
with the Lisson Gallery (198593). Fretton
worked as a ne artist for a while, bringing
to architecture the formal discipline,
intellectual reach and the power to be
affecting and communicative that he
found in Donald Judd, Barnett Newman
and Louis Kahn. Plainness and a sense of
naturalness were qualities he sought.31
While apparently concerned with pure
aesthetics, Fretton still spoke of a desire to
communicate to society at large. The Lisson
Gallery, set in an everyday streetscape
rather than the rareed art dealers quarter,
was excessively plain and spartan for its
time, but also slightly quirky. It set what
for England was a new model for Modernism, an architecture this country has never
known, as Kenneth Frampton called it in
1992, remixing familiar elements from
Adolf Loos, Alvaro Siza and Brutalism with
exquisite understatement.32
228
David Chipperfield,
Museum of the
River and Rowing,
Henley-on-Thames,
Oxfordshire, 1998.
Florian Beigel,
Jon Broome, Suresh
ARaj, of Architecture
Bureau, Half Moon
Theatre, Mile End
Road, London, 1985.
Looss devotion to the standard products of British equipment of

1900, mens suits and chairs, was reassuring in a regionalist way, while
more than any other Modernist master, he explored space, the aspect of
Modernism that Postmodernists were deemed to have neglected. The
Loos revival is seen most strongly in the Walsall Art Gallery by Caruso St
John (19952000), a practice marked by
Caruso St John,
Walsall New Art
Gallery, 19952000.
a concern for authenticity: the search for a strategy for avoiding

or subverting / resisting the apparently inevitable commodication of architecture under global capitalism and for tactics for
resisting the neoliberal markets imperative for novelty.33
This description could cover a subsection of the London architectural

world during the past ten years. In their lineage, they acknowledge Florian
Beigel, in whose ofce they came together. Beigels Half Moon Theatre in
Mile End Road was a crucial work of the early 1980s that stood for the
continuity of Modernist values in a spirit of community engagement. The
risk that these works run is to be too precious and introverted. Even so,
they can be contrasted with the more pretentious if popular modernisms
emanating from London or passing through it, which are more concerned
with formal invention on a global stage.
The high-style revival of Modernism was matched by its spread as a
normal style for restaurants and bars in the slow climb out of recession
in the early 1990s, affecting even the traditional British pub, where in
fashionable locations curtains, carpets and upholstery were removed to
expose hard surfaces. Enthusiasm for vintage modern furniture among
collectors acted as a spearhead for architecture, and the word retro,
referring to this revival, confusingly became a synonym for modern.
Political Change in the 1990s
During the 1980s Britons looked enviously at Franois Mitterrands series
of Grands Projets in Paris and at the secondary level of high-quality
urban renewal there and in other French cities. British rms occasionally contributed, as with Norman Fosters Carr dArt at Nmes of 198493,
his rst seriously contextual urban building. The Lottery brought a similar largesse and freedom, and was the beginning of an extraordinary
boom in public architecture in Britain, which was timed to pick up the
New Spirit and give it physical form all over the country. Projects were
selected by competition, open to architects in Europe as well as in Britain,
and contributed to an accelerated move into the European mainstream,
with the Swiss practice Herzog & de Meuron making a strong impact
with their conversion of Bankside Power Station into Tate Modern
(19952000) and following it with the Laban Dance Centre in Deptford.
While it was relatively easy to commission individual arts projects
with lottery funding available from 1995 onwards, the inherited complications of Britains post-war housing have taken longer to sort out. After
the Conservative governments dismantling of the welfare state housing
system in the early 1980s, initiatives were launched to rebuild inner
cities, although the task was massive and the expertise still undeveloped.
By the early 1990s new mechanisms of change were taking shape, as can
be seen in the story of the Hulme Estate in the southern part of central
Manchester, planned by Hugh Wilson and J. L. Womersley and built
between 1968 and 1972. A few years on, the original streets of terraced
232
Stephenson Bell,
conversion of
No. 4 Jordan Street,
Manchester, 1994.
houses might have been saved by Community Architecture, but instead

they were replaced by the biggest deck-access scheme in the country by
the once-praised masterminds of Park Hill and Cumbernauld, which
was immediately beset by technical and social problems directly attributable to lack of forethought and realism in the design (Europes worst
housing stock as the Architects Journal later described it), and culminating in the promise in 1992 to use 37.5 million of government City
Challenge money to destroy the whole project and replace it with something closer to what had been there before. Intensive involvement of
local residents, using techniques of Action Planning, produced a master
plan allowing for accretive growth in place of a single style or method,
although controlled by the newly popular design codes originating from
the New Urbanist movement in the usa. The resulting architecture
avoided the historicism associated with the New Urbanists, but was
inspired by Ralph Erskine in permitting visual variety to stem from the
wishes of individuals. The project included a housing co-operative,
Homes for Change, in the form of a four-sided block, funded by the
Guinness Trust, as well as private-sector housing. A new generation of
architects based in Manchester, such as Roger Stephenson and Stephen
Hodder, used the greater freedom in planning constraint in the mid233 Conscience: The Architecture of Fruitful Anxiety
1990s (compared to central London) to create new models for inserting

modern design within historic buildings.
In Birmingham, urban regeneration in the 1990s, led by Les Sparks as
Director of Planning and Architecture, concerned itself with mitigating
the adverse effects of the 1960s ring road, and creating a network of rehabilitated and new buildings along the canals in the city centre. Thus an
alternative city centre was created, including Brindleyplace, a canal-side
development based on the primacy of public space, around which a deliberately eclectic collection of new buildings marched in visually coordinated step to show the possibility of pluralism. In Birmingham, Manchester
and Belfast, new concert halls, with acoustics superior to the older halls
of London, afrmed the excellence of provincial culture. These were
the Symphony Hall, Birmingham (198791), and Bridgewater Hall,
Manchester (19936), both by rwhl Partnership, and the Waterfront Hall,
Belfast, by Robinson McIlwaine, a project originated in 1978 and completed in the years 19937, the most visually distinguished of the three.
London lacked a central coordinating authority following the abolition of the glc in 1986, and the inability of local councils to ll the role
was seen in the poor quality of public infrastructure and the generally
cosmetic level of improvements, which failed to solve underlying problems and created a mood of decline, a downward spiral of infrastructural and human problems that will prove hard to halt as the historian Roy
Porter wrote in 1994. The grim ironies of a city with low self-esteem were
captured in the lm London (1994), a ctionalized portrait of the year
1992 in the capital, which is portrayed by the director, Patrick Keiller, a
former architect, as a limbo of lost souls in a shabby prison camp. In
the directors synopsis of the lm, Robinson, the unseen protagonist,
speculates that the nineteenth century, Englands reaction to the French
Revolution and the failure of the English Revolution itself may all be to
blame for Londons decline and its imminent isolation and disappearance.34 In the lm, Robinson and his companion pause outside William
Morriss house in Hammersmith and remember
what we used to think of as the future: sophisticated engineering; low consumption; renewable energy; public transport; but
just now, London is all waste, without a future, its public spaces
either void or stage sets for the public spectacles of nineteenth
century reaction, endlessly re-enacted for television.35
Although London reected the gloom following the re-election of
John Major in 1992, his Minister for Environment from 1993 to 1997,
John Gummer, commissioned a discussion paper on Quality in Town
234
Cross-section
through a residential
district showing a
tree-lined street
enclosed by buildings
with ground-floor
retail and commercial
facilities and upperlevel apartments
enjoying views of
private and communal
gardens. Design by
Andrew Wright
Associates, illustrated in Towards an
Urban Renaissance
(1999).
and Country, as well as starting the process of recreating a unied

government for London which was continued in the Labour manifesto
of 1997, promising a new elected Greater London Assembly. The example
of Barcelona was ever present, where, between the death of Franco in
1975 and the Olympic Games in 1992, the city had been revived both
economically and physically through a renaissance of locally generated
architecture. Barcelona inspired Glasgow and Dublin to use architecture
as a catalyst for regeneration. As Richard Rogers pointed out in his Reith
Lectures of 1995, cities were becoming more effective at working towards
long-term targets for limiting their ecological impact than national
governments.36
When Tony Blair became leader of the Labour Party, his campaigning
emphasized youth, innovation and connection with the culture of Europe;
in a word, modernizing. Socially excluded sections of society were to
receive new help, although the fatalism of old-fashioned welfare was to be
avoided. This was a message in tune with a revival of a socially conscious
Modernism, and Rogers collaborated with the Shadow Arts Minister, Mark
Fisher, in a party publication, A New London (1992). Following his election
victory in 1997, Blair began to implement these policies, not without controversy and some falling short of the original intentions, but with an
overall result that, combined with steady economic growth, gave a boost
to architecture through funding and enabling new buildings of many
kinds, especially hospitals and schools. The London Borough of Southwark
showed the capacity of architecture to create economic and social benets,
from the international scale of the Tate Modern to the local effect of Will
Alsops Peckham Library (1999), a colourful and sculptural equivalent to
the boisterous public libraries of the 1900s. Most architects regret, however, that by continuing the Conservative Private Finance Initiative
scheme to offset the capital cost of many of these projects, architects have
been involved in large amounts of needless paperwork and administration
with no tangible benets at the end for the public.
A new Cabinet role was devised for the Deputy Prime Minister, John
Prescott, as head of a newly congured Department of Environment,
Transport and the Regions, with a national overview of planning policy.
The Urban Task Force appointed by him in 1997 and chaired by Richard
Rogers recommended denser settlement patterns, better public transport
infrastructure and the use of brown-eld land for new housing among a
range of issues that had been brewing for ten years or more prior to its
report of 1999.37 The strong rural preservationist faction was placated,
and demands for sustainability partially satised. Implementation was
patchy, and the government proved unwilling to come into conict with
some of the vested interests of commercial house builders, so that the
long-term problems of new housing have been addressed only in a piecemeal way. There were no tough measures for reducing car use, out-oftown retailing and other agents of impending ecological crisis, or for generating better public services in suburban areas of low density that comprise a large amount of the inherited housing stock, although city centres
did show signs of improvement. A follow-up report, Towards a Strong
Urban Renaissance, in 2005 noted that
Englands cities are very different places from the post-industrial
centres of unemployment and failing public services of twenty
years ago . . . They stand more condently on the international
stage.
Manchester, which took advantage of an ira bomb in the city centre in
1996 to remove previous unpopular developments, was the prime showcase for design-led change.
The period since 1980 saw the invasion of formerly subjective areas of
life by attempts to quantify and account for everything. New Labour
redoubled efforts in this direction, and special interest groups had to
respond in kind. The ribas report The Value of Architecture (2000) was
upbeat about the general situation, while noting the loss of qualied
architects and planners in the public sector since 1985, dropping by 50
per cent and 95 per cent respectively. Their lack was felt when complex
urban regeneration projects had to be steered to acceptance without
being stripped of design quality in the name of economy. The agship
effect of art museums and other prominent public buildings generated
tourism and growth, but the value of good design was not universally
accepted. The report quoted the New Statesman:
236
Alsop and Strmer,

Peckham Library
and Media Centre,
London, 1999.
The idea that an identity for a city, or region, or country can be

physically constructed troubles many people in Britain. Manchester
is now learning, but in England generally the invention of a tradition through architecture is not a conscious process.38
The reports author, Ken Worpole, stressed how urban design could
affect quality of life through greater feelings of safety and security,
greater legibility and assurance, and in a greater sense of locality, identity, civic pride and belonging.39 The theories of Kevin Lynch and others
going back to the 1950s were nally being applied. Pedestrianization of
town centres had a bad reputation, but urban designers began to acquire
more subtle ways of handling motor trafc and balancing it against
other users, despite resistance to change of any kind. The partial pedestrianization of Trafalgar Square in 2002, based on the research of the
Louis Hellman,
1999).
David Richmond
& Partners, Canon
UK Headquarters,
Reigate, Surrey,
cross-section through
offices, 19959.
Space Syntax Laboratory at the Bartlett School, showed how simple it

could be. The ofce-building sector has often led in sustainability of
construction and operation. The Canon Headquarters at Reigate, Surrey
(2000), by David Richmond, showed a temperate use of simple passive
methods of thermal-mass, sun-shading and stack-effect ventilation,
with a roof made of the companys own photovoltaic panels. These
were good building blocks for a simple version of Modernism. The
Norwegian architect Nils Thorps headquarters for British Airways at
Heathrow was praised for similar achievements, with a working environment that looked pleasant to be in. Architects who insisted on
cladding their entire building with glass had more difculty in being
238
convincingly green, although Rogers, Foster and others consistently

claimed this for their buildings, including the controversial but unmissable 30 St Mary Axe (rst called the Swiss Re tower but popularly
known as the Gherkin) in the City of London, completed in 2004.
An old debate about the comparative worth of icon buildings
(memorable and newsworthy designs by signature architects) and
high-quality background buildings surfaced in 2005, with some renewed
attention to the latter category. A practice such as Bennetts Associates
shows a strong ethical impulse combining ideals of collaborative design,
energy saving and community involvement, represented in a number of
ofce buildings and in the Central Library and Jubilee Development,
Brighton, a p project praised for retaining high quality, creating not
only a public building, but a new square and realigning the street pattern to an original grid. The architects commented: environmental
engineering is the Trojan horse for structural and spatial expression.40
The weakest point in the bright horizon of British architecture at the
turn of the Millennium remained private-house building. In a heated
sellers market, there was little incentive for developers to improve the
aesthetics, planning or sustainability of their product, and they continued to rely on kerb appeal, the rst impression created by the front of
the house. Initiatives by cabe, the governments own architectural advisory body, failed to make any major breakthrough. Individuals had
small successes, including Wayne Hemingway, a successful fashion
designer who criticized the design of Wimpey Homes in the press, and
Louis Hellman,
2003).
Cartwright Pickard,
Murray Grove
Housing, Islington,
London, 19989.
was invited to collaborate with them in a project at Gateshead. The

houses were commercially successful, but the company reverted to its
former designs. John Prescott was persuaded by the New Urbanist arguments for design codes, including the usually rather historical designs
that went with them, as promoted in the usa by the Congress for New
Urbanism and in Britain by the Princes Foundation for the Built
Environment. This was a recognition that most modern architects who
had offered sample schemes for new house types failed to understand
the emotional needs of the market, which would tolerate modern
architecture in places of work and entertainment, but not necessarily
in homes. Various television programmes have attempted to show
Modernism in the Netherlands as an alternative, so far without much
effect.41 Towards a Strong Urban Renaissance cited the Millennium Village
on the Greenwich Peninsula (still a slightly forlorn and isolated group of
dwellings, partly by Ralph Erskine, who resigned in protest at alterations
to his scheme), and partly by a young practice, Proctor Matthews, who
developed a distinctive style to match Erskines, using bright coloured
panels like medieval heraldry. In Manchester, the development company
Urban Splash, set up in 1993, pioneered inner-city loft living in converted
historic buildings, a phenomenon previously restricted to London, and
by 2000 was spreading its inuence to other cities. Also mentioned were
many visionary Peabody housing projects in London. These were largely the initiative of Dickon Robinson as Director of Development, who
commissioned the partially prefabricated housing at Murray Grove,
Islington (1999), by Cartwright Pickard, in an attempt to overcome the
construction-time over-runs of conventional building methods. It was
completed in 27 weeks, although the cost overran by 15 per cent. The
result was elegant enough, in the new metropolitan manner, and others
followed, such as Raines Court by Allford, Hall, Monaghan Morris. These
changes were in line with the recommendations of the Construction
Task Force (the Egan Report) of 1999, which returned to the issues of
1900 about inefciency throughout the industry as a factor in rising
construction costs. Architects were alarmed at the possibility of being
left out of the building process, but also looked forward to a phase of
mass customization akin to the direction taken by the car industry, in
which design ingenuity and individual difference could exist within an
overall streamlining of production.
Peabodys most radical scheme was Bedzed Beddington Zero
(Fossil) Energy Development (2002) at Beddington, Surrey, by the
architect Bill Dunster, who had left Michael Hopkins after contributing
to the pioneering energy-saving Nottingham Trent University Campus
and Portcullis House. At Bedzed, Dunster worked with the consultancy
240
Bioregional to create a model of sustainable development not only in the

sourcing and use of materials, but also with the minimum of energy in
use. The greatest novelty was to design in ways by which residents could
live more rewarding and simultaneously less wasteful lives than they
could expect in the conventional three-storey ats built alongside the
Bedzed site. The result attracted much interest and some controversy.
Not without teething problems, it remains the major demonstration site
of its kind, when its example could well have been developed elsewhere.
In a text reviewing British architecture from the 1950s to 2004, Peter
Buchanan commented:
Bedzed is both high-density housing and a business park. For
those who use all the facilities it offers, it achieves the feat of allowing a western European lifestyle within the ecological footprint
the earth can support (which is less than a quarter of the average
Londoners footprint) . . . [W]e need a new vision of creativity,
Bill Dunster
Architects, BedZED,
Hackbridge, Surrey,
19992001.
242
FAT (Fashion
Architecture Taste),
Islington Square new
housing, New Islington,
Manchester, 2006.
not as competitive ego-expression, but (recapturing some of the

humility of the fties) as collaborating in the owering of all
forms of evolution natural, historical and personal.42
This is a different way of stating the ethical theme to that of Caruso
St John and their fellow new materialists, yet similarly reminiscent of
Arts and Crafts ideals of the everyday and anonymous. It is a condition
that many architects currently practising in Britain may suppose they
have attained, arriving at a degree of consensus without conformity
that would have been unimaginable fteen years ago. In 2006, however, the press welcomed a return to Postmodernism in the form of the
Woodward Place housing in Manchester by fat (Fashion Architecture
Taste), a scheme quite unlike the solemn approach of most housing
architecture. These were the architects preferred by the local population,
Proctor and
Matthews, consultation meeting with
local residents, Dale
Mill, Rochdale,
Lancashire, 2005.
who were going to be re-housed by the

Manchester Methodist Housing Group
within the New Islington development by
Urban Splash. The houses followed traditional plan models, but with a more exible set of potential future uses. Externally,
they had cut-out shapes on their gables, little balconies, all ironic enough not to be
mistaken for the Poundbury of the north,
but in reality not far removed in intention.
While demand for housing in the SouthEast drove prices beyond the means of
most rst-time buyers on a single income, declining population and
employment opportunities in many northern cities presented the government with problems in its attempt to equalize opportunities in
British society. Ethnic and religious tensions in many northern cities
led to outbreaks of violence, and in 2002 the odpm launched its
Housing Market Renewal Pathnder Initiative to focus investment on
demolishing houses deemed to be incapable of occupation, and
replacing them with modern housing. This scheme was criticized for
appearing to return to the bad practices of the 1960s, in which lives
were disrupted by planning blight as habitable houses were condemned.
The inequality between the cost of rehabilitation work, which attracts
17.5 per cent vat, and new construction, which is zero-rated, was again
pointed out as a wasteful and illogical discrepancy, but no serious action
was taken to amend it.
Pathnder may falter with Prescotts exit from power in 2006, but
a scheme by Proctor Matthews for a small site, Dale Mill, in Rochdale
indicates the approach taken to
provide a robust and high-quality urban design framework that
balances key issues such as housing density with increased internal space provision and the creation of attractive external spaces
providing clear denitions between public, private and communal space.
Gordon Cullens Townscape theories were cited in the competitionwinning report, indicating that a picturesque approach has enduring
persuasiveness.
There are other circularities and persistent themes apparent here.
Comparing this situation with 1900, the problem of providing adequate
housing in cities, supported by a physical environment and public realm
244
attractive and affordable enough to stabilize populations and draw

investment, remains as far beyond the scope of immediate solution by
architecture and planning professionals as it was then. There are new
energy-based arguments in favour of more concentrated populations,
although the decline of agriculture has created social problems in rural
areas since the late 1990s.
There is a concerted attempt, almost for the rst time in 100 years, to
persuade people in Britain that urban living is preferable, despite the
conviction revealed in a survey in 2002 that 80 per cent of people would
sooner choose to live in a bungalow.
chapter seven
Difference: Local Action and

