Vol. CXVIII—3072
ARCHITECT & BUILDING NEWS
November 4, 1927
Proprietors: Gilbert Wood & Co., Ltd.
Managing Director: William L. Wood
Editorial, Publishing and Advertisement Offices:
Rolls House, 2 Breams Buildings, London, E.C.4. Tel.: Holborn 5708 Registered Office: Imperial Buildings, Ludgate Circus, London, E.C.4
Principal Contents
Notes and Comments ..... page 709, 710 Bath .........................................................................711, 712
Prof essional. Societies ....... 712 John Wood and Bath..............................................713-718
Some Original Drawings by John Wood (Illustrations) 719,-721 Beckenham Municipal Offices Competition (Illustrations)
720, 723-725, 727 The John Wood Celebrations at Bath .... 722 Correspondence . . . . . . . . 726 The British School at Rome (Illustrations) . . 728-730
The Architecture of an Industrial City (Illustrations) Points from Papers ....... Notes in Brief ............................................ . London Building- Notes ...... The Week’s Building News ..... Contracts Open............................................ . Building- Tenders..................................................... Current Market Prices ...... Current Measured Rates ......
NOTES AND COMMENTS
In the intervals of training future architects, Profession Reilly devotes some of his scant leisure to the noss important work of educating laymen to a pri understanding and appreciation of the Art
die From time to time, articles from his pen (apjgfcf n John O’London’s Weekly, which bright ilit vpfaper for thoughtful people may be con
g-ratuJafjcd alike upon its recognition of Architecture as ond( ojf the things that matter, and upon its selection mf thd contributor who expounds the fact. Professor dieillyj’si latest article, in the. current issue, deals with
Thd Age of Concrete,” an era he perceives to be gradually approaching and “ which may cause, and pfoMbliy will in the end, as great a revolution in building as did Roman concrete eighteen centuries ago.W (Indeed, the importance of the Roman innovation gp i vaulting over vast spaces with concrete has hardly : received its due recognition; and though greatIjy improved materials and appliances are ready to otpi hand for the purpose, we have, as yet, scarcely reached the level of Roman achievements with this THTlteTial. Though, doubtless, an idle occupation, it is interesting to speculate what might have happened to the world’s architecture had the Roman Empire not fallen and the secret of the Roman cement not been lost in the ruins. For one thing, the world would not have taken seven centuries to reach the somewhat limited span of the Gothic arch. It is probable that that distinctive span would never have been evolved; and in such case Britain would have been spared the psychological phenomenon of the century-long “ battle of the styles.”
From this article we might deduce that Professor Reilly himself is developing a new orientation in regard to modern tendencies in Architecture. A few years ago he, with others, was profoundly interested in the more recent work of the United States. That enthusiasm appears to have slackened with the realisation that American achievement centres mainly in the skyscraper, and that the American architects have failed to devise an artistic treatment, either expressive of, or commensurate with, Its novelty of form. Probably the facility with which steel framing lends itself to fancy dress, whether in Beaux Arts stonework or Venetian Gothic brickwork, has been the pitfall. We should judge that Professor Reilly now looks to see the future architecture in reinforced concrete, and this is a material that will, to a great extent, dictate its own expression. ‘ ‘ The buildings of the future constructed in it will not be of the heavy monumental character bricks and stone imply. The
new architecture will be more akin to Gothic than to Classic, but with angular forms rather than curved ones, for the moulds of the latter are difficult to make.” Also expensive! It is one of the savingvirtues of reinforced concrete that, in these days of increasing building costs, i£ will not pay to make
moulds to perpetuate the old traditional motifs. That, at least, will force architects out of the rut, and to thinking along original lines. As yet we must look to the Continent, and particularly France, where reinforced concrete was invented, for the first. tentative experiments in a new architecture. “ To begin with,” says the Professor to his lay audience, “ we shall no doubt think the buildings ugly. In the end we shall find them possessed, we fancy, of strange power rather like that of some of the pictures of machinery in the ‘ Metropolis ’ film. Probably our appreciation will be speedier, if our own architects begin to experiment in the architectural treatment of reinforced concrete. The cosmopolitanism of the present age tends to leave us too much under the thrall of foreign idiom. All our architectural ideas originally came from other countries, but were developed here into a native tradition. “ The Age of Concrete ” will probably follow the same procedure.
