NOTES
Charing Cross
Improvements.
One of the greatest architectural opportunities pf our time is the Charing Cross Improvement, and we have for a long time tried to make clear to our readers how vital are the issues to all who desire fine architectural development for London. It is impossible to regard the projected improvements solely from the point of view of practical necessity, though that cannot for a moment be disregarded, but such an opportunity as is now presented demands the most searching criticism in all--its aspects, and it is so serious a matter for the profession that we hope the new President of the R.I.B.A., Sir Banister Fletcher, will bring to the matter the weight which will attach to all he says as President. Sir Banister has been a power for good we all know in matters of City development, and we look with confidence to his judgment and guidance in this matter.
The
Abbey
Sacristy.
The Dean of Westminster, Dr. Poxley Norris, has often been criticised—most unjustly we consider—for his alleged unwillingness to consider alternative proposals for the Sacristy which is needed at the Abbey by those who do not approve of the site and design which has been approved by the Dean and.Chapter ; and his letter to the Times on Tuesday, will, we hope, at last silence and satisfy those critics. He states that a small committee has been appointed to reconsider the various schemes that have
been before the Dean and Chapter for the provision of a Sacristy, and that the following have consented to serve : Archbishop Lord Davidson of Lambeth, Sir W. Llewellyn (President of the Royal Academy), Sir Banister Fletcher (President of the Royal Institute of British Architects), Mr. C. R. Peers (President of the Society of Antiquaries), and Mr. J. F. Green (Acting Chairman of the Committee of the Society for Protection of Ancient Buildings). He adds: “The terms of reference will be as wide as possible—to review the schemes ; to investigate any that appear to be worthy of further consideration ; and to advise the Dean and Chapter on the whole question.”
The
Apologetic Attitude.
We were glad to note Mr. Edward Maufe’s comments on the subject, published in the Times on Wednesday. He says : “Now that the Advisory Committee has been formed, can we not free their hands and do away with the apologetic attitude which has been adopted in the past towards this question of the Sacristy ? What architect can produce a significant building if his client insists that the chief aim is that it shah be insignificant ? We certainly get the architecture we deserve. If we demand a beautiful building that we shall all see, the supply will not be lacking.” The same point has frequently been made in our columns, and we are glad to know that we have voiced the opinions of most of our leading architects. We are not lacking in admiration of the great architectural works of past times, and in determination to assist in their
preservation, but the timid method in the case of additions or alterations which appears to be favoured by our preservation critics will, as Mr.. Maufe says, give us the architecture we deserve.
Advisory Panels of Architects.
The increasing outcry against the disfigurement of the towns and countryside calls for a fresh effort of all citizens who take pride in what is beautiful in our towns and countryside to arrest this menace to our beautiful homeland. The South-Eastern Society of Architects believes that much good may result if local authorities would agree to co-opt on their committees an Advisory Panel of Architects to assist them in their work, in the same manner as experts are co-opted on to the education and other committees of the councils. Therefore a statement of facts concerning these panels has been sent to the clerks of all the local councils in Kent, Surrey and Sussex, asking them to assist in carrying through some such proposals as those outlined. A copy has been sent to us by Mr. R. Goulburn Lovell, the hon. general secretary of the Society, from which we note that active work has already been carried out in the South-Eastern area in pursuance of these objects. The following proposals are recommended as the most practical means of overcoming existing difficulties and of obtaining the full benefits of the Advisory Panel scheme as recommended by the Ministry of Health. “ (a) That local authorities should co-opt on to their Buildings Committees an Advisory Panel of Architects, nominated by the President of the R.I.B.A. These gentlemen would have no votes but would act as assessors or advisors on matters of which they had expert knowledge, (b) That intensive propaganda should be organised to explain the benefits which would result if some such scheme were put into operation. By this means, the ratepayers would realise how they could obtain the benefits of the Town Planning Acts, etc., as desired by the Government.” The memorandum includes several illustrations showing the value of architectural advice.
Architecture and Sculpture.
We have often been led to insist on a closer relationship between architecture and sculpture, and it is in the early training and development in both the arts that we feel there is a need for a better understanding of the inter-relation of those qualities which make for distinction in both. There can be a definite sculptural quality in buildings and there should be a something architectural in sculpture if it is to reach the highest level of dignity and breadth. A note in the R.I.B.A. Journal by Mr. Trystan Edwards is very pertinent to the present phase of building, which in its lean and stark design is perhaps rightly suggested as an architecture of protest. It has been suggested that if
Study, by Alfred Stevens.
Lent by Me. Alfred Drury, R.A., to the Exhibition of Retrospective Art, Brussels.