Global Thought
ODonnell and Tuomey,

Blackwood Golf Club,
Clandeboye, Co. Down,
19924.
Since the 1970s there has been a sense of crisis about what it has meant to
be British, wrote the historian Paul Ward.1 It is now widely understood
that Britain is not a natural nation, but an agglomeration of individual
nations, of which England is the largest and economically most powerful.
The rise of Britain in its nal form has been linked to the imperatives of
imperial expansion, and the decline of Britains status as a world economic and military power since 1945 has in turn been reected in the pressure
to restore greater autonomy to the parts that Ward calls Outer Britain:
Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Each of these has an individual history in relation to England and the construction of the United Kingdom
of Great Britain and Ireland, dating in its most complete form from the
Act of Union with Ireland of 1801 and in its present form from 1922. This
story has become an especially important aspect of the late twentieth and
early twenty-rst centuries, with the European Union diminishing the
economic and legislative hold of the London government. In spite of
globalization and the rise of a multi-cultural society in England, or perhaps because of it, the denition of English identity has become a matter
of widespread discussion, based on anxiety that it might not exist, or that,
once found, would prove unattractive and untted for the modern world.
While national identity has become a positive attribute for architecture in
Outer Britain, for England it remains largely unarticulated, despite a
widespread feeling that it has played a part in the Modern Movement.
Modern architecture is an inherently paradoxical medium through
which to study national identity, since modernity implies a levelling of
cultural differences through technology and the ow of information
and populations. On the other hand, the historian Robin Okey claims
that industrialisation and the emancipation of suppressed ethnic
groups are the twin shaping themes of modern European history, and
far from being antagonistic they have proved largely complementary.2
Not only in architecture, but also in the whole tendency of culture, the
rediscovery of local difference has been a form of resistance to modernization, and also a way of rescuing Modernism from periodic crises of
credibility. The dangers for the creative artist should not be underestimated, yet the poet and painter David Jones was a passionate enquirer
for the spirit of Welshness, while fearing that any attempt to differentiate Welsh culture would be
either a dubious difference, a mere propagandist difference, or
something imposed by purely utilitarian motives, unintegrated
and thin, and, of course, peculiarly loveless, though no doubt of
the highest efciency and the product of considerable combined
intelligence and most careful experimentation.3
The paradox of regional Modernism is that regional authenticity must
be sought in the study of the past. Iorwerth Peates book The Welsh
House (1940) was a major contribution to understanding Welsh vernacular, where, in the words of Greg Stevenson, he proposed, as Finns, Poles
and Hungarians had done for their countries in the 1890s, that Welsh
architecture was in fact the vernacular architecture of Wales, rather than
the architect-designed polite architecture that was largely influenced
from outside.4 We have suffered from a perverted creed of progress and
utilitarianism wrote George Scott-Moncrieff in 1952 of development in
Scotland.5
Is regionalism always and necessarily a conservative tendency, or does
it offer a different and better modernity from which to derive a critical
regionalist architecture? Is regionalism simply another way of saying
provincialism, with its implication of lagging behind the centre and
receiving each phase of Modernism too late? Sometimes this seems to
be the case, but high-end architecture has a long history of mobility.
Buildings in Dublin and Edinburgh at the end of the eighteenth century
were perhaps in advance of London, but maybe the decline of autocratic
patronage created a greater effect of time lag in the twentieth century,
despite improved communications. At the beginning of this book, we
saw how the geographical margins were the earliest places in Britain to
manifest major technological change in building construction around
1900. Aesthetically, a few trend-breakers have occurred in the intervening years, but only Dublin has a consistent record of getting ahead with
buildings such as Busras, the central bus station by Michael Scott
(1956), and later works by his practice. Conversely, there have been times,
such as the late 1930s and the 1970s, when loss of condence in the high
Modernism of the centre gave the periphery the opportunity to become
the avant-garde by offering the return of lost architectural meaning.
Beyond the particularity of a single region, moreover, lies a generic and
transferable sense of identity that has enabled modern architecture to
248
respond to place in a non-literal way and thus resolve the paradox of

backwards and forwards.
Broadly speaking, therefore, the study of regional Modernism includes
the universal and the particular, and neither can be assumed to dominate.
It has been generally agreed that literature and, to a lesser extent,
music have provided the dominant artistic media through which Outer
Britain has debated and celebrated its identity, while the contribution
of architecture has been less clear-cut. Scotland is the exception, for
Scottish architects have achieved international signicance for centuries
while retaining aspects of their national identity, but even well-informed
English people might have difculty in naming a single Welsh or Northern
Irish architect.
The economic realities of the nations within Great Britain during the
twentieth century have contributed to the inequalities. Architectural
development normally arises where the money is, and Scotland, Wales
and Northern Ireland all suffered from having grown in the nineteenth
century on a relatively narrow base of heavy industry. Their rural areas
remained much less developed than in England during this time. The
sharp decline of their traditional industries after the First World War
led to crises of unemployment and emigration in the 1930s. Architecturally, Scotland, the largest of the three countries, suffered least. Its
architectural culture was institutionally strong, with two schools of architecture in both Glasgow and Edinburgh, and further schools in Dundee
and Aberdeen, all founded before 1914. The Welsh School of Architecture
in Cardiff was founded in 1923, and the Department of Architecture at
Queens University, Belfast, only in 1965, prior to which many Ulster
architects trained at Liverpool.
In political history, each country has had a different relationship to
England. Wales has the longest history of political union, dating from
1536, and entered the modern world (in its widest sense) without separate
laws or institutions. On the other hand, the Welsh language survived as a
spoken vernacular far more widely than Gaelic in Scotland, becoming the
chief symbol of separate identity, together with sporting and musical
activities; and Nonconformist worship, evidenced by the number of large
chapels in Welsh towns and villages, may have inuenced the priority
given in the culture to music and the word. Separate legal and educational systems in Scotland have provided a basis for difference from England
since the formal Union of 1707, and language mostly in respect of dialect.
Nationalism in both Scotland and Wales had strong historic links with
religious independence, which in turn gave common cause with the
labour movement, all associated with the perception that religious, political and capitalist oppression had their origin in the London parliament,
where Liberal and later Labour governments depended on the support of

Scottish and Welsh mps. The landed and governing classes in each country, both indigenous and immigrant, were anglicized in speech, religion
and career opportunities, but were in some cases stronger advocates for
their countries of origin than the local population.
Ireland was placed under the English crown in 1542, but the north
resisted English rule until a programme of devastation was followed by
colonial plantation in 1607, resulting in the establishment of a
Protestant loyalist population locally that held economic and political
advantage and was anxious not to be cast adrift from London. Following
decades of agitation for Irish Home Rule, culminating in the Easter
Rising in Dublin of 1916 and the military conicts of the immediate
post-war years, the southern and greater part of Ireland achieved independence by a series of steps, leaving the six counties of Ulster with
their dominant Protestant population hardened by conict and resistance, as part of the reduced United Kingdom in 1920, possessed, unlike
Wales or Scotland, of its own parliament. Northern Ireland not surprisingly looked more to England for its culture, architecture included, than
to Dublin, where the vigour of the Georgian and Victorian local school
was in abeyance. The principal building of Belfast at the start of the new
century, the City Hall, was won in competition by Alfred Brumwell
Thomas, a London architect, in 1896, and completed ten years later. The
commission to create buildings for a new parliament at Stormont went
to a Liverpool architect, Arnold Thornley, in the competition of 1923, in
what was seen at the time as the international style of Franco-American
classicism, in white Portland stone. In this it resembled the local government and national cultural buildings in Cathays Park, Cardiff, from 1897
onwards, the rst of which to be the work of Welsh-based architects was
the Cardiff Technical College in 1912 by Ivor Jones and Percy Thomas.
This was the beginning of Thomass career as the principal architect in
Wales, whose inuence extended to London and the riba presidency.
The practice continued after his death in 1969, making a shift into
Modernism after the Second World War.
Neither of these commissions stimulated any debate about appropriateness of style, as did the design of Imperial Delhi by Sir Edwin
Lutyens in 1910. Although Charles Rennie Mackintosh showed how
Scottish building styles could be abstracted to make antecedents for
Modernism, and although a self-conscious adoption of regional styles
formed a basis for Scottish architecture for more than 100 years prior to
1900, they would have seemed a retrograde step for any major institutional building. In the early years of the twentieth century, Sir Robert
Lorimer, a more conservative adapter of national tradition, was the
250
dominant inuence rather than Mackintosh, but his inuence waned

with the onset of Modernism. The competition for St Andrews House,
Edinburgh, the northern headquarters of the London-based Scottish
Ofce, was a marker in replacing any outmoded call for a literal
Scottish style with the idea, after three years of lobbying against a proposal by the London-based government architect, that, regardless of
style, the competition in 1933 should be open only to Scottish architects,
who were presumed to be able to capture the essence of Scottishness as
nobody else could. In the House of Commons, the popular writer John
Buchan warned: we are in danger very soon of reaching the point
where Scotland will have nothing distinctive to show the world.6 The
competition winner was Thomas Tait of Burnet, Tait and Lorne, with
impeccably Scottish credentials and an Edinburgh ofce, although the
rm worked internationally and in a range of styles. While Taits design
has much to commend it, nothing about it is especially Scottish, and
instead it belongs in the Art Deco style, as widely used after 1930 for
entertainment and leisure buildings. Even the National Library of
Scotland (193455), by the Arts and Crafts church architect Reginald
Fairlie, was reticently stripped classical rather than attempting regional
references.
By the 1930s Mackintosh was invoked as an alternative starting point,
and in 1934 the architect Robert Hurd described a modern Scottish
idiom, which he identied in Mackintosh, believing that freedom of
design is a natural aptitude of a Scottish architect properly founded in
his countrys past architectural achievement.7 The Saltire Society,
founded to encourage and recognize Scottish culture, gave building
awards from 1937 onwards that recognized a quality of straightforwardness rather than either Modernism or a proliferation of crowstep gables
and wrought iron thistles, and it inuenced the revival of non-literal
regionalism after the war.8 The Empire Exhibition at Glasgow in 1938
represented a transition between the stripped classicism of Wembley in
1924 and the levity of the Festival of Britain in 1951. Tait was appointed
as architect-in-chief, and many younger designers were given opportunities, even if under the names of senior gures. The white buildings
were broadly Art Deco, some tending to regional styles, some more modern, within the same range seen at the international exhibition in Paris
in 1937. Spence contributed a model house for the Scottish Council for
Art in a vernacular style, and there was a clachan or traditional village,
reproduced from plaster casts of authentic buildings. Apart from a few
other self-consciously Scottish buildings, the issue of national identity
was secondary to the desire to perform to an international standard. For
J. M. Richards, the exhibition represented a whole-hearted acceptance of
the spectacular as well as of the functional possibilities of the modern

idiom.9
Art Deco was as far as Modernism went in most provincial parts of
the British Isles before 1945. The conviction with which it was handled
was unlike the dilution in the name of good taste that often occurred in
England, and showed how, since the late Victorian period, the greater the
distance from London, the stronger the likelihood of American inuence. Art Deco came via America from Paris, but one of its French masters, Rob Mallet-Stevens, apparently said: If I were God, I should design
like Mackintosh, so that in one sense it was coming home.10 It was the
style of cinemas, where even the unemployed might enjoy warmth and
comfort for a few hours. In Northern Ireland, three local cinema specialists emerged, John McBride Meill, Thomas McLean and Robert Sharpe
Hill, who matched the sophistication of London designers. Their work
has virtually disappeared.11 The north coast of Wales, with its summer
tourist economy, developed some spectacular holiday camps, such as
Pontins, Prestatyn. The local architect S. Colwyn Foulkes built restrained
cinemas in Rhyl, as well as excellent housing. From time to time architects were able to abandon ornament and symmetry, and work in a fully
developed Modern Movement style. The Rothesay Pavilion on the Isle of
Bute by J. and J. A. Carrick (1936), a northern equivalent of the De La
Warr Pavilion in its function and form, with a projecting bow at one end,
is the most notable example. The Strangford Lough Yacht Club (see p. 59)
is a smaller version of the same compositional theme. In Edinburgh, the
St Cuthberts Co-operative Association in Bread Street (1935), by T. P.
J. & J. A. Carrick,
Rothesay Pavilion,
Isle of Bute, Argyll
and Bute, 19368.
252
R. S. Wilshere,
Botanic Primary
School, Agincourt
Avenue, Belfast,
1939.
Marwick & Sons (see p. 46), was exceptional in the whole of Britain as a
glass curtain wall standing forward from a concrete frame (now converted in an appropriately neo-Modernist style into the Point Hotel). At the
Infectious Diseases Hospital, Paisley (19324), Burnet, Tait and Lorne
built their most straightforwardly modern building anywhere to date.
Schools in Scotland responded slowly to changing ideals of education,
spreading in plan and reducing in height, with larger windows.12 In
Northern Ireland, R. S. Wilshere, education architect to the Belfast
Corporation, progressed from neo-Georgian to the large metal-framed
windows in brick walls seen at Botanic Primary School (1939). After the
war, Wilshere was extensively involved in low-rise housing, and built
schools using the Bristol system with prefabricated aluminium section,
produced locally by Shorts Aircraft.
Mackintoshs lead in converting the harled (rough plastered) surfaces
of Scottish houses into abstract forms was followed by William
Kininmonth and Basil Spence in the 1930s, with some inexion from
Continental Modernist models of the 1920s. In Wales, the few white
Modernist works were mainly by English practices, such as a amboyant holiday house in Llandudno by Harry Weedon, the Birmingham
cinema architect, for a Manchester baker. In Penarth, 5 Cliff Parade by
Gordon Grifths (1939) was a local product, like some of the English
Modernist houses that looked to the Regency. In Northern Ireland,
Bendhu, on the edge of the sea in Co. Antrim, a at-roofed concrete
house by Ben Cowser for the artist Newton Penprase (1936), was something of a one-off in its eccentricity.13 In location and pioneering, it
could be paralleled by the rst white modern house south of the border,
Noel Campbell, house

at Brocklamont Park,
Ballymena, Co.
Antrim, 195960.
in a similar seaside location, Geragh, Sandycove, Co. Dublin (19367), by

Irelands leading Modernist, Michael Scott, for himself.
More than for England, the end of the Second World War marked the
effective beginning of Modernism in Outer Britain. Even this was a slow
start, and Robert McKinstry recalled that in the comparatively cosy and
certain little Ulster of the early fties there were, as yet, very few buildings
that could be called modern.14 This situation began to change with
houses and other buildings by younger practitioners such as Henry LynchRobinson and Noel Campbell, whose Dhu Varren at Portrush (19589)
and a house at Brocklamont Park, Ballymena, were outstanding, the former on the edge of the sea, the latter a cool Miesian pavilion enlivened
with sculpture and murals out of doors.15 Campbell never disdained the
decorative aspects of 1950s Modernism, and the same can be said of Max
Clendinning, a Belfast-born and trained architect with a speciality in allwhite interiors in the 1960s, who was involved in the curved timber roof
of Oxford Road Station, Manchester (195660). The most exceptional new
churches in Northern Ireland, almost all Catholic on both sides of the
border, were the work of Liam McCormick, who left Ireland to study in
Liverpool in the 1930s. Between 1947 and his death in 1996, McCormick
built churches of great variety and power. Some show the inuence of
Le Corbusiers Ronchamp rather strongly, but the principles of concealed
254
Liam McCormick,
Our Lady of Lourdes
Church, Steelstown
Road, Londonderry,
Co. Londonderry,
1976.
lighting and sculptural form were generalized, and local materials used to
excellent effect.16
In Scotland, Basil Spence was the only pre-war Edinburgh practitioner
to make a British national reputation, consolidated by his success in the
Coventry Cathedral competition. His small project for Fishermens Housing at Dunbar (194952) was a reversion to his pre-war vernacular, at
which he was very adept. His Edinburgh ofce remained as Basil Spence,
Glover and Ferguson, and was involved in buildings for Edinburgh
University, Glasgow Airport and the notorious Queenies or Hutchesontown c housing in the Gorbals (see pp. 1335). His Mortonhall Crematorium, Edinburgh (1967), was one of the few in the British Isles to aspire
to the architectural dignity of similar buildings in Scandinavia through
a generic white-walled vertical Scottishness. As a church architect,
Spence was rivalled in Scotland by the spectacular run of buildings by
Sir Basil Spence,

Glover and Ferguson,
Mortonhall Crematorium, Edinburgh,
1967.
Isi Metzstein and Andy MacMillan from Gillespie, Kidd and Coia,
although they shared Spences talent for theatrical effects.
Robert Matthew, a contemporary of Spences, returned home to
Edinburgh from the lcc in 1953 and established a large practice, adding an
English dimension through his partnership in 1956 with another ex-public-sector architect, Stirrat Johnson Marshall, although they operated virtually as separate entities. Matthew continued to build the kind of housing
he had admired in Sweden, and encouraged at Alton East individual towers set in a romantic landscape. Spences ability to operate equally on both
sides of the border was matched by Robert Matthew, whose rm grew to
international dimensions. In Edinburgh, the Royal Commonwealth Pool
(1970; project architect John Richards) was a serious building, and Richard
Murphy later commented: In these days of exotic plastic leisure centres,
the dignied restraint of this design is a lasting relief.17 Spences former
256
Peter Womersley,
Group Practice
Consulting Rooms,
Kelso, Roxburghshire,
1967.
associate, William Kininmonth, remained an Edinburgh gure, taking over

the supremely establishment practice of Rowand Anderson and Paul, and
showing a proto-Postmodernist ability to swing in and out of Modernism
at will, including a tough but well-integrated urban inll, the Scottish
Provident Institution Head Ofce in Edinburgh (1968).
An English-born architect, Peter Womersley (19231993), made a
signicant contribution to architecture in Scotland following his rst
and widely publicized house at Farnley Hey in Yorkshire (1954). Without
being connected to any of the networks of the time, Womersley found
his own way to developing architectural forms. Working mostly on his
own, he designed further memorable private houses, but also health
buildings, such as the admired doctors group surgery at Kelso (1967),
one of the few to show any direct Scottish character. In other respects,
his work helps to build up an image of Scotland in the 1960s as a country with good opportunities for patronage and a planning system that
did not get in the way.
In Wales, the Percy Thomas Partnership became the dominant single
ofce in the more populated and prosperous south, with Thomass son
becoming involved with and welcoming the up-to-date contribution of
the Welsh-born Dale Owen on his return from the usa, where he had
worked for Walter Gropius and The Architects Collaborative, in the late
1950s. Owen designed the bbc headquarters in Llandaff (1967), which
has nothing distinctly Welsh about it, but is a bold and clean statement
in the language of strong horizontal banding then in use by the two Basil
Spence ofces in Edinburgh and London. He went on to design the
Great Hall and Bell Tower for University College, Aberystwyth (1970), a
more romantic concept, comparable in grandeur to work by Jrn Utzon.
Northern Ireland depended more on London-based designers to create
some its most modern buildings, such as the Belfast Synagogue of
19614 by Yorke Rosenberg Mardall and their Altnagelvin Hospital
(194960), a twelve-storey slab sited on a hill top, distinguished by works
of art by William Scott and F. E. McMillan, both Ulster artists in origin.
The extension to the Ulster Museum by Francis Pym (196371) was the
sole major work by this London-based architect, who resigned from the
job in 1966, but a very remarkable one, responding to an unnished
inter-war classical building by clasping it in a composition of concrete
planes in relief, planned internally as an upward spiral journey, more
Percy Thomas
Partnership (Dale
Owen), Great Hall and
Bell Tower, University
of Wales College,
Aberystwyth,
Ceredigion, 1970.
258
Francis Pym,
extension to the
Ulster Museum,
Belfast, 196371.
like recent projects by Zaha Hadid than the Guggenheim Museum in

New York with its similar circulation system. There is nothing intrinsically Northern Irish about this, apart from the apparent freedom to
keep in keeping in a non-literal way, which might not have been possible in London, even at this high period of experimental freedom.18 The
construction period ran into the time of The Troubles in Northern
Ireland, when the Catholic minority community began to protest
against their situation, initially in the wake of the Civil Rights movement
in the usa. This interrupted a wave of modernization that was beginning to produce new buildings for new institutions. Since the mid-1960s
the architecture of the province has been irrevocably marked by the
fluctuating but never fully resolved conflict. The new University of
Ulster at Coleraine, founded in 1963 and constructed between 1968 and
1977 to designs by Robert Matthew, Johnson-Marshall, joined the same
rms universities at Stirling, the only completely new campus in
Scotland, and York, a severe design composed mainly of three- and four259 Difference: Local Action and Global Thought
storey blocks with regular window mullions. The new town of

Craigavon, designated in 1965, was built to link existing towns on the
southern edge of the large inland Lough Neagh, but the onset of the
Troubles reduced population growth and left housing uninhabited,
until after 2000, when some parts were redeveloped.
Given the condence in Modernisms international claims, it is not
surprising to nd that the 1960s was the decade in which national differences were least considered. Writing in 1962, Patrick Nuttgens suggested
that, in contrast to the 1930s, the problem of being Scottish, which tangled up a lot of good architects of an earlier generation, has probably
given way to the greater need of being wholly alive and a part of the
world, citing the pithead colliery buildings in Fife by the former
Bauhaus student Egon Riss in the 1950s, the new work of Gillespie, Kidd
Egon Riss, Rothes

Colliery, Kirkcaldy,
Fife, 1957.
260
Graham Brooks,
The Capel House,
Llandaff, Cardiff,
1966.
and Coia, and the effect of Robert Matthew on changing ofcial taste,
becoming the almost automatic choices for universities and hospitals.19
In 1977 Peter Willis praised the recently completed Bridgegate House
and shopping centre in Irvine new town by the Development Corporations architects (1976), which crossed the river previously dividing two
parts of the town. While associating this with American inspiration,
Willis felt that it exemplied the imaginative, not to say spatial aspect of
recent Scottish architecture.20
Private houses were a medium for mildly regionalist experiments, in
the prolic work of rms such as Law & Dunbar-Naismith and Morris
and Steedman. In Wales, Capel House, Llandaff (1966), by Graham
Brooks, is an example of the simple but sensitive work of the period. Ian
Campbells house overlooking Belfast Lough consists of two linked
wings at right angles to each other, each with monopitch roofs, similar
in this respect to Dewi-Prys Thomass Entwood at Birkenhead (1959), a
study in extrapolating from the Welsh vernacular, accidentally situated
across the border in the Wirral.21 In the 1960s and 70s there was a generic regional Modernism that could be found in any of the areas of Outer
Britain and in England as well, thus complicating any claims for its
unique relationship to any single nation or landscape. The similarities

are owed to the generic qualities of upland vernacular in the whole
northern and western areas of the islands, where materials were historically scarce and often limited to hard and intractable stones that
beneted from a whitewashed render coat. As abstract forms, these lent
themselves well to construction with concrete block, and matched
modern needs and sensibilities, with the insertion of larger windows
and split-roof pitches, letting light into the centre of the plan, a device
popularized by a group of houses at Klampenborg, Denmark, by Arne
Jacobsen of 194755.22 Their influence on architects looking for nonliteral ways of interpreting vernacular can be seen in the Fair-a-Far
housing at Cramond, West Lothian, by Philip Cocker and Partners (1973).
In Northern Ireland, high-rise housing was much used as a solution
to slum clearance, and much of it has since been demolished.23 In Wales,
Swansea Council commissioned thirteen tower blocks in 1961, in contrast
to the cottages and low ats that characterized Welsh public housing,
but vandalism and letting difculties followed soon after, and no more
were built.24 Scotland had four new towns, at East Kilbride, Glenrothes,
Irvine and Cumbernauld, all designed for Glasgow overspill, the last
being the only one to achieve widespread architectural fame. In Wales,
Cwmbran, between Newport and Pontypool, was designated in 1947 and
begun in 1952, on a hilly site, with terraces and closes of housing.
As well as welcoming Modernism, Nuttgens believed that the Scots
. . . have not let it arrive without a protest. Or let it in unscathed.25 He
attributed this to the extreme weather, which in turn limited the range
of effective building materials. With Art Deco and classicism dmod,
vernacular provided an alternative that was popular and practical.
Chessels Court (195867), by Robert Hurd and Ian Begg, was an inll
development on the south side of Edinburghs historic Canongate, not
unlike the rebuilding of many bombed historic German city centres. Ian
Nairn recognized the success of Wheeler and Sprowsons more abstracted urban renewal schemes in Kirkcaldy, in which the old rhythms have
been caught and effortlessly translated.26 The Small Houses Scheme
launched in the historic seaside towns of Fife by the National Trust for
Scotland shared the same approach, preserving historic buildings as
cultural yeast for sustaining a community in relatively remote places
and nding modern equivalents to ll the gaps between them. The idea
began before the war, and was carried forward with imagination,
becoming a revolving fund that covered its own costs.27
Arguably, regional consciousness in architecture rose and fell in much
the same cycle during the course of the century in the Cotswolds or
Cornwall as it did in Ceredigion or Caithness, but the dissolution of the
262
Robert Hurd and

Partners, Chessels
Court redevelopment,
Canongate,
Edinburgh, 1957.
Modern Movement at the end of the 1960s coincided with an unprecedented rise in political awareness among the Scots and Welsh. Nationalist
parties came and went before 1970, but the Westminster parliament was
unperturbed by them. By March 1979, however, the situation had changed
to the point where devolution for Scotland and Wales with separate elected assemblies was put to a referendum, although it failed to pass according to the demanding criteria imposed. In both countries, artists of all
kinds felt that they had a role in raising national self-consciousness. In
Cardiff in the 1960s, Dewi-Prys Thomas would show students a slide of
the Acropolis, followed by one of a simple stone barn on a Welsh hillside,
and simply say: look at the stone. As Peter Lord wrote, Dewi-Pryss gift to
his students was to enable many of them to understand this and to sense
the implications for their lives as architects, going on to qualify that sensing the genius loci is about sensing people not about the kitsch manifestation of the new idolatry of the nature.28 Pencadlys Gwynedd, the county
ofces in Caernarfon (198085), was an attempt to create a building that
historically might have been there for the previous two or three centuries,
where in the opinion of many Dewi-Prys failed to avoid the risk of kitsch
in architectural style, although the urban form of the building, in the
historic centre of the town rather than on a green-eld site, was exemplary
Merfyn H. Roberts
and Dewi-Prys
Thomas, Pencadlys
Gwynedd, Caernarfon,
1983.
in matching the progressive spirit of the

time. As Richard Weston has commented,
national expressions are not passed on
in the genes or consciously designed, but
rationalised post facto out of a mass of
conicting evidence.29 In Scotland, Hurds
partner Ian Begg continued the picturesque style of Chessels Court with more
rather than less historical conviction, even
though his Cathedral Visitor Centre in
Glasgow (1990) was known derisively as
Fort Weetabix. Modernism balanced
regionalism in the scales to produce the Plas
Menai outdoor sports centre by Bowen
Dann Davies (197782), not far away from
Pencadlys, which has been considered a
greater success, lying low in the mountainbacked vista across the Menai Straits,
beneath slate roofs, with chunky stone and
timber inside and out, the most persuasive built manifesto of the search for a
Welsh architecture.30 The Ben Lawers
Mountain Visitor Centre, Perthshire (1973), by Moira and Moira, is an
equivalent Scottish building in use and style. In Cardiff, the new buildings
for the Museum of Welsh Life at St Fagans (196881), by Dale Owen, were
more Modernist than vernacular. The Northern Irish equivalent,
Ferguson and Mcilveens Ulster Folk and Transport Museum (1980), tips
the balance the other way.
These examples might give a false impression that Modernism was
always on the back foot after 1970. Some signicant buildings continued
themes from the 1960s, such as the Department of Music at University
College, Cardiff (1970), by Alex Gordon and Partners; the Welsh Industrial
and Maritime Museum, Cardiff (1977), by Burgess and Partners; the
Portadown Technical College, Co. Armagh (1976), by Shanks, Leighton,
Kennedy and FitzGerald; the Dundee Repertory Theatre (1982) by Nicoll
Russell: and the headquarters for Distillers Company, Edinburgh (1984), by
rmjm. These were at the end of their line, however, for when Modernism
returned, the starting point was more self-consciously contextual and
referential. The difference is highlighted by Malcolm Fraser, a leading
Edinburgh architect, recalling the bankruptcy of the discipline under the
burden of its hubris, exemplied in a speech by Robert Matthew in 1977
in which he claimed: there is not a single social or industrial problem of
264
Richard Rogers and

Partners, Inmos
Microprocessor
Factory, Newport,
Gwent, 1982.
importance that can be solved without new

buildings, often on a vast scale.31
The election of the Conservative government in May 1979 led to terminal collapse of the surviving heavy industries,
coal, steel and shipbuilding. By the end of
the 1980s, there were more Welshmen
working in banks than in coal mines, and
such new jobs as existed were found in
new, cleaner technology, often in Japanese
companies. One of these was Inmos Microprocessor, whose factory at Newport was
the rst to make silicon chips in Britain. It
was designed by Richard Rogers in 1982 and
boasted a highly serviced dust-free environment, as well as an eye-catching exterior.
In Scotland, North Sea oil arrived in time
to provide new economic resources, while
Glasgow, described in a book title as the
city that refused to die, began to direct its
regeneration towards conservation rather than blindly destructive redevelopment.32 The marketing campaign Glasgows Miles Better in the
early 1980s branded the city and marketed it for tourism. Mackintosh,
whose buildings the city council had been happy to demolish for years,
became an integral part of the brand. The Cardiff Bay Development
Corporation, established in 1987, presided over a mixture of conversions
and relatively undistinguished new building, until the Welsh capacity for
architectural patronage was tested and found wanting with the Welsh
Opera House competition in 1994, in which Zaha Hadids design was
selected and then discarded in favour of spending money on a new rugby
stadium. Instead of living with the worlds great cities, we had opted for
provincialism, as Stephen Evans wrote.33 Cardiff therefore missed its
opportunity for a Bilbao effect through a single landmark building. In
Edinburgh, the Royal Scottish Museum extension (19918), by Benson
and Forsyth, fullled multiple symbolic purposes, as a building to represent the history of Scotland while explaining it through objects, and as a
demonstration that Modernism was alive despite lack of support from
the Prince of Wales, which temporarily threatened the project. While the
language was Modernist, the meaning was Postmodernist in its layering
of reference and signicance, responding to the sense among architects
that the public would be pacied provided that every gesture carried an
explanation.
Zaha Hadid,
competition design
for the Welsh Opera
House, Cardiff, 1994.
Benson & Forsyth,

extension to the
Scottish National
Museum, Chambers
Street, Edinburgh,
19918.
In an opinion poll of 1992, 50 per cent of Scots favoured independence

for Scotland. Devolution was part of New Labours promise of local
autonomy and the reduction of central power in Tony Blairs election
campaign of 1997, and a new referendum on devolution in September
produced a vote of 74 per cent in favour of a Scottish parliament. A simultaneous referendum in Wales produced a small but sufcient majority in
favour of a Welsh assembly. In both cases, existing historic buildings were
adapted to enable the assemblies to meet, but there was a strong desire for
new buildings to symbolize these historic changes. In both cases, the
process of completing the buildings was far from smooth. Each went far
above its original budget and timescale, attracting predictable criticism.
Neither was designed by an architect with local connections. The Scottish
Parliament, on a site near Holyroodhouse, the historic royal palace in
Edinburgh, was strongly supported by the First Minister, Donald Dewar,
who, like the Catalan architect Enric Miralles, did not live to see it
completed. The choice was appropriate for Scotlands historic links with
mainland Europe and its aspiration to emulate Barcelona in bringing
economic success in the wake of independence, manifested in and generated by popular modern architecture.
Like the Royal Scottish Museum, this design was heavily metaphorical, although never too literal. As Miralles wrote,
The parliament should be able to reect the land which it

represents. The land itself will be a material, a physical
building material. From the outset we have worked with
the intuition that individual identication with land carries
collective consciousness and sentiments.34
EMBT (Enrico Miralles

and Benedetta
Tagliabue) with RMJM,
Scottish Parliament,
Edinburgh,
19992004.
We had lost the intuitive, the letting go, that change of consciousness
that is necessary to rediscover the poetic, wrote Neil Gillespie of the
nished building, Miralles, acting as our shaman, recovers a sense of
place.35 This attention to place was as major a theme for the late
twentieth century as it had been for the late nineteenth, neatly bracketing the international Modern Movement. What had once been the
preoccupation of the sensitive few at the fringes became a mainstream issue not only in architecture but also in the ne arts, lm and
literature.
268
Frank Gehry, Maggies

Centre, Dundee, 2003.
The counter-puritan jollity of the

Parliament and its international star quality
are shared by a contemporary project,
Maggies Centres, a series of cancer-care
buildings devised before her death by
Maggie Keswick Jencks, the wife of the
critic Charles Jencks, whose roots were in
the lowlands of Scotland, as a result of
which the rst examples have been built in
Scotland. Architects have included Frank
Gehry (Dundee, 2003, his rst project in the
British Isles) and Zaha Hadid (Kirkcaldy,
opened 2006), as well as leading Scottish architects such as Richard
Murphy (Edinburgh) and Page & Park (Glasgow). At a time when
healthcare buildings have been sucked backwards into utilitarianism as
a result of the constraints of the Private Finance Initiative (p), these
buildings have shown what can be achieved with a little more cost and
imagination. During the second half of the 1990s, the bounty of the
national lottery was deliberately directed away from south-east England,
and fell on Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland alike, giving the
opportunity for major arts and heritage projects, with special European
funding available in the more remote and underprivileged areas. The
Festival of Architecture in Glasgow in 1999 was a skilfully managed
event, recalling the same citys year as European City of Culture in 1990.
The Scottish Executive issued A Policy on Architecture in Scotland, which
recommended a campaign of public education (similar to cabes in
England), attempting to get beyond the gap dividing a handful of star
buildings and the mass of undistinguished ones.
The relative lack of condence in the transformative capacity of
architecture in Wales in the past has not been entirely lost, although the
past ten years have given a stronger indication than any previous decade
that it might be changing. As well as the loss of the Opera House, a
scheme by David Chippereld for the Mid Wales Arts Centre at Powys
Castle fell apart in 1996 when the local council failed to commit to its
share of funding. The architect commented; The people of Welshpool
are losing out on 8 million of investment into one of the poorest areas
of Europe for the sake of local politics. It is completely irresponsible
behaviour.36 Despite such cold-footedness, the Welsh-based architect
David Lea believed that Waless position might augur well for the future,
through focus not only on local materials as a form of symbolic decoration, but also as part of a sustainable way of living:
our small and energetic population inhabits a magnicent green

landscape capable of providing almost everything required for a
wonderful quality of life: clothing, food, shelter, tools, and energy.
Agenda 21 frameworks arising from the Rio Summit offer the
opportunity to being these resources into a creative relationship.37
Wales is also the home of Christopher Day, an architect known for his
books about building in harmony with nature and human feeling, partly based on the architectural traditions of Rudolf Steiner. Days Steiner
kindergarten at Nant-y-Cwm, near Llancefyn, Dyfed (c. 1990), made the
material aspects of a building inseparable from its intention to create
feeling, and much of the work was done by hand by volunteers.
Days buildings, or Leas usually more conventionally architectural
ones, might seem a paradigm for an architecture in touch with the
Welsh landscape, but their search was far from unique in Europe, and by
the mid-1990s there were examples that combined this impulse with a
recognizable line of modern architecture. In Touchstone, a magazine
whose foundation coincided with the new wave of devolutionary enthusiasm, Adam Voelcker wrote of Peter Zumthors Thermal Baths at Vals
in Switzerland, with its abundant use of local slate, that in future Welsh
buildings might match its level of sophisticated contact with the elements, with maybe some better architects and an improved competition
Christopher Day,
Nant-y-Cwm school,
near Llancefyn,
Dyfed, c. 1990.
270
Richard Rogers
Partnership, The
Welsh Assembly,
Cardiff Bay, 2006.
track record. Yet, as he went on, it would take more to level the national
differences, including a less subservient attitude to safety and the whole
formulaic mentality into which we seem to have become locked.38
The Welsh Assembly building was the subject of a selection process
in 1998 for the same site as the Opera House, facing onto Cardiff Bay.
Compared to Edinburgh, there was a less intense sense of context. It
was won by Richard Rogers Partnership with a scheme similar in some
respects to their Law Courts at Bordeaux and the European Court of
Human Rights at Strasbourg. Some changes came into the design as
security concerns heightened after the attack of 11 September 2001 on
the World Trade Center in New York, so that the idea of transparency,
which is represented in the glass box enclosing the chamber, beneath its
overhanging roof, is not transmitted through the actual way that the
people are allowed to enter the building. The Assembly opened early
in 2006. Welshness was sought through the use of a slate plinth for the
building, while the oak underside of the canopy, rising in the centre to
Capita Percy Thomas

Partnership (Jonathan
Adams), Wales
Millennium Centre,
Cardiff Bay, 2004.
cover the debating chamber in a dome with an air-extract cowl, is the

most visible surface material. While the cost increases, the time delays
and the transfer to a Design and Build contract in 2002 all contributed
to controversy, the general reception of the building was positive.
This cannot be said for the Wales Millennium Centre on the adjoining site, which was a substitute for the cancelled Opera House, offering
a space not only for opera but also musicals and a circus. The designer
was Jonathan Adams of the Percy Thomas Partnership, who was Welsh
by parentage if not upbringing. Here he introduced a symbolic quality
that he felt was lacking from the Assembly. From most angles, bands of
slate forming anking walls are highly visible. From these emerges the
large shell of the auditorium, clad in stainless steel, with a giant inscription cut away to create window openings in the shape of letters. It may
seem like a parody of an icon building, although the foyers inside are
less insistently representational and their undulating balconies are reminiscent of Aalto. Comparing the two buildings, one may feel that
nationalism in architecture has failed to win its case, and may fall out
of favour as fast as it did following the National Romantic phase in
European architecture a century before.
In Northern Ireland, nothing so dramatic has been attempted, wisely
perhaps, given the emotive connotations of nationhood. Instead, there
272
have been a number of projects that have shared in the growing architectural sophistication of the Republic of Ireland, especially following
the economic boom of the Celtic Tiger period in the 1990s. In addition
to the Waterfront Hall (see p. 234), Belfast enjoyed its own Modernist
revival, with buildings such as the Central Fire Station, Bankmore Street
(1991), and the Glenveagh School, Harberton Park (1993), by Kennedy
Fitzgerald and Associates, who were also the designers of the new St
Brigids Roman Catholic Church (19967). Taken together, these
designs cover a similar expressive range to those of Michael Hopkins.
The regeneration of the riverside area where the Waterfront Hall provided the focus has included the high-tech Hamilton Building (19956) by
Christopher Campbell Architects, and the more traditional Clarendon
House (1998), by Knox and Maxwell. The Dublin architects Sheila
ODonnell and John Tuomy designed the Blackwood Golf Club at
Clandeboye, Co. Down (19924), which, in its deliberate breaking down
into parts, reminded Shane OToole of the ancient and sacred acropolis
of Cashel, the seat of kings and bishops for 900 years. In Armagh, often
the site of modern conflict, the architects Glen Howells, based in
Birmingham and London, contributed a new theatre and arts centre,
completed in 2000, which was acclaimed for respecting the civic context and avoiding spurious notions of a regional vernacular, continuing
the austere and colourless classicism of some of its historic neighbours.39
It offered an escape into cosmopolitan sophistication, in this context one
of Modernisms positive assets.
With such generally optimistic reports coming from Outer Britain,
how does England consider itself in relation to possessing a national
Christopher Campbell
Architects, Hamilton
Building, Belfast,
19956.
style of modern architecture? On the one hand, it is usually convenient

for architects to assert their interest in locality, since it has now become
an approved concept in planning regulation. How it is to be achieved is
a less certain matter, beyond the literal replication of materials and
building forms often demanded by planning committees with results
that seldom justify the effort. Since Pevsners The Englishness of English
Art in 1956, no attempt at a general theory of Englishness has been
attempted, and the simplicity of his visually based criteria would probably be deemed supercial if reworked. Pevsner noted the ways in which
English medieval cathedrals differed in plan form and aesthetic intention from French ones, even in a period when architecture and religion
were more international than they have ever been since. He noted a
divorce between structure and ornament and a tendency to achieve
expression through excessive length or height. These characteristics could
be clues to the English problem with Modernism, at least in its guise as
an architecture of structural reason, subordinated and rationalized
ornament, and essentially classical aesthetics of balance, not that modern
architecture in Europe or America has necessarily conformed to these
criteria at all times.
Another long-term trend that is relevant is the way that England
has been a net importer of architectural ideas at almost all times.
Admittedly, its forms of pre-modern timber framing are completely
distinctive, suggesting the possibility of a national style, but in the realm
of polite architecture the trafc across the Channel has been one way.40
This argument has often been used in defence or extenuation of
Modernisms apparent alien invasion in the twentieth century. Thus John
Summerson wrote in 1946:
from time to time, in all the arts, the English have developed an
enormous appetite for foreign inuence; its immediate effect has
sometimes been slightly irrelevant, but it has invariably stimulated
new vitality and creation.41
On the other hand, if one were to accept that the abstract and plain
qualities of Modernism were alien to the national character of design in
England, one would have to exclude the powerful and enduring consequences of the religious Reformation from the Tudor period onwards.
This also was a European movement, originating with Luther in
Germany and Zwingli and Calvin in Switzerland, but it transformed the
look of English and Scottish places of worship. By the time of Oliver
Cromwell in the mid-seventeenth century, almost all signs of sacred
representation had been effaced, and plain white walls were considered
274
the proper and least distracting context in which to x ones attention

on the abstractions of divinity through the ministry of the word. What
David Brett has called The Plain Style, founded on prejudice against the
decorative excesses of the Counter-Reformation in Catholic Europe,
have been the symbols of good citizenship, masculine virtue and moral
integrity ever since, a code shared equally with North America. The history of styles in England partly consists of an ebb and ow between the
plain and the fancy, frequently combined with moral and religious
justications for each position. When King Edward vii, one of the least
overtly moral monarchs in English history, nally succeeded his mother,
Queen Victoria, in 1901, one of his rst actions was nonetheless to paint
the polychrome interiors of Buckingham Palace in white. Thus Modernism arrived in England at a time when plainness was in the ascendancy,
although its revolutionary intentions prevented its rapid or complete
adoption by cautious and conventional people.
These qualities could be linked to the satisfaction felt by English people in denying their intellectualism. Perry Anderson attributes the lack
of systematic thought in the cultural eld to the fact that while mainland
Europe followed Roman law after the Dark Ages, with its basis in principle, English law has been based on precedent. Consequently, European
education was based on abstract reasoning, while English was empirical
and pragmatic, and all our major twentieth-century thinkers have been
migrs.42 By extension, it is not uncommon to claim, as Summerson
did, that in architecture we need a periodic boost of foreign logic along
with the strong coffee to set the sluggish and muddled English mind in
motion. Stefan Collini has recently questioned the truth of anti-intellectualism in England, arguing that our conception of Frenchmen endlessly
discussing philosophy in cafs before declaiming truth from the barricades
is a caricature, as is the comforting sense of isolation adopted by those
in England who identify themselves as a lost tribe of thinkers.43 Despite
the apparent ascendancy of London as a world centre for architecture,
the paradigm of English stupidity is certainly alive in architectural discussion in 2006. Thus David Chippereld, who has largely built overseas,
complains that
the big difference between working in Britain and Europe is that
here, you are not really expected to debate ideas. Money and
marketing are what matters most . . . Original thinking and
debate have been overwhelmed. So we get a lot of slick and often
thoughtless architecture put up at speed. It doesnt matter much
how it works, but how it looks, and whether or not it ts the
latest fashion prole.44
Like Chippereld, and other typical intellectuals in internal exile, Tony