Charing Cross
Improvements.
One of the greatest architectural opportunities pf our time is the Charing Cross Improvement, and we have for a long time tried to make clear to our readers how vital are the issues to all who desire fine architectural development for London. It is impossible to regard the projected improvements solely from the point of view of practical necessity, though that cannot for a moment be disregarded, but such an opportunity as is now presented demands the most searching criticism in all--its aspects, and it is so serious a matter for the profession that we hope the new President of the R.I.B.A., Sir Banister Fletcher, will bring to the matter the weight which will attach to all he says as President. Sir Banister has been a power for good we all know in matters of City development, and we look with confidence to his judgment and guidance in this matter.
The
Abbey
Sacristy.
The Dean of Westminster, Dr. Poxley Norris, has often been criticised—most unjustly we consider—for his alleged unwillingness to consider alternative proposals for the Sacristy which is needed at the Abbey by those who do not approve of the site and design which has been approved by the Dean and.Chapter ; and his letter to the Times on Tuesday, will, we hope, at last silence and satisfy those critics. He states that a small committee has been appointed to reconsider the various schemes that have
been before the Dean and Chapter for the provision of a Sacristy, and that the following have consented to serve : Archbishop Lord Davidson of Lambeth, Sir W. Llewellyn (President of the Royal Academy), Sir Banister Fletcher (President of the Royal Institute of British Architects), Mr. C. R. Peers (President of the Society of Antiquaries), and Mr. J. F. Green (Acting Chairman of the Committee of the Society for Protection of Ancient Buildings). He adds: “The terms of reference will be as wide as possible—to review the schemes ; to investigate any that appear to be worthy of further consideration ; and to advise the Dean and Chapter on the whole question.”
The
Apologetic Attitude.
We were glad to note Mr. Edward Maufe’s comments on the subject, published in the Times on Wednesday. He says : “Now that the Advisory Committee has been formed, can we not free their hands and do away with the apologetic attitude which has been adopted in the past towards this question of the Sacristy ? What architect can produce a significant building if his client insists that the chief aim is that it shah be insignificant ? We certainly get the architecture we deserve. If we demand a beautiful building that we shall all see, the supply will not be lacking.” The same point has frequently been made in our columns, and we are glad to know that we have voiced the opinions of most of our leading architects. We are not lacking in admiration of the great architectural works of past times, and in determination to assist in their
preservation, but the timid method in the case of additions or alterations which appears to be favoured by our preservation critics will, as Mr.. Maufe says, give us the architecture we deserve.
Advisory Panels of Architects.
The increasing outcry against the disfigurement of the towns and countryside calls for a fresh effort of all citizens who take pride in what is beautiful in our towns and countryside to arrest this menace to our beautiful homeland. The South-Eastern Society of Architects believes that much good may result if local authorities would agree to co-opt on their committees an Advisory Panel of Architects to assist them in their work, in the same manner as experts are co-opted on to the education and other committees of the councils. Therefore a statement of facts concerning these panels has been sent to the clerks of all the local councils in Kent, Surrey and Sussex, asking them to assist in carrying through some such proposals as those outlined. A copy has been sent to us by Mr. R. Goulburn Lovell, the hon. general secretary of the Society, from which we note that active work has already been carried out in the South-Eastern area in pursuance of these objects. The following proposals are recommended as the most practical means of overcoming existing difficulties and of obtaining the full benefits of the Advisory Panel scheme as recommended by the Ministry of Health. “ (a) That local authorities should co-opt on to their Buildings Committees an Advisory Panel of Architects, nominated by the President of the R.I.B.A. These gentlemen would have no votes but would act as assessors or advisors on matters of which they had expert knowledge, (b) That intensive propaganda should be organised to explain the benefits which would result if some such scheme were put into operation. By this means, the ratepayers would realise how they could obtain the benefits of the Town Planning Acts, etc., as desired by the Government.” The memorandum includes several illustrations showing the value of architectural advice.
Architecture and Sculpture.
We have often been led to insist on a closer relationship between architecture and sculpture, and it is in the early training and development in both the arts that we feel there is a need for a better understanding of the inter-relation of those qualities which make for distinction in both. There can be a definite sculptural quality in buildings and there should be a something architectural in sculpture if it is to reach the highest level of dignity and breadth. A note in the R.I.B.A. Journal by Mr. Trystan Edwards is very pertinent to the present phase of building, which in its lean and stark design is perhaps rightly suggested as an architecture of protest. It has been suggested that if
Study, by Alfred Stevens.
Lent by Me. Alfred Drury, R.A., to the Exhibition of Retrospective Art, Brussels.