Fretton is homesick for another country, and says that being based in
London
only works if you get on an aeroplane and get out of England
with its nonsensical planning system and lack of architectural
leadership and courage, and the declining intelligence of the
institutions that surround architecture.45
The metaphorical notion that Modernism is a denite destination as
simple to reach as Zurich or Berlin can be comforting, for the complaints about England are not unjustied. Yet its reication in aesthetic
or technical terms has been the cause of previous overreaching and
breakdown. Deborah Saunt, on the other hand, suggests that the oyster
of English Modernism needs the irritant of an adverse culture to produce its pearls, praising Frettons ability to assimilate contradiction
without compromise, and to see that as a creative starting point rather
than as a negative thing.46
Certainly, the route of media promotion by which modern architecture has been restored to public favour, including the Stirling Prize,
lends itself to such shallowness both of input and output, a paradox that
seems to justify the restriction of Modernisms discourse once more to a
smaller circle of initiates, as it has been for most of the twentieth century. Deyan Sudjic, reviewing the rst ten years of the award (19962005),
asked whether it was time to bring back the concept of memory, embodied in Stirlings own work:
it would be encouraging to think that an award could be used to
convey a more complex message than the triumph of spectacle,
and that an architectural prize can still be about more than the
egotistical object or a reward for corporate good manners.47
At the same time, Rem Koolhaas, an outsider who has chosen London as
one of his several bases, believes that England has accidentally got the
right qualities for the time, enjoying a belated owering of Modernism,
and that through this Anglo-Saxon uidity and the fact that the market
has always been a determinant of values here, has been able to manipulate forces in a much more sophisticated manner.48
Saunts view supports the reading of plurality as a constant condition
in English architecture and not necessarily a disadvantage. Plurality
can be a deliberate goal, or an accidental result of failing to reach some
other, more dened position. If, as Koolhaas claims, uidity is an Anglo276
Saxon quality, then it may have found its moment in an age dened by
another immigrant thinker, Zygmunt Bauman, as Liquid Modernity.49
This concept, arising from observation of social and technological trends
in the second modernity, conforms to the broadening sense of the
architects eld of action extending beyond the construction of new
buildings to a more general sense of intervention. There is nothing about
current conditions to suggest that stability, literal or metaphorical, can
be attempted or achieved in the near future.
References
chapter one: Efciency: From Modernity to Modernism
1 Martin Wiener, Between Two Worlds: The Political Thought of Graham Wallas (Oxford,
1971), p. 129.
2 See Tricia Cusack, Mouchel, Louis Gustave, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography
(Oxford, 2004) (with bibliography).
3 As reported in Patricia Cusack, The Reinforced Concrete Specialist in Britain, 190508,
Architectural History, xxix (1986), p. 185.
4 See Alan Powers, Architectural Education in Britain, 18801914, PhD thesis (University of
Cambridge, 1982).
5 See The First Fifty Years: History of the Brixton School of Building, 19041954, London
County Council (1954), and Alan Powers, Professor Pite, in The Golden City: Essays on
the Architecture and Imagination of Beresford Pite, ed. Brian Hanson (London, 1993),
pp. 95103.
6 See Alan Powers, Liverpool and Architectural Education in the Early Twentieth Century,
in Charles Reilly and the Liverpool School of Architecture, 19041933 (Liverpool, 1996), pp.
123, and C. H. Reilly: Regency, Englishness and Modernism, Journal of Architecture, v/1
(Spring 2000), pp. 4764. See also Christopher Crouch, Design Culture in Liverpool,
18801914: The Origins of the Liverpool School of Architecture (Liverpool, 2002), and Peter
Richmond, Marketing Modernisms: The Architecture and Inuence of Charles Reilly
(Liverpool, 2001).
7 Ian Nairn, Nairns London (Harmondsworth, 1968), p. 150.
8 Drapery Times (20 November 1909), quoted in Dan Cruickshank, Reinforcing Classicism,
Architects Journal (12 February 1992), pp. 2234.
9 Ibid., p. 28.
10 John Brodie, Concrete Dwellings, Eldon Street: Report of the City Engineer, 22 April 1905,
Proceedings of Liverpool City Council, 190405, quoted in Richard Moore, An Early System
of Large-Panel Building, riba Journal (September 1969), pp. 3836.
11 Reyner Banham, The Architecture of the Well-Tempered Environment (London, 1969), p. 76.
For better illustrations, see Annette Becker, John Olley and Wilfred Wang, eds, Ireland
(Munich and New York, 1997), pp. 9091.
12 Wyndham Lewis, Blast, i (1913), p. 23; Desmond Mountjoy [Desmond Chapman-Huston],
A Creel of Peat: Stray Stories (London, 1910), p. 5.
13 H. Muthesius, The English House, ed. Dennis Sharp (London, 1979), p. 4.
14 See J. H. Archer, Partnership in Style: Edgar Wood and J. Henry Sellars, exh. cat.,
Manchester City Art Gallery (Manchester, 1975).
15 Lawrence Weaver, Smaller Country Houses of Today (London, 1910), pp. 2027.
16 Wagners address is printed in the volume of Transactions published by the riba in 1908,
pp. 10911.
17 For a comprehensive account of Burnets career, see http://www.codexgeo.co.uk/dsa/
architect_full.php?id=M001684.
18 See Alan Powers, Angleterre, in Encyclopdie Perret, ed. Jean-Louis Cohen, Joseph Abram
and Guy Lambert (Paris, 2002), pp. 37072.
278
19 Beresford Pite, C.F.A. Voysey and Reginald Blomeld, LArt Nouveau: What It Is and What
Is Thought of It, Magazine of Art (1903), p. 169.
20 Nikolaus Pevsner and Enid Radcliffe, Randall Wells, Architectural Review, cxxxvi
(November 1964), pp. 36770.
21 Engineering and Architecture, Builder, cxi (1931), p. 54.
22 Roger Fry, Architectural Heresies of a Painter (London, 1921), p. 9.
23 A. Trystan Edwards, Good and Bad Manners in Architecture (London, 1924); Howard
Robertson, The Principles of Architectural Composition (London, 1924); Clough WilliamsEllis and Amabel Williams-Ellis, The Pleasures of Architecture (London, 1924).
24 This account relies heavily on Mark Swenarton, Homes for Heroes (London, 1981).
25 Wyndham Lewis, The Caliphs Design (London, 1914), subtitle to book.
26 Colin Davies, The Prefabricated Home: A Non-Architectural History (London, 2005), p. 60.
27 Thomas Jones, Whitehall Diary, ed. Keith Middlemas (Oxford, 1969), vol.1, p. 229 (9
February 1923).
28 Ibid.
29 See David J. Blake, Window Vision (Braintree, 1989), and Hentie Louw, Crittall, Francis
Henry, in Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford, 2004).
30 Henry-Russell Hitchcock, Foreign Periodicals, Architectural Record, lxiii (1929), p. 598.
31 Quoted in Christian Barman, The Man Who Built London Transport (Newton Abbott,
1979).
32 See Alan Powers, Britain and the Bauhaus, Apollo (May 2006), pp. 4854.
33 Basil Ward, Connell, Ward and Lucas, in Planning and Architecture, ed. Dennis Sharp
(London, 1967), p. 80.
34 Connell Ward and Lucas a note by Peter Smithson, Architectural Association Journal
(December 1956), p. 138.
35 Lubetkin, Samizdat (unpublished memoir), quoted in John Allan, Berthold Lubetkin:
Architecture and the Tradition of Progress (London, 1992), p. 99.
36 Dmitri Mirsky, The Intelligentsia of Great Britain (London 1935), p. 39.
37 Herbert Read, The City of Tomorrow, The Listener (18 February 1931), p. 273.
38 Maxwell Fry, Autobiographical Sketches (London, 1975), p. 136.
39 The Times (11 March 1935), p. 8.
40 See R.A.H. Livett, Housing in an Industrial City (extract from a paper read at
the Architectural Association), Architect and Building News, cliv (6 May 1938),
pp. 16061.
41 Adrian Forty, Words and Buildings (London, 2000), pp. 18087. See also Tim Benton,
The Myth of Function, in Modernism in Design, ed. Paul Greenhalgh (London, 1990),
pp. 4153. See also Stanford Anderson, The Fiction of Function, Assemblage, 2 (February
1987), and Alan Colquhoun, Introduction: Modern Architecture and Historicity, in Essays
in Architectural Criticism (Cambridge, ma, and London, 1982), p. 12.
42 Aldous Huxley, Notes on Decoration, The Studio, c (1930), p. 242.
43 Homes of Tomorrow, The Listener (11 October 1933), p. 528. The second passage is a
quotation from the Arts and Crafts architect and Social Credit enthusiast, A. J. Penty.
44 Nikolaus Pevsner, Pioneers of Modern Design from William Morris to Walter Gropius
(London, 1936), p. 207.
45 Charles McKean, The Scottish Thirties: An Architectural Introduction (Edinburgh, 1987),
p. 100.
46 See Bob Jarvis, The Enigma of Dunston b, Thirties Society Journal, ii (1982), pp. 315.
The building was demolished c. 1985.
47 Mars versus Jupiter, Landscape and Garden, v (1938), p. 53.
48 Hugh Casson, Homes by the Million: An Account of the Housing Achievement in the usa,
19401945 (Harmondsworth, 1946).
49 Davies, The Prefabricated Home, p. 61.
279 References
chapter two: Compassion: Modern Architecture Builds the Just City

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
280
Louis MacNeice, Autumn Journal (London, 1939), p. 95.

Lewis Mumford, Technics and Civilisation (London, 1934), pp. 4334.
Lewis Mumford, The Culture of Cities (London, 1938), p. 495.
See Irene Barclay, People Need Roots: The Story of the St Pancras Housing Association
(London, 1976).
Russia, busy with essential services, has postponed her architectural development and
meanwhile must rely on the only skilled architects she possesses the academicians of the
old regime was Herbert Reads interpretation of the situation: The International Style,
The Listener (22 May 1935), p. 867.
John Summerson, Bread and Butter and Architecture, Horizon, vi (October 1942), p. 234.
Quoted from Emma Goldman, in A Laboratory of Anarchy, Anarchy, 60 (February 1966),
p. 56.
Quoted in Colin Ward, Peckham Recollected, Anarchy, 60 (February 1966), p. 54.
The yha was founded in 1930 with funds from the Carnegie United Kingdom Trust. The
earliest buildings were conversions. The Holmbury Hostel stands at the edge of a large
tract of publicly accessible woodland, given in trust in 1928. Lobbs contribution included
a neo-vernacular hostel at Ewhurst, Surrey, in 1936.
Editorial, Trends in Design, i/2 (Summer 1936), p. 69.
Miners Welfare Fund Annual Reports, 192126, vol. i, rst report, p. 6, cited in Cheryl
Buckley, Miners Welfare, Architects Journal (13 June 1984), pp. 4859.
Nikolaus Pevsner, The Modern Movement, unpublished ms in the Getty Archive, Santa
Monica, ca; published in Twentieth Century Architecture, 8: British Modern (London,
2006).
Summerson, Bread and Butter and Architecture, p. 242.
Tim Bennett, The Contribution of the Thirties (review of Alfred Roth, The New
Architecture), Architectural Review, lxxxviii (July 1940), p. 30.
See Scoreboard, Architects Journal (25 May 1939), pp. 85162.
See John Betjeman, A Note on Ninian Comper, Architectural Review, lxxxv (February
1939); also contributions by Anthony Symondson and Alan Powers to First and Last Loves:
John Betjeman and Architecture (London, 2006).
John Summerson to Ben Nicholson, 31 December 1940, Tate Archive 8717.1.2.4621.
Alan A. Jackson, Semi-Detached London (London, 1973), Epilogue, pp. 31924.
Quoted in Robert Cowan, Dictionary of Urbanism (Tisbury, 2005), p. 348.
Alison Ravetz, From Working Class Tenement to Modern Flat, in Multi-Storey Living:
The British Working Class Experience, ed. Anthony Sutcliffe (London, 1974), pp. 125.
See the nal chapter of S. E. Rasmussen, London: The Unique City (London, 1937).
Architect and Building News, cxxxviii (22 June 1934), p. 330.
E.g. Loughborough Park, Brixton, by Edward Armstrong, 1938 (Guinness) or Evelyn Court,
Hackney, 1934, by Burnet, Tait and Lorne (4 per cent Industrial Dwellings Company).
Elizabeth Denby, Kensal House and Urban Village, in Flats, Municipal and Private
Enterprise (London, 1938), pp. 614.
The Housing Centre, New Homes for Old, cited in Darling note 67.
See Elizabeth A. Darling, To Induce Humanitarian Sentiments in Prurient Londoners:
The Propaganda Activities of Londons Voluntary Housing Associations in the Inter-War
Period, London Journal, xxvii/1 (2002), pp. 4262.
Rehousing, abstract of paper read before the riba on 16 November 1936 by Elizabeth
Denby on Rehousing from the Slum-Dwellers Point of View, Architect and Building
News, cxlviii (20 November 1936), pp. 234.
Elizabeth Denby, Europe Rehoused, (London, 1938), p. 275.
F. Yerbury, A Housing Survey, Architectural Review, lxxxiii (June 1938),
pp. 3034.
See Romy Golan, Modernity and Nostalgia: Art and Politics in France Between the Wars
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
(London and New Haven, 1995). There is as yet no international survey of this phenomenon, although a wider range of countries is explored on these lines in Jean-Louis Cohen,
ed., Annes 30: larchitecture et les arts de lespace entre industrie et nostalgie (Paris, 1997).
Marcel Breuer, Where Do We Stand?, Architectural Review, lxxvii (April 1935), pp. 1336.
Maxwell Fry, The Architects Dilemma i, The Listener (17 February 1955), p. 282.
J. M. Richards, An Introduction to Modern Architecture (Harmondsworth, 1940), pp. 7980.
Brenda Colvin, Land and Landscape (London, 1948), p. 1.
Sonya O. Rose, Which Peoples War? (Oxford, 2003), p. 62.
Ralph Tubbs, Living in Cities (Harmondsworth, 1942), p. 49.
Maxwell Fry, The New Britain Must Be Planned, Picture Post (4 January 1941), p. 19.
Holford to Sir Ralph, 9 December 1942, Holford duplicate book, 1942, University of
Liverpool d.147/P/17/2; quoted in Gordon Cherry and Leith Penny, Holford (London,
1986), p. 95.
See Country and Town: A Summary of the Scott and Uthwatt Reports (Harmondsworth,
1943), p. 82.
Lionel Brett, The New Haussmann, Architectural Review, xciii (January 1943), p. 25.
The lm was The Way We Live, Two Cities Films for the Rank Organisation, 1945. See Alan
Powers, Plymouth: Reconstruction after World War ii, in Out of Ground Zero: Case
Studies in Urban Reinvention, ed. Joan Ockman (Munich and London, 2002),
pp. 98115.
The article, The New Empiricism, Architectural Review, ci (June 1947), pp. 199204, is
unsigned, but attributed by Eric Mumford in The ciam Discourse on Urbanism (2002) to
J. M. Richards.
Herbert Tayler in conversation with Elain Harwood, May 1996, printed in Elain Harwood
and Alan Powers, Tayler and Green, Architects, 19381973: The Spirit of Place in Modern
Housing (London, 1998), p. 66.
J. M. Richards, The Castle on the Ground (London, 1946), p. 82. The book was illustrated by
John Piper. Richards wrote later: The book was scorned by my contemporaries as either
an irrelevant eccentricity or a betrayal of the forward-looking ideals of the Modern
Movement, to which the suburbs were supposed to be an absolute antithesis: Memoirs of
an Unjust Fella (London, 1980), p. 188.
Nikolaus Pevsner, Introduction, The Reith Lectures 1955: The Englishness of English Art
(London, 1955), p. 8. This is the pamphlet intended to provide illustrations for listeners,
rather than the book of the lectures published by the Architectural Press in 1956.
See Alan Powers, The Expression of Levity, in Festival of Britain, ed. Alan Powers and
Elain Harwood (London, 2001), pp. 4856, and the other articles and references therein.
Commentary to Brief City, directed by Jacques Brunius, 1952.
Colin Boyne, The New Towns as Prototypes, The Listener (29 September 1955), p. 502.
John Summerson, Foreword, 4555: Ten Years of British Architecture, exh. cat. (London,
1956), p. 13.
chapter three: Poetics: The Moral Dilemma of Modern Aesthetics

1 John Summerson, Foreword, 4555: Ten Years of British Architecture, exh. cat. (London,
1956).
2 The Vertical City, Observer (17 February 1952).
3 John Allan, Berthold Lubetkin: Architecture and the Tradition of Progress (London, 1992),
pp. 38492.
4 Reyner Banham, Faade, Architectural Review, cxv (November 1954), p. 306.
5 Paul Thompson, Architecture or Social Service? (London, 1963); quoted in William Curtis,
Denys Lasdun (London, 1994), p. 51.
6 H. T. Cadbury-Brown, Goldnger, Architects Journal (31 January 1973), p. 241.
7 Ian Nairn, Modern Buildings in London (London, 1964), p. 47.
281 References
8 Ernesto Rogers, The Tradition of Modern Architecture in Italy, in Italy Builds, ed.
G. E. Kidder-Smith (London, 1955), pp. 11, 13.
9 Reyner Banham, Neo-Liberty: The Italian Retreat from Modern Architecture,
Architectural Review, cxxv (April 1959), pp. 2315.
10 See Sarah Williams Goldhagen, Coda: conceptualising the modern, in Goldhagen and
Legault, eds, Anxious Modernisms: Experimentation in Postwar Architectural Culture
(Cambridge, ma, 2000), pp. 30120.
11 Edward D. Mills, The New Architecture in Britain (London, 1953), p. 207.
12 Nairn, Modern Buildings in London, p. 111. Gatwick was enlarged by the same architects
in successive phases into the 1990s, but although the original structure of 1957 survives,
it no longer reads in any way that corresponds to the original perception.
13 Kenneth Frampton, ad in the 60s: A Memoir, Architectural Design (June 2000), p. 102.
14 Reyner Banham, The Jet Jetty, New Statesman (21 June 1958), p. 804.
15 A. Smithson and P. Smithson, The Charged Void: Architecture (New York, 2001), p. 40.
16 Ibid., p. 41.
17 [Reyner Banham], Design Principles, Architectural Review, cxvi (September 1954), p. 152.
18 Future, Architectural Review, cxv (April 1954), p. 274.
19 Ibid.
20 Although frequently quoted, apparently this saying has no original printed source.
21 Risinghill (in Penton Street) was renamed Elizabeth Garrett Anderson School, having
become notorious for the freedom given to pupils in the early 1960s.
22 Reyner Banham, The Cool Young Men, New Statesman (29 March 1958), p. 404; The New
Brutalism (London, 1966), p. 89.
23 Francesco Tentori, Phoenix Brutalism, Zodiac, 18 (1968), p. 257. Giving a restrictive interpretation of the movement, I shall be inclined from time to time to identify it with
Banham himself or with the two Smithsons. In the conclusion of Banhams book on
New Brutalism, he wrote: for all its brave talk of an ethic, not an aesthetic, Brutalism
never quite broke out of the aesthetic frame of reference (p. 134).
24 Arthur Korn, The Work of James Stirling and James Gowan, Architect and Building News,
ccxv (7 January 1959), p. 8.
25 Mark Girouard, Concluding Address at Royal Gold Medal presentation to James Stirling,
Architectural Design (JulyAugust 1980), p. 13.
26 James Gowan, Curriculum, Architectural Review, cxxvi (December 1959), p. 316.
27 Reyner Banham, The Style for the Job, Listener (14 February 1954), p. 266.
28 Kenneth Frampton, Modern Architecture: A Critical History (London, 1980), p. 265.
29 John Voelcker, Team x, Arena (June 1965), p. 12.
30 Alison Smithson and Peter Smithson, Urban Structuring (London, 1967), pp. 345.
31 Smithson and Smithson, Urban Structuring, p. 34.
32 Reyner Banham, Corbolatry at County Hall, New Society (4 November 1965), p. 26.
33 See Gavin Stamp, McMorran and Whitby: A Progressive Classicism, in Modern Painters, 4
(Winter 1991), pp. 5660, where the Lammas Green Estate, Sydenham Hill (1957), and the
Holloway Estate are illustrated. See also Elain Harwood, England: A Guide to Post-War
Listed Buildings (London, 2000), example 9/26.
34 See Edward Hollamby and David Gregory-Jones, The Structure and Personality of the
lcc Architects Department, Architecture and Building, xxxii (May 1957), pp. 17080.
35 E.g. Backstrm & Reinius, Danviksklippan, Hstholmsvgen, Stockholm, 1943.
36 Nikolaus Pevsner, Roehampton, Architectural Review, cxxvi (July 1959), p. 22. When
Peter Smithson travelled to Sweden in 1946 with Ron Simpson, he was strongly inuenced
by the housing designs of Backstrm and Reinius, which consisted of towers with
cut-off corners, forming part of the range of sources that informed Alton East, as
well as more connected blocks with y-form plans. See Ron Simpson, From the
Beginning, in Architecture Is Not Made with the Brain (London, 2005), pp. 789.
37 Jack Lynn, Park Hill Development, Shefeld, riba Journal (December 1962), p. 447.
38 Ivor Smith, Architects Approach to Architecture, riba Journal (July 1967), p. 274.
282
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
Reyner Banham, The Vertical Community, New Statesman (30 June 1961), p. 1056.
Robert Maxwell, New British Architecture (London, 1972), p. 20.
Robert Maxwell, Rowe, Colin, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford, 2004).
A.J.P. Taylor, Look Back at the Fifties, New Statesman (2 January 1960), pp. 56.
James Stirling, Ronchamp Le Corbusiers Chapel and the Crisis of Rationalism
Architectural Review, vol. 119 (March 1956), pp. 15561.
Voelcker, Team x, Arena /aaj (June 1965), p. 19.
Fred Vanderschmidt, What the English Think of Us, quoted in Harry Hopkins, The New
Look (London, 1963), p. 109.
See F. R. Leavis and Denys Thompson, Culture and Environment (London, 1933); Richard
Hoggart, The Uses of Literacy (London, 1957), and Raymond Williams, Culture and Society,
17801950 (Harmondsworth, 1958).
John McHale, The Expendable Ikon 1, Architectural Design (February 1959), pp. 823, and
(March 1959), pp. 11617.
Architectural Review, cxxi (May 1957), p. 293.
Ibid., p. 297.
Denys Lasdun, An Architects Approach to Architecture, riba Journal (April 1965), p. 184.
Ibid., p. 194; A Sense of Place and Time, Listener (17 February 1966), p. 229.
Louis Kahn, Towards a Plan for Modern Philadelphia, Perspecta, 2 (1953), p. 11.
Reyner Banham, Apropos the Smithsons, New Statesman (8 September 1961), p. 317.
Ibid., p. 318.
Ian Nairn, Nairns London (Harmondsworth, 1968), p. 80.
Peter Blake, The Establishment Strides Again!, Architectural Forum, cxxii (May 1965),
p. 18; Brian Henderson in conversation with the author, 1992; Alvin Boyarsky, The
Architecture of Etcetera, Architectural Design (June 1965), p. 268.
Reyner Banham, The New Brutalism (London, 1966), p. 134.
Peter Smithson, Planning Today, Architectural Design (June 1957), p. 186.
Robin Middleton, The New Brutalism as a Clean and Well-Lighted Place, Architectural
Design (January 1967), pp. 78.
chapter four: Production: White Heat and Burnout

1 H.C.G. Matthew, Macmillan, Harold, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford,
2004).
2 In response to a talk at the riba by Alistair Cooke, riba Journal (July 1961), p. 343.
3 E. W. Cooney, High Flats in Local Authority Housing in England and Wales since 1945,
in Multi-Storey Living: The British Working Class Experience, ed. Anthony Sutcliffe
(London, 1974), p. 151.
4 See Patrick Dunleavy, The Politics of Mass Housing in Britain, 19451975 (Oxford, 1981),
p. 170.
5 riba Journal (MarchApril 1955), p. 201; Herbert Tayler, Flats and Houses, 1958: A Critical
Review, Architect and Building News, ccxv (27 May 1959), pp. 6938.
6 Fred Berry, Housing: The Great British Failure (London, 1974), p. 53.
7 Ibid., p. 57. The Twilight Zone was the title of an American tv science-ction series of
195964.
8 Miles Glendinning, ed., Rebuilding Scotland (East Linton, 1997), p. 107.
9 Charles Robertson, in Rebuilding Scotland, p. 101.
10 Bridget Cherry and Nikolaus Pevsner, The Buildings of England: London 2: South (London,
1983), p. 595.
11 A. W. Davey, Architectural Design (July 1959), p. 282.
12 Colin Amery and Lance Wright, Foreword: Lifting the Witchs Curse, in The Architecture
of Darbourne & Darke (London, 1977).
13 Quoted in Elain Harwood, England: A Guide to Post-War Listed Buildings (London, 2003),
283 References
p. 312.
14 See Reyner Banham, Megastructure: Urban Futures of the Recent Past (London, 1976).
15 Nicholas Taylor, The Failure of Housing, Architectural Review, cxlii (November 1967),
pp. 341, 359.
16 J. M. Richards, Rebuilding the City: The City of London on the Brink of Disaster,
Architectural Review, cxv (June 1954), pp. 37986.
17 Ian Nairn, Modern Buildings in London (London, 1964), p. 20.
18 Oliver Marriott, The Property Boom (London, 1967), p. 44.
19 See John Smith, Anti-Ugly Action, Architecture and Building (April 1959), pp. 1268;
Ken Baynes, Where Do We Go From Here, Boys?, Architects Journal (21 January 1961),
pp. 1056; Gavin Stamp, Anti-Ugly, Apollo (January 2005), pp. 889.
20 Rodney Gordon, Modern Architecture for the Masses: The Owen Luder Partnership,
196067, Twentieth Century Architecture 6: The Sixties Life, Style, Architecture, ed. Elain
Harwood and Alan Powers (London, 2002), p. 75.
21 Marriott, The Property Boom, p. 140.
22 Ibid., chapter 11.
23 The rfac was founded in 1924 as an advisory body. Following the death of its rst secretary, H. Charlton Bradshaw, in 1946, the position was taken by Godfrey Samuel, a leading
member of the pre-war mars Group. Samuel brought Modernist sympathies to the role,
but the committee was balanced between conservative members, including Sir Albert
Richardson, Raymond Erith and John Betjeman, and, after 1958, an increase in the radical
faction, led by J. M. Richards. The Commission made it known by its actions that it
would tend not to support traditional schemes.
24 Lord Annan, Report of the Disturbances in the University of Essex (Wivenhoe, 1974), p. 32.
25 Stefan Muthesius, The Post-War University (London and New Haven, 2000), p. 181.
26 Lance Wright, Enquiries Welcome, Architectural Review, cxlix (March 1971), p. 161.
27 Leslie Martin, Buildings and Ideas, 193383 (Cambridge, 1983), p. 121.
28 Editorial, Too Big for its Site, Architectural Review, cxlv (February 1974), p. 69.
29 Peter Hall, Great Planning Disasters (London, 1980), p. 152.
30 Alan Bennett, Views, Listener (30 November 1967), p. 692. Commenting on the
proposal drawings, he wrote: How many times in the last ten years has one seen the
same drawing: that spacious sun-baked piazza, the motor-cars tucked vaguely away
somewhere, those ne ourishing trees, those outdoor restaurants, the whole thronged
by Precinct People, a race of tall, long-headed men, Municipal Masai, who lounge about
in every architects drawing in a languor presumably induced by the commodiousness
of their surroundings.
31 Terence Bendixson, Knights in Shining Architecture, Spectator (31 March 1967), p. 374.
32 I. de Wolfe (H. de Cronin Hastings) and Gorden Cullen, Townscape and Townscape
Casebook in Architectural Review (December 1949), pp. 35474.
33 Colin Buchanan, Mixed Blessing: The Motor Car in Britain (London, 1958), p. 99.
34 Sir Colin Anderson (chair), Motorway Signs: Final Report of Advisory Committee on Trafc
Signs for Motorways (London, 1962); Phil Baines, A design (To Sign Roads By), Eye, 34
(Winter 1999), pp. 2636. The Morris Mini Minor and Austin Seven (the same model
under different names) were introduced in 1959. One major innovation was to position
the engine laterally to save length. Edward de Bonos Lateral Thinking was published by
Ward Lock Education in 1970.
35 See Peter J. Larkham and Keith D. Lilley, Planning the City of Tomorrow: British
Reconstruction Planning, 19391952: An Annotated Bibliography (Pickering, 2001).
36 Buchanan, Mixed Blessing, caption to plate xliii.
37 Ian Nairn, Birmingham, Liverpool, Manchester, Architectural Review, clxxxvii (August
1960), p. 111.
38 James P. McCafferty, The Glasgow Inner Ring Road: Past, Present and Future, in
Rebuilding Scotland, ed. Glendinning, p. 77.
39 Glasgow Herald (22 February 1960), quoted in McCafferty, The Glasgow . . . Road.
284
40 Cyril Winskell, Newcastle upon Tyne, 19452003, in Twentieth Century Architecture 7: The
Heroic Period of Conservation, ed. Elain Harwood and Alan Powers (London, 2004).
41 Ibid., p. 102.
42 Ibid., p. 103. This is what actually happened by 2000, as Winskell comments.
43 Trafc in Towns: A Study of the Long Term Problems of Trafc in Urban Areas. Report of the
Steering Group and Working Group Appointed by the Minister of Transport (London, 1963).
44 For a grim appraisal of Cumbernauld, see p. 166.
45 Anonymous, Covent Garden Carve Up, Architectural Design (July 1971), p. 402.
46 In the Architectural Design article cited, p. 404, the community was described as a sort
of Cow Green of social relationships, a reference to an incomparable and unique survival of ora dating back to the Ice Age, which was callously ooded, after a ministerial
enquiry, to provide a reservoir for an ici plant.
47 For a group of papers on these themes, introduced by Royston Landau, see Architectural
Design (October 1972).
48 Martin Pawley, Fifty Years of Phantom Pregnancy, Architectural Design (December 1971).
49 Martin Pawley, Its Alright Ma, Everybody Loves Ya, Architectural Design (November 1970),
p. 585.
50 Martin Pawley, Architecture on tv; or, It Wont Always Be This Easy, Architectural Design
(September 1971), pp. 5723.
chapter ve: Happiness: The Reintegration of Architecture

1 Udo Kultermann, Architecture in the Seventies (London, 1980), p. 1.
2 Books on happiness include Ziyad Marar, The Happiness Paradox (London, 2003), and
Richard Layard, Happiness: Findings from a New Science (London, 2004). In the autumn
of 2005, a television series, Making Slough Happy, was broadcast, based on an attempt to
apply Layards ideas. Alain de Bottons The Architecture of Happiness (London, 2006) uses
the idea of happiness as a way of dening beauty in modern architecture.
3 The calculation has been made by the New Economics Foundation in London.
4 Listener (6 February 1964), p. 224.
5 Peter Smithson, Just a Few Chairs and a House: An Essay on the Eames-Aesthetic,
Architectural Design (September 1966), pp. 4445.
6 A Matter of Taste, Listener (13 October 1966), p. 528. Bruce Archer, Who Prots By
Design?, ibid., pp. 5334, including the conclusion, efcient designing includes proper
respect for popular tastes.
7 Stephen Mullin, Day Tripper: Two Legs Good, Four Wheels Bad, Architectural Design
(September 1968), p. 409.
8 aa Journal (October 1964), p. 63.
9 Theo Crosby, Architecture: City Sense (London, 1967).
10 Royston Landau, A Philosophy of Enabling, Cedric Price: The Square Book (London, 1984).
11 Obituary: Joan Littlewood, The Guardian (23 September 2002).
12 B. N. Lewis, Fun Palace: Counterblast to Boredom, New Society (15 April 1965), p. 8.
13 The Open University did, however, erect its own buildings at Milton Keynes designed by
Jane Drew of Fry, Drew and Partners (1969).
14 Paul Barker, Thinking the Unthinkable, in Non-Plan: Essays on Freedom, Participation and
Change in Modern Architecture and Urbanism, ed. Jonathan Hughes and Simon Sadler
(Oxford, 2000), p. 4.
15 See Simon Sadler, The Brutal Birth of Archigram, in Twentieth Century Architecture 6:
The Sixties Life, Style, Architecture, ed. Elain Harwood and Alan Powers (London, 2002),
pp. 12028.
16 Architects Journal (19 June 1968), p. 1300.
17 Simon Sadler, Archigram: Architecture without Architecture (Cambridge, ma, 2005).
18 Martin Pawley, Miraculous Expanding Tits Versus Lacquered Nipples, Architectural Design
285 References
(February 1972), p. 80.

19 Susan Sontag, Against Interpretation (London, 2001), p. 291.
20 Peter Cook, Arcadia, Architectural Design (April 1971), p. 235. The derogatory comments
on Hoover (designed by Wallis, Gilbert & Partners, 19325) from Nikolaus Pevsners
Middlesex (Harmondsworth, 1951) were probably the only references in print to a building
well known from the roadside view on the A40 Western Avenue.
21 Ibid.
22 Peter Cook, Towards a Quietly Technologised Folk-Suburbia, Architectural Design (April
1972), pp. 2412.
23 Ibid.
24 Robin Middleton, Foreword, in The Idea of the City, ed. Robin Middleton (London and
Cambridge, 1996), p. 7.
25 Bernard Tschumi, City and Void, in The Idea of the City, ed. Middleton, p. 143.
26 George Baird, Meaning in Architecture: An Introduction, Arena/aaj, lxxxiii (June 1967),
p. 7.
27 Charles Jencks, Modern Movements in Architecture (Harmondsworth, 1973), pp. 1112.
28 Charles Jencks, The Language of Post-Modern Architecture (London, 1977), p. 101.
29 The Mark i New Towns were those begun or designated between 1946 and 1950:
Stevenage (1946), Crawley, East Kilbride, Harlow, Hemel Hempstead, Newton Aycliffe,
(1947), Glenrothes, Hateld, Peterlee, Welwyn (1948), Basildon, Bracknell, Cwmbran
(1949), Corby (1950). Mark ii were designated in response to an increasing birth rate
after 1950: Cumbernauld (1955), Skelmersdale (1961), Livingston (1962), Redditch,
Runcorn (1964), Washington (1964), Irvine (1966), Newton (1967). Mark iii New Towns
were created specically to deal with London overspill and larger populations in the
region of 170,000250,000. Peterborough (1967) and Northampton (1968) were enlargements of existing Midland towns. Milton Keynes (1967) incorporated some existing
settlements, but created a new centre and name.
30 John Weeks, Scientic Fitness, Architectural Review, cl (November 1971), p. 264.
31 Robert Maxwell, The Beautiful City, aa Quarterly, vi/34 (1974), p. 12.
32 Peter Aldington was at the Manchester University School of Architecture, where the Head
of School, R. A. Cordingley, was an enthusiast for vernacular, and one of the staff, Ronald
Brunskill, one of the leading experts in the country on such matters. Norman Fosters
student notebooks from the same course show an early understanding of framed and
jointed structures.
33 See Mats Egelius, Ralph Erskine (Stockholm, 1990), p. 136; Peter Colleymore, The
Architecture of Ralph Erskine (London, 1985), p. 1.
34 Martin Richardson, Architectural Design (SeptemberOctober 1977), pp. 71617.
35 Robert Maxwell, The Beautiful City, p. 38 (review rst published in Progressive
Architecture, August 1979).
36 Arthur Edwards, The Design of Suburbia (London, 1981), p. 160.
37 Sutherland Lyall, The State of British Architecture (London, 1980), pp. 7980.
38 Ibid., p. 84. See Paul Ricoeur, Universalisation and National Cultures, in History and Truth
(Evanston, il, 1961), pp. 27683; A. Tzonis, L. Lefaivre and A. Alofsin, Die Frage des
Regionalismus, in Fr eine andere Architektur, ed. N. Andritzky, L. Burchardt and O.
Hoffman (Frankfurt, 1981). Texts by Frampton (1983) and Tzonis and Lefaivre (1991) are
found in Theorizing a New Agenda for Architecture, 19651995, ed. Kate Nesbitt (Princeton,
nj, 1996), and in other collections.
39 Kenneth Frampton, Towards a Critical Regionalism: Six Points for an Architecture of
Resistance, in Hal Foster, ed., The Anti-Aesthetic: Essays on Postmodern Culture (Port
Townsend, wa, 1983).
40 According to Jeremy Dixon, the phrase came from Michael Golds manner of clearing his
throat before speaking.
41 Walter Segal, The Neo-Purist School of Architecture, Architectural Design (June 1972),
pp. 3445.
286
42 Walter Segal, Less Is More, Architects Journal (20 February 1974), p. 371.
43 The Solar House at 14 Beacon Way, Rickmansworth, is described in Architecture and Building News (11 October 1956), pp. 49097. On Wallasey, see Dean Hawkes, Energy Revisit:
Wallasey School, Pioneer of Solar Design, Architects Journal (6 May 1987), pp. 559.
44 An account of the movement in the 1970s is given in Colin Porteous, The New EcoArchitecture: Alternatives from the Modern Movement (London, 2002). Another narrative
with more historical depth is John Farmer, Green Shift: Changing Attitudes in Architecture
to the Natural World (Oxford, 1996; revd edn, 1999).
45 The concept was apparently formulated by the architectural teacher and historian Robert
Macleod in 1971. See Alex Gordon, Architects and Resource Conservation, riba Journal
(January 1974), p. 9.
46 See John Littler and Randall Thomas, Solar Energy Use in the Autarkic House, Martin
Centre for Architectural and Urban Studies: Transactions, ii (1977), pp. 93110.
47 Bryan Appleyard, Richard Rogers: A Biography (London, 1986), p. 126.
chapter six: Conscience: The Architecture of Fruitful Anxiety

1 Eric Lyons, Debate, riba Journal (March 1980), p. 9.
2 Roger Zogolovitch, Developing Talent, Architects Journal (6 March 1985), p. 40.
3 Michael Heseltine, speaking at Financial Times Industrial Architecture Award luncheon
(1980); quoted in Colin Amery, The National Gallery Sainsbury Wing: A Celebration of Art
and Architecture (London, 1991), p. 43.
4 Sense and Sensibility: The Architecture of Romantic Pragmatism was the title of an
article in the Architectural Review, clxxiv (September 1983), by Gillian Darley and Peter
Davey, covering Cullinan, Robert Maguire, Peter Aldington and other architects.
5 Alison Ravetz, letter, Architects Journal (2 April 1980), p. 653.
6 See Chris Holmes, A New Vision for Housing (London, 2006), p. 89.
7 Aids, Education and the Year 2000 (interview with Margaret Thatcher by Douglas Keay),
Womans Own (31 October 1987), pp. 810.
8 See Colin St John Wilson, England Builds, Architectural Reections (Oxford, 1992),
pp. 198203.
9 Wilson, quoted in Michael Stonehouse and Gerhard Stromberg, The British Library at St
Pancras (London, 2004), p. 111.
10 Quoted in Amery, The National Gallery Sainsbury Wing, p. 43.
11 The British Way of Death, Leader, Architects Journal (10 April 1985), p. 15.
12 For example, Peter Smithson, The Viceroys House in New Delhi, riba Journal
(April 1969), pp. 1524.
13 Jonathan Dimbleby, The Prince of Wales (London, 1994), p. 314.
14 The Hampton Court speech and the other principal speeches made by the Prince up to
1988 are printed in full in Charles Jencks, The Prince, the Architects and the New Wave
Monarchy (London, 1988).
15 Lionel Esher drew attention to these in the conclusion of A Broken Wave: The Rebuilding
of England, 19401980 (London, 1981), p. 296.
16 Nick Wates, Co-Op Consolidation, Architectural Review, clxxvii (April 1985), pp. 5760.
17 Dennis Hardy, Poundbury: The Town That Charles Built (London, 2006), p. 37.
18 Terry Farrell, Buildings as Resources, riba Journal (May 1976), p. 172.
19 Jrgen Habermas, Modernity An Incomplete Project, in Postmodern Culture, ed. Hal
Foster (London, 1983), pp. 315.
20 Berthold Lubetkin, Letters, Architects Journal (29 October 1986), p. 22.
21 Richard MacCormac, Introduction, in The Art of the Process (London, 1993), p. 4.
22 Francis Duffy, The Changing Workplace (London, 1992), p. 125 (reprinted from Architects
Journal, 18 November 1981, pp. 9979).
23 Two of the best of Richardsons early City buildings were victims of 1980s redevelopment,
287 References
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
replaced by crude Postmodern monsters: Moorgate Hall, Moorgate, and Leith House,
Gresham Street.
Murray Fraser, review of Zaha Hadid: The Complete Works, Architects Journal (13 January
2005), p. 40.
Donald Schon and Robert Gutman, Architectural Practice: A Critical View (Princeton, nj,
1988).
Michael Spens, ar Critique, 19801995, The Recovery of the Modern (Oxford, 1996), p. 17.
Ibid., p. 23.
The New Spirit, Architectural Review, clxxx (August 1986); reprinted ibid., p. 58.
Quoted in Michael Jenner, New British Architecture in Germany (Munich, 2000), p. 25.
Peter Davey, Regional Meaning, Architectural Review, clxxxiii (May 1988), p. 164.
Tony Fretton: Conversation with David Turnbull (Barcelona, 1995), pp. 89.
Kenneth Frampton, The Lessons of Lisson, aa Files, 23 (1992), p. 23.
Christopher Woodward, A London Practice, in As Built: Caruso St John Architects, ed.
Aurora Fernndez Per (Vitoria-Gasteiz, 2005), p. 7.
See www.screenonline.org.uk/lm/id/497617/index.html (accessed 5 October 2006).
Transcription from videotape; punctuation invented.
Richard Rogers and Philip Gumuchdjian, Cities for a Small Planet (London, 1997), p. 170.
Towards an Urban Renaissance (London, 1999).
Hugh Aldersley Williams, Building on Tradition, New Statesman (3 May 1999); quoted in
Ken Worpole, The Value of Architecture: Design, Economy and the Architectural Imagination
(London, 2000), p. 18.
Ibid., p. 36.
Bennetts Associates: Four Commentaries (London, 2005), p. 40.
For example, Not All Houses Are Square (presenter Charlie Luxton, Channel 4, October
2001) and The Perfect House (presenter Alain de Botton, Channel 4, March 2006).
Peter Buchanan, Now and Then: British Architecture since 1950, av Monographs, 107
(2004), p. 13.
chapter seven: Difference: Local Action and Global Thought

1 Paul Ward, Britishness since 1870 (London, 2004), p. 1.
2 Quoted in John Davies, A History of Wales (London, 1994), p. 418.
3 No surviving copy of the Dewi-Prys Thomas manifesto has been traced. David Jones,
Wales and Visual Form (c. 1944), in The Dying Gaul and Other Writings (London, 1978).
4 Greg Stevenson, Foreword to Iorwerth C. Peate, The Welsh House: A Study in Folk Culture
[1940] (Cribyn, 2004).
5 George Scott-Moncrieff, text for The Little Houses, exh. cat., National Trust touring
exhibition (1952).
6 Quoted in Charles McKean, The Scottish Thirties (Edinburgh, 1987), p. 14.
7 Robert Hurd, Scotlands Mirror, Listener (6 June 1934), p. 948.
8 Colin McWilliam, Scottish Townscape (London, 1975), p. 180.
9 J. M. Richards, Glasgow 1938: A Critical Survey, Architectural Review, lxxxiv (July 1938),
p. 4.
10 Quoted in the entry on Mackintosh by Robert Furneaux Jordan in J. M. Richards, ed.,
Whos Who in Architecture (London, 1977).
11 See Paul Larmour, Cinema Paradiso, Perspective, v/4 and The Big Feature, (March
April 1997), pp. 2637.
12 A selection is illustrated in McKean, The Scottish Thirties, pp. 1245.
13 See Andrew Cowser, Bendhu, Perspective (MayJune 1995), pp. 213.
14 Robert McKinstry, Contemporary Architecture, in Causeway: The Arts in Ulster, ed.
M. Longley (Belfast, 1971), p. 28.
15 See Paul Larmour, Style Master, Perspective (JulyAugust 1997), pp. 1831.
288
16 See Paul Larmour, In the Name of the Father, Perspective (NovemberDecember 1996),
pp. 3043.
17 Peter Murray and Stephen Trombley, eds, Modern British Architecture since 1945 (London,
1984), p. 156.
18 See Paul Clarke, Belfasts Upward Spiral, Perspective (MayJune 2004), pp. 725.
19 Patrick Nuttgens, Scottish Architecture Today, Architectural Design (January 1962), p. 11.
20 Peter Willis, New Architecture in Scotland (London, 1977), p. 14.
21 See House and Garden Book of Modern Houses and Conversions (London, 1966), pp. 1345;
Entwood, Birkenhead (1959), illustrated in Elain Harwood, England: A Guide to Post-War
Listed Buildings (London, 2003), pp. 723.
22 Jacobsens Sholm houses at Klampenborg, Copenhagen (194655), are the model. The
high windows producing the split-roof section were included to catch the setting sun in
what were otherwise east-facing houses.
23 Ian Nairn, The Burghs of Fife, The Listener (12 November 1964), p. 756.
24 See Miles Glendinning and Stefan Muthesisus, Tower Block (New Haven and London,
1994), p. 263.
25 Nuttgens, Scottish Architecture Today, p. 8.
26 Ian Nairn, The Burghs of Fife, Listener (12 November 1964), p. 756.
27 See Diane Watters, Sturdy Homes, Living Homes: The National Trust for Scotlands
Little Houses Improvement Scheme, in Twentieth-Century Architecture 7: The Heroic
Period of Conservation, ed. Alan Powers and Elain Harwood (London, 2004), pp. 11126,
and Diane Watters and Miles Glendinning, Little Houses (Edinburgh, 2006).
28 Peter Lord, The Genius Loci Insulted, in Gwenllian: Essays on Visual Culture (Llandysal,
Dyfed, 1994), pp. 142, 144.
29 Masterwork or Missed Opportunity?, Touchstone, 2 (May 1997), p. 17.
30 Richard Weston, Revisiting Our Roots, Touchstone, 10 (Spring 2002), p. 19.
31 Malcolm Fraser, Architecture and the Wee Blue Ball, in Architecture in Scotland,
20022004, ed. Stuart MacDonald (Glasgow, 2004), p. 27.
32 Michael Keating, The City That Refused To Die. Glasgow: The Politics of Urban Regeneration
(Aberdeen, 1988).
33 Stephen Evans, In Steel and Stone, Planet, 140 (AprilMay 2000), p. 9.
34 Quoted in Deyan Sudjic, The Scottish Parliament, in Architecture in Scotland, p. 9.
35 Neil Gillespie, Seat of Power, Architects Journal (30 September 2004), p. 30.
36 Architects Journal (24 October 1996), p. 9.
37 David Lea, Fake or Real?, Planet, 138 (December 1999January 2000), p. 81.
38 Adam Voelcker, Could This Be Wales?, Touchstone, 4 (April 1998), pp. 256.
39 Peter Fawcett, Master of Arts, Architects Journal (22 June 2000) , p. 34.
40 The unique features of timber framing in the British Isles are the unequal spacing of the
principal trusses and bays, the distinction between the upper and lower face of the truss,
and the tie beam lap dovetail assembly of the truss. See Richard Harris, Discovering Timber
Framed Buildings (Princes Risborough, 1997).
41 John Summerson, Architecture in England (London, 1946), p. 20.
42 Perry Anderson, Components of the National Culture (1968), in English Questions
(London, 1992).
43 Stefan Collini, Absent Minds: Intellectuals in Britain (Oxford, 2006).
44 David Chippereld quoted by Jonathan Glancey, The Guardian Culture (21 November
2005), p. 19.
45 Icon, 28 (October 2005), p. 163.
46 Ibid., p. 139.
47 Deyan Sudjic, The Stirling Prize 2005, in The Stirling Prize: Ten Years of Architecture and
Innovation, ed. Tony Chapman (London, 2006), p. 216.
48 Icon, p. 169.
49 Zygmunt Bauman, Liquid Modernity (Cambridge, 2000).
289 References
Select Bibliography
Allan, John, Berthold Lubetkin: Architecture and the Tradition of Progress (London, 1992)
, Berthold Lubetkin (London, 2002)
Amery, Colin, The National Gallery Sainsbury Wing: A Celebration of Art and Architecture
(London, 1991)
Anderson, Perry, English Questions (London, 1992)
Archer, J. H., Partnership in Style: Edgar Wood and J. Henry Sellars (Manchester, 1975)
Arnell, Peter, and Ted Bickford, eds, James Stirling: Buildings and Projects (London, 1984)
Arts Council of Great Britain, 4555: Ten Years of British Architecture (London, 1955)
, Thirties (London, 1979)
As Built: Caruso St John Architects (Vitoria-Gasteiz, 2005)
Auden, W. H., The English Auden: Poems, Essays and Dramatic Writings, 19271939 (London,
1977)
Barclay, Irene, People Need Roots: The Story of the St Pancras Housing Association (London,
1976)
Bauman, Zygmunt, Liquid Modernity (Cambridge, 2000)
Bertram, Anthony, The House: A Machine for Living In (London, 1935)
, Design (Harmondsworth, 1938)
Banham, Reyner, The New Brutalism: Ethic or Aesthetic? (London, 1966)
, Megastructure: Urban Futures of the Recent Past (London, 1976)
, Design by Choice (London, 1981)
, A Critic Writes (London, 1996)
Barker, Paul, ed., Arts in Society (London, 1977)
Barman, Christian, The Man Who Built the London Transport (Newton Abbot, 1979)
Berry, Fred, Housing: The Great British Failure (London, 1974)
Blake, David, Window Vision (Braintree, 1989)
Blomeld, Reginald, Modernismus: A Study (London, 1934)
Booker, Christopher, The Neophiliacs: A Study of the Revolution in English Life in the Fifties and
Sixties (London, 1969)
Brett, David, The Plain Style (Cambridge, 2004)
British Architecture Today: Six Protagonists (Milan, 1992)
Buchanan, Colin, Mixed Blessing: The Motor Car in Britain (London, 1958)
Bullivant, Lucy, Anglo-Files: uk Architectures Rising Generation (London, 2005)
Bullock, Nicholas, Building the Post-War World: Modern Architecture and Reconstruction in
Britain (London, 2002)
Calabi, Donatella, ed., Architettura domestica in Gran Bretagna, 18901939 (Milan, 1982)
Campbell, Louise, Coventry Cathedral: Art and Architecture in Post-War Britain (Oxford, 1996)
Cantacuzino, Sherban, Wells Coates (London, 1978)
Casson, Hugh, New Sights of London (London, 1938)
Chapman, Tony, ed., The Stirling Prize: Ten Years of Architecture and Innovation (London,
2006)
Cherry, Gordon, and Penny Leith, Holford: A Study in Architecture, Planning and Civic Design
(London, 1986)
Cherry, Monica, Building Wales (Cardiff, 2005)
290
Chippereld, David, David Chippereld: Architectural Works, 19902002 (New York, 2003)
Colleymore, Peter, The Architecture of Ralph Erskine (London, 1985)
Collini, Stefan, Absent Minds: Intellectuals in Britain (London, 2006)
Colquhoun, Alan, Essays in Architectural Criticism (Cambridge, ma, and London, 1982)
Colvin, Brenda, Land and Landscape (London, 1948)
Cottam, David, Sir Owen Williams, 18901966 (London, 1986)
Country and Town: A Summary of the Scott and Uthwatt Reports (Harmondsworth, 1943)
Crosby, Theo, Architecture: City Sense (London, 1965)
, Playing the Environment Game (Harmondsworth, 1973)
Curtis, William, Denys Lasdun (London, 1994)
, Modern Architecture since 1900 (London, 1982, with subsequent revisions)
Dannatt, Trevor, Modern Architecture in Britain (London, 1959)
Darling, Elizabeth, Re-forming Britain: Narratives of Modernity before Reconstruction (London,
2006)
Davies, Colin, High Tech Architecture (London, 1988)
, Michael Hopkins, 2 vols (London, 19932001)
, The Prefabricated Home (London, 2005)
Dean, David, The Thirties: Recalling the English Architectural Scene (London, 1983)
Denby, Elizabeth, Europe Re-Housed (London, 1938)
Drew, Philip, The Third Generation: The Changing Meaning of Architecture (London, 1972)
Duffy, Francis, The Changing Workplace (London, 1992)
Duncan, R. A., The Architecture of a New Era: Revolution in the World of Appearance (London,
1933)
Dunleavy, Patrick, The Politics of Mass Housing in Britain, 19451975 (Oxford, 1981)
Dunnett, James, and Gavin Stamp, eds, Ern Goldnger (London, 1983)
Dunster, Bill, From A to Zed: Realising Zero (Fossil) Energy Developments (Wallington, 2003)
Edwards, Brian, Basil Spence, 19071976 (Edinburgh, 1995)
Egelius, Mats, Ralph Erskine (Stockholm, 1990)
Elwall, Robert, Building a Better Tomorrow: Architecture of the 1950s (Chichester, 2000)
, Ern Goldnger (London, 1996)
Esher, Lionel, A Broken Wave: The Rebuilding of England, 19401980 (London, 1981)
Farmer, John, Green Shift: Changing Attitudes in Architecture to the Natural World (Oxford,
1996)
Fairbrother, Nan, New Lives, New Landscapes (London, 1970)
Flats, Municipal and Private Enterprise (London, 1938)
Ford, Boris, ed., The Cambridge Guide to the Arts in Britain, vols 8 and 9 (Cambridge, 1989)
Forty, Adrian, Objects of Desire (London, 1986)
, Words and Buildings (London, 2000)
Frampton, Kenneth, Modern Architecture: A Critical History (London, 1980)
, Labour, Work and Architecture (London, 2002)
Fry, Maxwell, Fine Building (London, 1944)
, Autobiographical Sketches (London, 1975)
Fry, Roger, Architectural Heresies of a Painter (London, 1921)
Girouard, Mark, Big Jim: The Life and Work of James Stirling (London, 1998)
Glancey, Jonathan, New British Architecture (London, 1989)
Glendinning, Miles, ed., Rebuilding Scotland: Post-War Vision, 19451975 (East Linton, 1997)
, and Stefan Muthesius, Tower Block (London, 1994)
Gloag, John, ed., Design in Modern Life (London, 1934)
Gold, John, The Experience of Modernism: Modern Architects and the Future City, 19281953
(London, 1997)
Goldhagen, Sarah Williams, and Rjean Legault, Anxious Modernisms: Experimentation in
Postwar Architectural Culture (Montreal and Cambridge, ma, 2000)
Goodhart-Rendel, H. S., English Architecture since the Regency: An Interpretation (London,
1953)
2 9 1 S e l e c t B i b l i o g ra p h y
Gould, Jeremy, Modern Houses in Britain, 19191939 (London, 1977)

Hall, Peter, Urban and Regional Planning (Harmondsworth, 1975)
, Great Planning Disasters (London, 1980)
Hardy, Dennis, Poundbury: The Town That Charles Built (London, 2006)
Harwood, Elain, England: A Guide to Post-War Listed Buildings (London, 2003)
, and Alan Powers, Tayler and Green, Architects, 19381973: The Spirit of Place in Modern
Housing (London, 1998)
Higgott, Andrew, Mediating Modernism: Architectural Cultures in Britain (London, 2006)
Hitchcock, Henry-Russell, Modern Architecture in England (New York, 1937)
Holmes, Chris, A New Vision for Housing (London, 2006)
Hughes, Jonathan, and Simon Sadler eds, Non-Plan: Essays on Freedom, Participation and
Change in Modern Architecture and Planning (London, 2000)
Jackson, Anthony, The Politics of Architecture: A History of Modern Architecture in Britain
(London, 1970)
Jacobs, Jane, The Death and Life of Great American Cities (London, 1962)
Jencks, Charles, Modern Movements in Architecture (Harmondsworth, 1973)
, The Language of Post-Modern Architecture (London, 1977)
, The Prince, the Architects and the New Wave Monarchy (London, 1988)
, and George Baird, eds, Meaning in Architecture (London, 1969)
Jenkins, David, ed., On Foster . . . Foster On (Munich and London, 2000)
, ed., Norman Foster: Works, 4 vols (London 2002)
Jenner, Michael, New British Architecture in Germany (Munich, 2000)
Keiller, Patrick, Robinson in Space (London, 1999)
Kitchen, Paddy, A Most Unsettling Person: An Introduction to the Life and Ideas of Patrick
Geddes (London, 1975)
Latham, Ian, and Mark Swenarton, eds, Jeremy Dixon and Edward Jones: Buildings and
Projects, 19592002 (London, 2002)
Landau, Royston, New Directions in British Architecture (London, 1968)
Lasdun, Denys, ed., Architecture in an Age of Scepticism (London, 1984)
Latimer, Karen, ed., Modern Ulster Architecture (Belfast, 2006)
Loveday, Donna, and James Peto, eds, Modern Britain (London, 1999)
Lyall, Sutherland, The State of British Architecture (London, 1980)
MacDonald, Stuart, ed., Scottish Architecture, 20002002 (Glasgow, 2002)
, ed., Architecture in Scotland, 20022004 (Glasgow, 2004)
McGrath, Raymond, Twentieth Century Houses (London, 1934)
McKean, Charles, The Scottish Thirties: An Architectural Introduction (Edinburgh, 1987)
McKean, John, Learning from Segal (Basel, 1989)
, Leicester University Engineering Building (London, 1994)
, Royal Festival Hall (London, 1992)
MacNeice, Louis, Autumn Journal (London, 1939)
Marriott, Oliver, The Property Boom (London, 1967)
Martin, J. L., Buildings and Ideas, 193383 (Cambridge, 1983)
, Ben Nicholson and Naum Gabo, Circle: International Survey of Constructive Art
(London, 1937)
Maxwell, Robert, New British Architecture (London, 1967)
, Sweet Disorder and the Carefully Careless (London, 1993)
Michelaides, Byron, ed., Architecture for People (London, 1980)
Mills, Edward D., The New Architecture in Britain (London, 1953)
Mirsky, Dmitri, The Intelligentsia of Great Britain (London, 1935)
Moore, Rowan, ed., Structure Space and Skin: The Work of Nicholas Grimshaw and Partners
(London, 1993)
Mumford, Eric, The ciam Discourse on Urbanism, 19281960 (Cambridge, ma, 2000)
Mumford, Lewis, Technics and Civilisation (London, 1934)
, The Culture of Cities (London, 1938)
292
, The Letters of Lewis Mumford and Frederick J. Osborn (Bath, 1971)

Murray, Peter, and Stephen Trombley, Modern British Architecture since 1945 (London, 1984)
Muthesius, Hermann, The English House, ed. Dennis Sharp (London, 1979)
Muthesius, Stefan, The Post-War University (London and New Haven, ct, 2000)
Nairn, Ian, Modern Buildings in London (London, 1964)
, Nairns London (Harmondsworth, 1968)
Osborn, Frederick, and Arnold Whittick, New Towns: The Answer to Megalopolis (London,
1969)
Pawley, Martin, ed., Norman Foster: A Global Architecture (London, 1999)
Pearman, Hugh, Equilibrium: The Work of Nicholas Grimshaw and Partners (London, 2000)
Pevsner, Nikolaus, Pioneers of the Modern Movement from William Morris to Walter Gropius
(London, 1936)
, The Englishness of English Art (London, 1956)
, Studies in Art, Architecture and Design. Volume Two: Victorian and After (London, 1968)
, et al., Pevsner Buildings of England series
, et al., Pevsner Buildings of Ireland series
, et al., Pevsner Buildings of Scotland series
, et al., Pevsner Buildings of Wales series
Porteous, Colin, The New Eco-Architecture (London, 2002)
Powell, Kenneth, Edward Cullinan Architects (London, 1995)
, New Architecture in Britain (London, 2003)
, New London Architecture (London, 2001)
, Richard Rogers, 3 vols (London, 19982006)
Powers, Alan, Look Stranger at this Island Now: English Architectural Drawings of the 1930s
(London, 1983)
, Oliver Hill: Architect and Lover of Life (London, 1989)
, Serge Chermayeff (London, 2001)
, The Twentieth Century House in Britain (London, 2004)
, Modern: The Modern Movement in Britain (London, 2005)
Price, Cedric, Cedric Price (London, 1984)
Rasmussen, Steen Eiler, London: The Unique City (London, 1937)
Ravetz, Alison, Model Estate: Planned Housing at Quarry Hill, Leeds (London, 1974)
Read, Herbert, ed., Unit One: The Modern Movement in English Architecture, Painting and
Sculpture (London, 1934)
Richards, J. M., Introduction to Modern Architecture (Harmondsworth, 1940)
, The Castles on the Ground (London, 1946)
, Memoirs of an Unjust Fella (London, 1980)
Richmond, Peter, Marketing Modernisms: The Architecture and Inuence of Charles Reilly
(Liverpool, 2001)
Risselada, Max, and Dirk van den Heuvel, eds, Team 10: 195381 in Search of a Utopia of the
Present (Rotterdam, 2005)
Robbins, David, ed., The Independent Group: Postwar Britain and the Aesthetics of Plenty
(Cambridge, ma, 1990)
Robertson, Howard, Modern Architectural Design (London, 1932)
Rogers, Richard, and Mark Fisher, A New London (London, 1992)
Rowe, Colin, The Mathematics of the Ideal Villa and Other Essays (Cambridge, ma, and
London, 1982)
, and Fred Koetter, Collage City (London, 1975)
Royal Institute of British Architects, The Art of the Process (London, 1993)
Sadler, Simon, Archigram: Architecture without Architecture (Cambridge, ma, 2005)
Saler, Michael T., The Avant-Garde in Interwar England: Mediaeval Modernism and the London
Underground (New York, 1999)
Saint, Andrew, Towards a Social Architecture (New Haven, ct, and London, 1987)
Samuel, Raphael, Theatres of Memory (London, 1994)
, Island Stories (London, 1998)

Scott, Geoffrey, The Architecture of Humanism (London, 1914, revised 1923)
Sharp, Dennis, ed., Connell, Ward and Lucas: Modern Movement Architects in Britain,
19291939 (London, 1994)
Sharp, Thomas, Town Planning (Harmondsworth, 1940)
Sharples, Joseph, ed., Charles Reilly and the Liverpool School of Architecture, 19041933
(Liverpool, 1998)
Silver, Nathan, and Jos Boys, eds, Why Is British Architecture So Lousy? (London, 1980)
Smithson, Alison, and Peter Smithson, Urban Structuring (London, 1967)
, , Without Rhetoric: An Architectural Aesthetic, 19551972 (London, 1973)
, , The Charged Void: Architecture (New York, 2001)
Spens, Michael, ed., The Recovery of the Modern: Architectural Review, 19801995: Key Text and
Critique (London, 1996)
Stamp, Gavin, ed., Britain in the Thirties (London, 1979)
Stephen, Douglas, Kenneth Frampton and Michael Carapetian, British Buildings, 19601964
(London, 1965)
Stirling, James, James Stirling: Buildings and Projects, 19501974 (London, 1975)
Stonehouse, Michael, and Gerhard Stromberg, The British Library at St Pancras (London,
2004)
Sudjic, Deyan, Norman Foster, Richard Rogers, James Stirling: New Directions in British
Architecture (London, 1986)
Summerson, John, Heavenly Mansions (London, 1949)
Sutcliffe, Anthony, Multi-Storey Living: The British Working Class Experience (London, 1974)
Swenarton, Mark, Homes for Heroes (London, 1981)
Taylor, Nicholas, The Village in the City (London, 1973)
Taylor, Nigel, Urban Planning Theory since 1945 (London, 1998)
Towards an Urban Renaissance (London, 1999)
Towndrow, F. E., Architecture in the Balance: An Approach to the Art of Scientic Humanism
(London, 1933)
Trafc in Towns: A Study of the Long Term Problems of Trafc in Urban Areas. Report of the
Steering Group and Working Group Appointed by the Minister of Transport (London, 1963)
Tubbs, Ralph, Living in Cities (Harmondsworth, 1942)
, The Englishman Builds (Harmondsworth, 1944)
Tyrwhitt, J., et al., The Heart of the City: Towards the Humanisation of Urban Life (London,
1952)
Venturi, Robert, Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture (New York 1966)
Ward, Paul, Britishness since 1870 (London, 2004)
Watkin, David, Morality and Architecture (Oxford 1977)
Watters, Diane, and Miles Glendinning, Little Houses: The National Trust for Scotlands Scheme
for Small Houses (Edinburgh, 2006)
Webb, Michael, Architecture in Britain Today (London, 1969)
Williams-Ellis, Clough, and Amabel Williams-Ellis, The Pleasures of Architecture (London,
1924)
Willis, Peter, New Architecture in Scotland (London, 1977)
Wilson, Colin A. St John, Architectural Reections (Oxford, 1992)
, The Other Tradition of Modern Architecture (London, 1995)
Worpole, Ken, The Value of Architecture: Design, Economy and the Architectural Imagination
(London, 2000)
Wright, Myles, Design of Nursery and Elementary Schools (London, 1938)
Yorke, F.R.S., The Modern House (London, 1934)
, The Modern House in England (London, 1937)
, and Frederick Gibberd, The Modern Flat (London, 1938)
294
Journals
Architectural Association Journal
Architectural Design
Architectural Review
Architect and Building News
Architecture Today
Architects Journal
Architects Year Book
Builder (retitled Building in 1966)
Building (retitled Architecture and Building in 1953)
Design for Today
Perspective (Northern Ireland)
Perspectives on Architecture
Prospect (Scotland)
riba Journal
Studio
Thirties Society Journal
Touchstone (Wales)
Twentieth Century Architecture
Acknowledgements
My rst debt is to Professor Adrian Forty, who recommended me as author of this book, and
my second to my editor, Vivian Constantinopoulos, who has been as encouraging and patient
as any author could possibly hope. In the later stages, other editors at Reaktion Books have also
been most helpful. My wife and children have provided a valuable domestic support.
The book brings together the results of conversations and encounters lasting a lifetime and
still in progress, and they cannot be listed individually. I would, however, like to give a special
mention to Elain Harwood, a colleague in many ventures and a constant source of detailed and
accurate information. In addition, my visual coverage of outer Britain in the nal chapter
would have been poorer without the generous contributions of Monica Cherry, Paul Larmour,
and Gavin Stamp. Many other people and architectural practices have been generous in providing photographs or helping me to obtain them, and their names are listed on the following
page. Among those concealed behind the names of their institutions, I would like to thank
Robert Elwall of the riba and Nigel Wilkins of the National Monuments Record.
The British Academy awarded a Small Research Grant towards the cost of illustrations, and
the Paul Mellon Centre for Studies in British Art supported the illustration and production costs.
I am grateful to Gavin Stamp, Louise Campbell, John Allan and John Gold, who supported
these applications.
296
Photo Acknowledgements
The author and publishers wish to express their thanks to the below sources of illustrative
material and/or permission to reproduce it.
John Allan/Avanti Architects: p. 68; Andrew Wright Associates: p. 235; Archigram Archives: pp.
170, 173; Peter Baistow: 160; Florian Beigel: p. 231; Stephenson Bell: p. 233 (both); Benson &
Forsyth: p. 266; photo Hlne Binet (courtesy of Caruso St John): p. 230; John S. Bonnington:
p. 124; Dirk Bouwens: p. 30 (left); Braintree District Council: p. 31; Graham Brooks: p 261;
Cheryl Buckley: p. 61 (bottom); H. T. Cadbury-Brown: p. 84; Louise Campbell: p. 256; Canadian
Centre for Architecture/Collection Centre Canadien dArchitecture (Cedric Price Fonds): p. 167;
Capita Percy Thomas: p. 272; Centre for Alternative Technology, Machynlleth: p. 187 (left);
Martin Charles: pp. 116, 139, 203, 219; Monica Cherry: pp. 258, 264; Nev Churcher: p. 200;
Country Life Picture Library: p. 21; Tim Crocker: p. 138 (top); Gillian Daniell: p. 134; Jeremy
Dixon: p. 201; James Dunnett: pp. 81, 91 (right); photo Richard Einzig/arcaid. co. uk: p. 103;
photo English Heritage/nmr: p. 52; Foster & Partners: pp. 192, 194; Grimshaw Architects:
p. 189; Zaha Hadid: p. 267; Michael Carapetian: p. 121; Elain Harwood: pp. 179 (right), 180, 182
(top); courtesy of Louis Hellman: pp. 89, 129, 158, 161, 165, 196, 208 (bottom), 213, 238 (top),
239; Judith Henderson: p. 105; History of Advertising Trust: p. 12; Ken Kirkwood: pp. 191, 265;
Charles Knevitt: p. 208 (top);Paul Larmour: p. 20 (top), 253, 254, 255, 259, 273; Leeds City
Council: p. 44; Len Grant Photography: p. 243; Liverpool City Council: p. 17; London Borough
of Camden Local Studies & Archives Centre: p. 55; MacCormac, Jamieson & Pritchard: p. 220;
Maggies Centres: p. 269; Martin Centre, Cambridge: p. 187 (right); Roger Mayne: pp. 88, 113;
National Monuments Record: pp. 26, 146; New Society: p. 169; ODonnell & Tuomey: p. 246;
Pollinger Ltd: p. 45; from Margaret Potter and Alexander Potter, The Building of London (West
Drayton, 1944): p. 79 (top); Proctor and Matthews Architects: p. 244; rcahms: pp. 260, 263;
Richard Rogers Partnership/Redshift Photography: p. 271; David Richmond & Partners: p. 238
(bottom); Royal Academy of Arts, London: p. 212; photos courtesy of the Royal Institute of
British Architects Library: pp. 27, 77 (top) (both riba Library Drawings Collection), 6, 29, 34,
39, 47, 49, 50, 58 (top), 60, 64, 65, 72, 79 (bottom), 108, 135, 143 (all riba Photographs Collection);
photo Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea Libraries, London: p. 144; Phil Sayer: p. 186
(foot); Scottish Parliament Public Information Service: p. 268; Simon Smithson: p. 107; Gavin
Stamp: pp. 206, 252; Tim Street-Porter: p. 193; Swansea Town Council: p. 15; Whitechapel Art
Gallery and Whitechapel Archive, London: p. 106; Matthew Wickens: p. 257; Charlotte Wood:
p. 270; and courtesy of the author: pp. 16, 20 (bottom), 22, 23, 30 (right), 32, 33, 35, 37, 38, 40, 42,
46, 51, 57, 58 (bottom), 59, 61 (top), 67, 69, 71, 76, 77 (bottom), 78, 80, 82, 85, 86, 87, 90, 91 (left),
93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 100, 102, 109, 110, 111, 117, 118, 119, 130, 133, 137, 138 (bottom), 140, 141, 142,
145, 148, 150, 151, 153, 157, 159, 162, 164, 171, 175, 177, 179 (left), 181, 182 (bottom), 183, 184, 186 (top),
188, 205, 207, 209, 211, 214, 215, 216, 217, 221, 222, 224, 228, 229, 237, 241 and 242.
297
Index
Aalto, Alvar 179, 227, 272
Abercrombie, Sir Patrick 7980, 86
Aberdeen, David du R.: Congress House,
Bloomsbury 91
Adshead, Stanley Davenport 16, 29; Dorlonco
system 2930
Ahrends, Burton & Koralek 92; Chalvedon,
Basildon 190; National Gallery project 2056
Aldington, Peter 190, 199; houses at Haddenham,
Bucks. 179
Allford, Hall, Monaghan Morris: Raines Court,
Hackney 240
Alsop, Will 224, 226; Peckham Library 235, 237
Archigram 17071; Monaco Entertainments
Centre 171
Architects Co-Operative Partnership 77;
Margaret Wix School, St Albans 51;
Brynmawr Rubber Factory 77, 97; Dunelm
House, Durham 97; University of Essex 97,
151; St Johns College, Oxford 97; St Pauls
Cathedral Choir School, London 97;
Risinghill School, Islington 100
Arup Associates: Broadgate, London 2223; cegb,
Bristol 193; Lion Yard, Cambridge 153; Lloyds
of London, Chatham 193; National Gallery
project 205; Paternoster Square project 211;
Snape Maltings 184; Stockley Park, Chiswick
225
Arup, Sir Ove Nyquist 39
Atelier 5: St Bernards, Croydon 137
Baillie Scott, M. H. see Scott, Mackay Hugh
Baillie
Banham, Peter Reyner 20, 90, 10001, 1045, 110,
114, 1223, 145, 169, 195
Barr, A. W. Cleeve 51, 132
bdp: Ealing Broadway Centre 182
Beaux-Arts style 16, 26, 78, 150
Begg, Ian 262; Cathedral Visitor Centre, Glasgow
264
Behrens, Peter 225, 29; New Ways, Northampton
29
Beigel, Florian: Half Moon Theatre, Mile End
231, 232
Bell, G. Philip: Yacht Club, Strangford Lough 59,
252
298
Bennetts Associates: Central Library, Brighton

237
Benson and Forsyth 138, 199; Royal Scottish
Museum 2657; see also Camden Borough
Council
Berlage, Hendrik Petrus 152; Holland House,
Bury Street, London 22, 23
Bowen Dann Davies: Plas Menai, Gwynedd 264
Brandon-Jones, John: Hampshire County Hall,
Winchester 152; Brentwood Town Hall 152;
Staines Town Hall, 152
Breuer, Marcel 47, 70; Gane Show House, Bristol
7071; Unesco, Paris 147
Brooks, Graham: Capel House, Llandaff 261
Buchanan, Sir Colin 1557
Bunton, Sam: Red Road, Glasgow 133
Burgess and Partners: Maritime Museum, Cardiff
264
Burnet, Sir John James 22, 234, 31; British
Museum 23; Kodak Building, Kingsway 23;
Wallace Scott Tailoring Institute, Cathcart 23;
see also Burnet,Tait and Lorne
Burnet Tait: Co-operative Insurance Society
Tower, Manchester 1457
Burnet, Tait and Lorne 60; Infectious Diseases
Hospital, Paisley 253; St Andrews House,
Edinburgh 251
Burnham, Daniel: Selfridges 12, 1617, 23
Cadbury-Brown, H. T. 84, 91; Gravesend Civic
Centre 153; Royal College of Art, Kensington
92
Camden Borough Council 189; Architects
Department: Alexandra Road 1389; Branch
Hill 138; Dunboyne Road 1378
Campbell, Christopher: Hamilton Building,
Belfast 273
Campbell, Ian: house at Belfast Lough 261
Campbell, Noel: house at Brocklamount Park,
Ballymena 254; Dhu Varren, Portrush 254
Carrick, J., and J. A.: Rothesay Pavilion, Bute 252
Cartwright Pickard: Murray Grove, Islington
24041
Caruso St John: Walsall New Art Gallery 230, 231,
243
Casson, Sir Hugh 49, 83; Casson and Conder:
Arts Faculty buildings, Cambridge 104

Centre for Alternative Technology, Machynlleth
1878
Chamberlin, Powell & Bon: Golden Lane, City of
London 94, 111, 142; Bouseld Primary
School, Kensington 94; Cooper Tabor Seed
Warehouse, Witham 94
Chermayeff, Serge 40, 92; bbc 46; De La Warr
Pavilion, Bexhill 52, 57, 252; Bentley Wood,
Halland 70
Chippereld, David 228, 2756; Mid Wales Arts
Centre project 269; Museum of the River
and Rowing, Henley 229
Churcher, Nev 199, 200
ciam 36, 42, 47, 78, 83, 1068, 123
Classical revival 172, 218, 262
Clendenning, Max: Oxford Road Station,
Manchester 254
Coates, Wells 36, 41, 62; Isokon Flats, Hampstead
42, 43, 66
Cocker, Philip: Fair-a-Far housing, Cramond 262
Community Architecture 168, 186, 208, 233
Comper, Sir John Ninian: St Philip, Cosham 623
Connell, Amyas 36, 39; High and Over,
Amersham 37; White House, Haslemere 37,
38; Connell, Ward and Lucas: Greenside,
Wentworth 115
Conservative Party 86, 1256, 131, 157, 202, 232, 265
Cook, Peter 16971, 174; Plug-in City 170; Arcadia
(lecture) 172; Hedgerow Village 173
Copcutt, Geoffrey 140; Cumbernauld Civic
Centre 141
Cornwall County Council: County Hall, Truro
153
Covent Garden 15860, 189, 21112
Cowser, Ben: Bendhu, Co. Antrim 253
Crosby, Theo 106, 166, 170; Euston Station project
170
Crowe, Dame Sylvia 73, 156
Cullen, Gordon 6, 83, 122, 154, 244
Cullinan, Edward 178, 182, 199, 209, 218;
Fountains Abbey Visitor Centre, N. Yorks.
21819
Cumbernauld 140, 158, 161, 166, 170, 233, 262
Curtis, Edward: Solar House, Rickmansworth
187, 188
Curtis, W. T. 6061
Darbourne and Darke 190; Lillington Street,
Pimlico 1367, 141
Day, Christopher: Nant-y-Cwm School, Dyfed
270
Denby, Elizabeth 667, 129
dia 25, 279, 312, 41, 59
Dixon, Jeremy 185, 224; Lanark Road, Maida Vale
201
Dudok, Willem Marinius 61; Hilversum Town
2 9 9 I n d ex
Hall 152
Duffy, Francis 2223, 225
Dunster, Bill: Bedzed, Hackbridge 240, 242
Easton and Robertson, Keele University 149;
Royal Horticultural Hall, Westminster 34, 35;
British Pavilion, Paris (1925) 35; Shell Centre
142
Emberton, Joseph 40; Royal Corinthian Yacht
Club, Burnham-on-Crouch 36, 37, 59
Erith, Raymond 210
Erskine, Ralph 106, 190, 224, 233; Byker
Development, Newcastle upon Tyne 109, 180;
Clare Hall, Cambridge 18081; Eaglestone,
Milton Keynes 181; Millennium Village,
Greenwich 240; Studlands Park, Newmarket
181; Killingworth, Northumberland 181
Esher, Lord see Brett, Lionel
Etchells, Frederick 36
Evans, Stephen 265
Evans and Shalev: Truro Law Courts 221; Tate
Gallery, St Ives 221
Fairlie, Reginald: National Library of Scotland
251
Farrell, Terry: Alban Gate, City of London 216;
Clifton Nurseries, Covent Garden 212;
Comyn Ching Triangle, Westminster 211;
Embankment Place 216; Paternoster Square
211; tv-am, Camden Town 212
fat (Fashion Architecture Taste): Woodward
Place, Islington 243
Ferguson and Mcilveen: Ulster Folk and
Transport Museum 264
Festival of Britain 836, 8990, 165, 251; South
Bank Exhibition 835; Live Architecture
Exhibition 86
Fielden and Mawson: Friars Quay, Norwich 180
Forrest, Donald: Autarkic Houses at Milton
Keynes 188
Foster, Norman 190, 239; see also Norman Foster
and Partners
Foulkes, S.: Colwyn 252; Rhyl cinemas 252
Frampton, Kenneth 95, 104, 109, 172, 185, 228
Fretton, Tony 276: Lisson Gallery, Marylebone
228
Fry, E. Maxwell 4042, 71, 745, 78, 92; Impington
Village College 60, 62; Sassoon House,
Peckham 66; Kensal House 667; Cecil
Residential Club, Euston 71, 72; St Leonards
Hill, Windsor project 112
Gasson, Barry, and John Meunier: Burrell
Collection, Glasgow 2067
Gehry, Frank: Maggies Centre, Dundee 269
Georgian 78, 83, 95, 109, 136, 250
Germany 13, 23, 267, 29, 31, 33, 36, 39, 43, 48, 58,
64, 73, 117, 125, 165, 227, 262, 274

Gibberd, Sir Frederick 40, 73, 131; bisf House 49,
50; Pullman Court, Streatham 66; Somerford
Road, Hackney 81; Lansbury Estate, Poplar
86; Harlow New Town 867, 130; The Lawn,
Harlow 130
Gibson, Sir Donald 76
Gillespie, Kidd & Coia 117, 256, 260; St Paul,
Glenrothes 118; St Pauls Seminary, Cardross
118
glc 1579, 171, 199, 204, 234; Hook New Town
project 175; Queen Elizabeth Hall and
Hayward Gallery 171; Swinbrook Estate,
Notting Hill 189; Thamesmead 158, 204
Goldnger, Ern 36, 74, 92, 147; Daily Worker
building, Farringdon Road 91; 13 Willow
Road, Hampstead 91; Trellick Tower, North
Kensington 133
Gollins, Melvin and Ward: ofces in New
Cavendish Street, Fitzroy Square 95; Castrol
House, Marylebone 956, 100; Shefeld
University Library and Arts Tower 109
Gordon, Alex 187; Department of Music, Cardiff
264
Gordon, Rodney 104, 144; see also Luder
Gough, Piers 198, 224; Aztec West, Bristol 225;
Cascades, Isle of Dogs 216; China Wharf,
Bermondsey 216; The Circle, Shad Thames
216; Kentish Homes 212; National Gallery
project 207,
Gowan, James 10001, 104; see also Stirling and
Gowan
Grifths, Gordon: 5 Cliff Parade, Penarth 253
Grimshaw, Sir Nicholas 227; Service Tower 189;
Waterloo Station 214
Gropius, Walter 28, 36, 40, 425, 48, 50, 60, 94, 112,
179, 258; Wood House, Shipbourne
(Gropius) 45, 57
Grunt Group 185, 201; Clipstone Street,
Westminster 1856; Nethereld, Milton
Keynes 185, 201; Portsdown Hill project 185;
Waxham and Ludham, Gospel Oak 1856
Guinness Store House, Dublin 19
Gwynne, Patrick 92
Hackney, Rod 2089
Hadid, Zaha 173, 2267; Maggies Centre,
Kirkaldy 269; Welsh Opera House, Cardiff
224, 265, 267, 269
Hall, Denis Clarke: Girls High School,
Richmond 50
Hampshire County Council 175, 199; Architects:
Woodlea School 200
Harris, Emmanuel Vincent 144, 149
Havlicek and Honzig 95
Hay, G. S. 1457
Hayes, F. O. 136
300
Henman, William, and Thomas Cooper 19, 20

Herron, Ron 169, 171; Walking City 170
Hertfordshire County Council 5051, 99, 53, 132;
Templewood School, Welwyn Garden City 51
Herzog & de Meuron: Laban Dance Centre,
Deptford 232; Tate Modern 232, 235
High Tech 171, 178, 19096, 199, 21314, 218
Hill, Oliver: Whitwood Mere School, Castleford
60
Hill, Robert Sharpe 252
Hitchcock, Henry-Russell 31, 36
Hodder, Stephen 233
Hodgkinson, Patrick 967, 136; Brunswick
Centre, Bloomsbury 13940
Holden, Charles Henry 23, 29, 323, 61; 55
Broadway, Westminster 29, 33; London
University Senate House 33; Arnos Grove
Station 33
Holford, William (Lord Holford) 756, 131, 157
Hopkins, Sir Michael 199, 240, 273; Bracken
House, City of London 21415;
Glyndebourne 214; Mound Stand, Lords
Cricket Ground 214; Nottingham Trent
University Campus 240; Portcullis House,
Westminster 242; Schlumberger Research
Laboratories, Cambridge 214, 225
Howell, William 112; and Gillian Howell 106
Howells, Glen: Theatre and Arts Centre, Armagh
273
Hull School of Architecture 48
Hurd, Robert 251, 264; Chessels Court,
Edinburgh 2623
ica 89, 1045
Impington Village College, Cambridge 45, 60
Independent Group 101, 1046, 112, 11819
Irvine 262; Development Corporation:
Bridgegate House 261
Jacobs, Jane 155, 159, 160, 166
Jellicoe, Sir Geoffrey 73
Jencks, Charles 172, 174, 269
Joass, J. J. 23
John Madin Group: Birmingham Post and Mail
145
Johnson, W. A.: Co-operative stores in
Hudderseld, Bradford and Southport 46
Johnson-Marshall, Sir Stirrat 50, 256; see also
rmjm
Kahn, Louis 120, 145, 228; Yale University Art
Gallery 120
Keay, Lancelot 202
Kennedy, John Fitzgerald 126
Kennedy Fitzgerald and Associates: Central Fire
Station, Belfast 273; Glenveagh School,
Belfast 273; St Brigids Church, Belfast 273
Kininmonth, Sir William 253, 257; Scottish

Provident Institution, Edinburgh 257
Knox and Maxwell: Clarendon House, Belfast 273
Koolhaas, Rem 173, 226, 276
Krier, Leon 172, 210
Labour Party 81, 114, 1257, 132, 1978, 234; New
Labour 204, 267
Lacey, Nicholas: Heron Quays, Isle of Dogs 224
Lansbury Estate, Poplar 86, 89
Larsen-Neilsen system 134, 182
Lasdun, Sir Denys 91; Halleld Estate and School,
Paddington 90, 92, 100; National Theatre 215;
Usk Street and Claredale Street housing,
Bethnal Green 90; Royal College of
Physicians, Camden 119, 120; University of
East Anglia 151, 194
Law and Dunbar Naismith 261
lcc 16, 41, 667, 69, 84, 110, 119, 144, 147, 171, 182,
201
lcc Architects 112; Ackroyden Estate 130;
Highbury Quadrant 110, 111; Alton Estates,
Roehampton 111, 112, 114, 131, 256
Le Corbusier 25, 28, 357, 41, 46, 65, 74, 91, 96, 106,
120, 128, 153; Pavillon de lEsprit Nouveau 34;
Maisons Jaoul, Neuilly 99, 101, 136, 150; Unit
dHabitation, Marseilles 106, 112, 114, 133;
Villa Stein, Garches 115; Notre Dame du
Haut, Ronchamp 117; La Tourette 118; Rob et
Roq project 137, 139
Lea, David 218, 26970
Leitch, Archibald: Ibrox Park 19
Lescaze, W. E.: Boarding Houses, Dartington 58,
60
Lethaby, William Richard 16, 25, 279, 32, 35, 39,
51, 62, 152; All Saints, Brockhampton 25
Levitt Bernstein Associates: Tolmers Square,
Euston 189
Libeskind, Daniel 173; Jewish Museum, Berlin 227
Lipton, Sir Stuart 2212, 225
Liverpool School of Architecture 16, 41, 75, 115,
249
Livett, R.A.H. 43, 44
Llewelyn-Davies, Richard (Lord LlewelynDavies) 48, 174
Llewelyn-Davies, Weeks, Forestier-Walker and
Bor: Milton Keynes master plan 175;
Northwick Park Hospital, Harrow 176
Lobb, H. Vicars: Youth Hostel, Holmbury St
Mary 58, 59
London Underground 29, 32, 612; Arnos Grove
Station 33
Loos, Adolf 91, 228, 231
Lubetkin, Berthold 35, 39, 71, 84, 92, 106, 145, 213;
see also Tecton; Penguin Pool, London Zoo
39; Highpoint, Highgate 39, 66, 90; Finsbury
Health Centre 3940, 57, 71; Spa Green,
3 0 1 I n d ex
Finsbury 90; Bevin Court, Islington

(Skinner, Bailey and Lubetkin) 130
Lucas, Colin 38, 112, 115, 182; see also Connell,
Ward and Lucas
Luder, Owen 104, 144; Eros House, Catford 104;
Shopping Centre, Gateshead 145;Tricorn
Centre, Portsmouth 145
Lutyens, Sir Edwin 18, 25, 207, 216, 250
Lynch, Kevin 155, 159, 237
Lynn, Jack 88, 113
Lyons, Eric 198; Parkleys, Richmond 94;
Blackheath Park 94
Lyons, Israel Ellis and Gray 99100; Trescobeas
School, Falmouth 100; Old Vic Theatre
Annexe, Waterloo 100
McCafferty, James 156
MacCormac, Richard 178, 182, 21819; Cable and
Wireless College, Coventry 220
McCormick, Liam 254; Our Lady of Lourdes,
Londonderry 255
McGrath, Raymond: Finella, Cambridge 35; bbc
46
Mackintosh, Charles Rennie 29, 25053, 265;
Glagow School of Art 22; Scotland Street
School, Glasgow 23
McLean, Thomas 252
MacMillan, Andrew 118; see also Gillespie, Kidd &
Coia
McMorran and Whitby 111, 149; Holloway Estate,
Camden 110; Suffolk County Hall, Bury St
Edmunds 152
Maguire & Murray: St Pauls, Bow Common 116,
117; Stag Hill Court, Guildford 180
Mardall, Cyril (Sjstrm) 77; see also Yorke
Rosenberg Mardall
mars Group 6, 36, 43, 47, 55, 68, 69, 83, 106; plan
for London 78
Martin, Sir Leslie 48, 84, 96, 112, 118, 122, 136, 142,
153, 174; Harvey Court, Cambridge 967;
Whitehall plan 154
Marwick, T. P.: St Cuthberts Co-operative
Association showroom, Edinburgh 46, 252
Matthew, Sir Robert 84, 133, 256, 260, 264; see also
rmjm
Maxwell, Robert 104, 11415, 178, 182
Medd, David and Mary 51
Melvin, John: Essex Road, Islington 218
Mendelsohn, Erich 40; De la Warr Pavilion,
Bexhill 52, 57, 252
Merz & McLellan: Dunston b Power Station,
Gateshead 46
Metzstein, Isi 118; see also Gillespie, Kidd & Coia
Mies van der Rohe, Ludwig 14, 245, 945, 108,
119, 145, 190, 216, 254; No. 1 Poultry project
208
Milton Keynes 153, 1758, 185, 188
Miners Welfare Commission 55, 6061

Ministry of Public Buildings and Works: Post
Ofce Tower, Camden, 1478
Miralles, Enric: Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh
2679, 271
Moira and Moira: Ben Lavers Mountain Visitor
Centre 264
Morgan, Emslie: Wallasey School, Cheshire 187
Morris and Steedman 261
Morris, William 111, 234
Mosscrop, Stuart 162, 178
Motorways: mi 155; London Motorway Box 157,
189
Mumford, Lewis 54, 56, 159
Murphy, Richard 256; Maggies Centre,
Edinburgh 269
Nairn, Ian 16, 92, 94, 102, 122, 142,154, 156, 262
National Trust for Scotland, Small Houses
Scheme 262
Naunton, Maurice, and Geroge Garrard: Noak
Bridge, Basildon 183, 184
Neo-classicism 95
Neo-Georgian 21, 54, 59, 183
Neo-Palladian 115
Neo-Tudor 21, 183
Neo-Vernacular 178, 185
New Brutalism 89, 94, 97101, 108, 110, 120, 122,
125, 132, 145, 164, 17071, 176, 221, 228
New Empiricism 817, 95, 125
New Towns 78, 80, 86, 108, 131, 134, 140, 175,
26062
New Urbanism 233, 240
Newham Borough Council: Ronan Point 134, 136
Non-Plan 169, 223
Norman Foster and Partners 178; bbc project,
London 213; Bean Hill, Milton Keynes 191;
Carr dArt, Nmes 232; Hong Kong and
Shanghai Bank 213; ibm, Cosham 191;
Reichstag, Berlin 227; Renault Distribution
Centre, Swindon 214; Sage, Gateshead 225;
Sainsbury Centre, Norwich 194; Stansted
Airport 214; Stockley Park, Chiswick 225;
Swiss Re, City of London 149; Willis Faber
Dumas, Ipswich 1914, 193
ODonnell Tuomy: Blackwood Golf Club,
Clandeboye 246, 273
stberg, Ragnar: Stockholm City Hall 34, 152
Outram, John: Pumping Station, Docklands 216;
Judge Institute, Cambridge 21617; New
House, Sussex 216;
Page & Park: Maggies Centre, Glasgow 269
Palumbo, Peter (Lord) 208, 218
Paolozzi, Sir Eduardo 101, 104, 106, 109, 205
Paris, 252; Exposition Internationale des Arts
302
Dcoratifs et Industriels (1925) 35;

Exposition Internationale des Arts et
Techniques (1937) 251
Park Hill, Shefeld 88, 11314, 136, 233
Parry, Eric 227; Stockley Park, Chiswick 225
Pawley, Martin 161, 171
Pawson, John 228
Peabody Trust 42, 240
Pelli, Csar: No. 1 Canada Square, Canary Wharf
223
Penoyre & Prasad 219
Percy Thomas Partnership: bbc Headquarters,
Llandaff 258; Great Hall and Bell Tower,
University College, Aberystwyth 258; Visitor
Centre, St Fagans 264; Wales Millennium
Centre, Cardiff Bay 272
Peterlee New Town 90, 106
Pevsner, Sir Nikolaus 26, 45, 62, 83, 112, 174, 179
Phippen Randall and Parkes 137
Piano, Renzo 195
Pick, Frank 323, 612
Picturesque 1011, 83, 89, 97, 110, 141
Pike, Alex: Autarkic House, Cambridge 1878
Pluralism 175, 234, 276
Pollard, Ian: Homebase, West Kensington 218
Pollard Thomas and Edwards 202; Field Court,
Hampstead 203
Pop Art 105, 144, 147, 165, 17072
Postmodernism 172, 183, 195, 207, 212, 214, 218,
226, 231, 243, 257, 265
Poundbury, Dorchester, Dorset 184, 20910, 244
Powell & Moya 73; Skylon 83; Brasenose College,
Oxford 92; St Johns College, Cambridge 92;
Churchill Gardens, Pimlico 923, 129;
Prescott, John 236, 239, 240, 244
Price, Cedric 16970, 172, 188; Fun Palace project,
Stratford 1669, 195; Potteries Thinkbelt and
Pop-up Parliament projects 168
Prince of Wales 184, 207, 209, 218, 239, 240, 265
Proctor Matthews: Dale Mill, Rochdale 244;
Millennium Village, Greenwich 240
Puritanism 92, 1645, 174
Pym, Francis: Ulster Museum, Belfast 2589
Quarry Hill ats, Leeds 43, 44, 54, 64
Quennell, C.H.B. 31; cottages at Braintree 31
Ravetz, Alison 64, 66, 201
Read, Sir Herbert 41, 101, 104
Regency 6970, 83, 114, 253
Regent Street Polytechnic School of Architecture
169, 188
Regionalism 181, 231, 249, 25051
Reid, Richard: Civic Ofces, Epping 21618
Reilly, Sir Charles Herbert 16, 16, 1718, 29, 41; St
Barnabas, Shacklewell 16
Renton, Andrew 144
rfac 147, 149, 152

riba 15, 1920, 22, 28, 59, 69, 115, 161, 187, 197, 199,
2067, 218, 236, 250; Board of Architectural
Education 16; Headquarters building 35;
Symposium on Tall Flats 131
Richards, Sir James Maude 71, 82, 141, 144, 251
Richardson, Sir Albert Edward 24, 147, 223;
Bracken House, City of London 144, 21415;
Jockey Club, Newmarket 62
Richardson, Martin 178, 199; Great Linford,
Milton Keynes 182; Housing at Hunslett,
Leeds 182
Richmond, David: Canon Headquarters, Reigate
238
Riss, Egon: Rothes Colliery, Kirkaldy 260
Ritchie, Ian; Roy Square, Leipziger Messe 227;
Limehouse 224; Stockley Park, Chiswick 225
rmjm 132; Coleraine University 259; Distillers
Company, Edinburgh 264; Hillingdon Civic
Centre 152, 182; Royal Commonwealth Pool,
Edinburgh 256; Stirling University 259;
University of York 51, 132, 150, 259
Robertson, Sir Howard Morley 28, 34, 36; see also
Easton and Robertson
Robinson, Henry Lynch 254
Robinson McIlwaine: Waterfront Hall, Belfast
234, 273
Roche, Fred Lloyd 162, 178
Rogers, Richard (Lord Rogers of Riverside) 190,
227, 2356, 239; Centre Pompidou, Paris 195,
213; European Parliament, Strasbourg 271;
Inmos, Newport 214, 265; Law Courts,
Bordeaux 271; Lloyds of London 21314, 222;
National Gallery project 2056; Stockley
Park, Chiswick 225; Welsh Assembly, Cardiff
Bay 271
Rosenberg, Eugene 95; see also Yorke Rosenberg
Mardall
Rossi, Aldo 172, 213; Gallaratese Housing, Milan
185
Rowbotham, Harold: Parliament Hill Lido 61
Rowe, Colin 115, 123, 1723, 213
Royal Festival Hall, London 57, 845, 171
Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast 19, 20
Ruskin, John 10, 25, 62
rwhl Partnership: Bridgewater Hall, Manchester
234; Symphony Hall, Birmingham 234
Ryder, Gordon, and Peter Yates 90
St Pancras Home Improvement Society 54, 55
Scott, Elisabeth: Shakespeare Memorial Theatre,
Stratford-upon-Avon 34
Scott, Sir Giles Gilbert 76
Scott, Mackay Hugh Baillie: Blackwell,
Windermere 20, 21
Scott, Michael: Busras, Dublin 248; Geragh,
Sandycove 254
3 0 3 I n d ex
Segal, Walter 1856, 188, 190

Seifert, Richard 147, 161; Centre Point, Camden
148; Natwest Tower, City of London 149;
Woolworth Building, Marylebone 147
Shanks, Leighton, Kennedy and FitzGerald:
Portadown Technical College, Armagh 264
Shaw, Richard Norman 25, 219
Shepheard, Epstein and Hunter: University of
Lancaster 150
Shepheard, Sir Peter 73; see also Shepheard
Epstein and Hunter
Short & Ford 219
Sidney Kaye, Eric Firmin & Partners: Euston
Centre 147
Simpson, John: Paternoster Square project 211
Sisson, Marshall A. 149
Skidmore, Owings and Merrill: Broadgate 223;
Canary Wharf 223; Lever House, New York
96; National Gallery project 206
Skipper, G. H. 30
Smith, Ivor 88, 112
Smith and Brewer: Heal & Son, London 25, 26
Smithson, Peter 38, 144, 165; and Alison Smithson
48, 92, 99, 101, 1057, 11718, 174, 178;
Smithdon School, Hunstanton 989, 104,
190; Soho house project 99; Golden Lane
project 109; Robin Hood Gardens, Poplar
109, 110; Economist group, St Jamess 121,
1223, 144, 160; House of the Future 122;
Sugden House, Watford 123, 184
South Bank 142, 171; see also Festival of Britain
Southwark Borough Council 235; Aylesbury
Estate 136
Soviet Union 58, 111
span Ltd 94, 198
Spence, Sir Basil 253, 255; Coventry Cathedral 76,
117, 255; Edinburgh Univresity 255; Glasgow
Airport 255; houses at Dunbar 255; house for
Scottish Council for Art, Glasgow Empire
Exhibition 251; Mortonhall Crematorium,
Edinburgh 2556; Sea and Ships Pavilion 84;
Sunderland Civic Centre 124, 153; Queen
Elizabeth Square, Glasgow 1334, 255; Thorn
House, Westminster 143, 144; University of
Sussex 150;
Stanseld-Smith, Sir Colin 199
Stanton Williams 228
Stephen, Douglas 104; Brunel Centre, Swindon
153; Centre Heights, Swiss Cottage 104
Stephenson Bell 233; No. 4 Jordan Street,
Manchester 233
Stirling and Gowan: Langham House Close,
Ham 1012, 136; Leicester University
Engineering Building 1024; House at
Cowes, Isle of Wight 115
Stirling, Sir James 48, 10001, 115, 117, 173, 210, 214,
218; Florey Building, The Queens College,
Oxford 166; Derby Civic Centre project 173;

History Faculty and Library, Cambridge
104; National Gallery project 207; Neue
Staatsgalerie, Stuttgart 173, 213, 218, 226; No. 1
Poultry, City of London 208; Tate Gallery,
Liverpool 224
Stirling Prize 8, 276
Summerson, Sir John, 6, 55, 623, 86, 89, 2745
Tait, Gordon 145; see also Burnet Tait
Tait, Thomas Smith 31, 36, 57; see also Burnet Tait
and Lorne
Tanner, Sir Henry 15; General Post Ofce,
London 17
Taut, Bruno 28, 36, 140; Hufeisen, Britzsiedlung,
Berlin 64
Tayler and Green 812, 131, 179, 183; Whiteways,
Wheatacre 82
Taylor, Nicholas 141, 185
Team 4 Architects: Reliance Controls, Swindon
19091
Team 10 106, 1089, 11213, 11718, 140, 171, 179, 181
Tecton Partnership 35, 47, 57, 58, 62, 83
Tennessee Valley Authority 49, 56
Terry, Quinlan: Richmond Riveside 21011
Thatcher, Margaret 1978, 204, 213, 223
Thomas, Sir Alfred Brumwell: Belfast City Hall
250
Thomas, Dewi-Prys 263; Entwood, Birkenhead
261; Pencadlys Gwynedd, Caernarfon 263
Thomas, Sir Percy: Cardiff Technical College
(with Ivor Jones) 250
Thornley, Arnold: Parliament, Stormont 250
Thorp, Nils: British Airways Headquarters,
Heathrow, 238
Town and Country Planning Act 1947 81, 127
Town Planning Act 1909 63
Townscape 83, 122, 154, 216, 244
Troughton McAslan 224; Stockley Park, Chiswick
225
Universities: Aberystwyth 258; Berkeley 152;
Cambridge 225 (see also Wilson, Sir Colin A.:
Cambridge School of Architecture); Cardiff
264; Coleraine 259; Durham 97, 149; East
Anglia 1512, 194; Essex 97, 128, 1512; Exeter
149; Keele 149; Lancaster, 150; Liverpool (see
Liverpool School of Architecture); London
School of Economics 152; London, Imperial
College, 160; Nottingham 149; Open 168;
Queens University, Belfast 249; Shefeld 109;
Stirling 259; Surrey 180; Sussex 150; Warwick
150, 152
Unwin, Sir Raymond 21, 63
Urwin, S. E. 5960
304
Venturi, Robert 171, 216, and Scott-Brown and

Rauch, National Gallery Sainsbury Wing 207
Vernacular 179, 181, 182, 248, 261, 262; see also
Neo-Vernacular
Voelcker, John 106, 117; Lyttelton House, Arkley
108, 109
Wagner, Otto 223
Walker, Derek 178
Webb, Philip 152, 2278
Webber, Melvin 1756
Weedon, Harry 172; house in Llandudno 253
Weeks, John 109, 176; see also Llewelyn-Davies,
Weeks, Forestier-Walker and Bor
Wells, A. Randall: Dominion House, Aldwych
256, 27
Wembley (British Empire Exhibition) 85, 251
Wheeler and Sprowson: housing in Kirkcaldy 262
Whiteld, Sir William: Paternoster Square,
London 211
Wilkinson Eyre: Millennium Bridge, Gateshead
225
William Weaver and Company 15, 19
Williams, Sir Owen: Boots d10 3840; Daily
Express, Fleet Street 46; Peckham Health
Centre 56, 57; m1 motorway bridges 155
Williams-Ellis, Sir Clough 28, 165; Portmeirion,
Gwynedd 164, 211
Wilshire, R. S.: Botanic Primary School, Belfast
253
Wilson, Sir Colin A. 89, 97, 112, 117; British
Library 1534, 2045, 227; Cambridge School
of Architecture 96; Liverpool Civic Centre
Project 153; Spring House, Cambridge 179
Wilson, Hugh 140, 232
Womersley, J. Lewis 88, 113, 232
Womersley, Peter 257; Farnley Hey, Hudderseld
257; Group Practice, Kelso 257
Wood, Edgar: Upmeads, Stafford 21
Woodward, Christopher 162, 178
Worlds End housing, Chelsea 204
Wornum, George Grey: riba Building 35
Wright, Frank Lloyd 24, 119
Yorke, Francis Reginald Stevens 40, 47
Yorke Rosenberg Mardall: Altnagelvin Hospital,
N. Ireland 258; Belfast Synagogue 258;
Gatwick Airport, Crawley 945; University of
Warwick 150
Zogolovitch, Roger 198
Zurich 94, 276

Arquitectura Britanica

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Arquitectura Britanica

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Arquitectura Britanica

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BRITAIN

modern archi tec tur es i n hi s tory

modern architectures in history

Series editor: Vivian Constantinopoulos

Published by Reaktion Books Ltd

13 Efficiency: From Modernity to Modernism

53 Compassion: Modern Architecture Builds the 'Just City'

89 Poetics: The Moral Dilemma of Modern Aesthetics

125 Production: White Heat and Burnout

163 Happiness: The Reintegration of Architecture

197 Conscience: The Architecture of Fruitful Anxiety

The way that the history of architecture is conceived changes constantly. A

Louis Hellman, cartoon

In Britain, the Modern Movement has been a moral and political

From the start, Modernism was viewed as a mission to convert the

Efficiency: From Modernity

Daniel Burnham & Co.

Modernism are inseparable, more prominence is accorded to aesthetic

Efficiency: From Modernity to Modernism

neer3. In 1909 the edgling architecture schools in Britain were actually

leading Chicago architect Daniel Burnham, although actually the work

John Brodie (City

Efficiency: From Modernity to Modernism

Efficiency: From Modernity to Modernism

William Henman and

Windermere (1900), was representative of the type, built as a holiday

Efficiency: From Modernity to Modernism

desired, questioned the economy and utility

ribas International Congress of Architects in 1906, but none of his

Efficiency: From Modernity to Modernism

Garden City setting, Burnet produced a building with no distinct period

Efficiency: From Modernity to Modernism

Dunbar Smith and

war), Lethaby concluded: I do, however, greatly admire the wonderful

Efficiency: From Modernity to Modernism

resurgent eclecticism and doubts about the harshness of Modernism. One

Modernism. It fell short of becoming an avant-garde pressure group,

At the end of the First World War, against a background of threatened

Efficiency: From Modernity to Modernism

blocks such as those used by Skipper. Thus the

Efficiency: From Modernity to Modernism

Sir John Burnet and

Efficiency: From Modernity to Modernism

gures in history, they nonetheless occupied many crucial positions in

Easton and Robertson,

Efficiency: From Modernity to Modernism

richly stocked and divergent mind. His buildings themselves were

on-Crouch (1930) was illustrated in The

Efficiency: From Modernity to Modernism

Amyas Connell and

of uniting them. Joined in 1934 by Colin Lucas,

Lubetkin and Tecton,

plates interrupted the glass in horizontal bands, slightly diminishing

Efficiency: From Modernity to Modernism

Lubetkin and Tecton,

Health Centre, where he designed the wings of the building, containing

revival of interest in politics was accompanied by an increased

Le Corbusier appeared to offer such a key. A rapturous review in The

Modernism worked on a mixture of reason and emotion, and the

Efficiency: From Modernity to Modernism