* * * *
The full details of the proposals of the London and Home Counties Traffic Advisory Committee for co-ordinating the passenger transport facilities in the London traffic area have now been made public, and we see no reason to alter the views we previously expressed when an intelligent forecast of the main provisions was given in The Times. It is stated that the proposals for a common fund and management have, generally, been favourably received by the public and private bodies concerned in providing the transport facilities. This was only to be expected from the London County Council, which sees a prospect of eliminating much of the competition which makes their tramway undertaking a hopelessly losing concern. Lord Ashfield, the head of the Underground group, is less certain in his attitude. He is reported to have expressed a liking for adventure and for the risks of private enterprise, and a scheme which limits the scope and extent of his combine’s activities to certain lines and in certain directions can hardly hold a strong appeal for him. The most notable point about the report, however, is its negation or abrogation of the principle that unrestricted competition tends to the benefit of the people as a whole. It is the abandonment of a hitherto important tenet of British economics, and the truth of the converse
731 734 735, 736
. 737 738, 739 740, 741
. 742 742, 744 743/744 745, 746
ARCHITECT & BUILDING NEWS
November 4, 1927
Proprietors: Gilbert Wood & Co., Ltd.
Managing Director: William L. Wood
Editorial, Publishing and Advertisement Offices:
Rolls House, 2 Breams Buildings, London, E.C.4. Tel.: Holborn 5708 Registered Office: Imperial Buildings, Ludgate Circus, London, E.C.4
Principal Contents
Notes and Comments ..... page 709, 710 Bath .........................................................................711, 712
Prof essional. Societies ....... 712 John Wood and Bath..............................................713-718
Some Original Drawings by John Wood (Illustrations) 719,-721 Beckenham Municipal Offices Competition (Illustrations)
720, 723-725, 727 The John Wood Celebrations at Bath .... 722 Correspondence . . . . . . . . 726 The British School at Rome (Illustrations) . . 728-730
The Architecture of an Industrial City (Illustrations) Points from Papers ....... Notes in Brief ............................................ . London Building- Notes ...... The Week’s Building News ..... Contracts Open............................................ . Building- Tenders..................................................... Current Market Prices ...... Current Measured Rates ......
NOTES AND COMMENTS
In the intervals of training future architects, Profession Reilly devotes some of his scant leisure to the noss important work of educating laymen to a pri understanding and appreciation of the Art
die From time to time, articles from his pen (apjgfcf n John O’London’s Weekly, which bright ilit vpfaper for thoughtful people may be con
g-ratuJafjcd alike upon its recognition of Architecture as ond( ojf the things that matter, and upon its selection mf thd contributor who expounds the fact. Professor dieillyj’si latest article, in the. current issue, deals with
Thd Age of Concrete,” an era he perceives to be gradually approaching and “ which may cause, and pfoMbliy will in the end, as great a revolution in building as did Roman concrete eighteen centuries ago.W (Indeed, the importance of the Roman innovation gp i vaulting over vast spaces with concrete has hardly : received its due recognition; and though greatIjy improved materials and appliances are ready to otpi hand for the purpose, we have, as yet, scarcely reached the level of Roman achievements with this THTlteTial. Though, doubtless, an idle occupation, it is interesting to speculate what might have happened to the world’s architecture had the Roman Empire not fallen and the secret of the Roman cement not been lost in the ruins. For one thing, the world would not have taken seven centuries to reach the somewhat limited span of the Gothic arch. It is probable that that distinctive span would never have been evolved; and in such case Britain would have been spared the psychological phenomenon of the century-long “ battle of the styles.”
From this article we might deduce that Professor Reilly himself is developing a new orientation in regard to modern tendencies in Architecture. A few years ago he, with others, was profoundly interested in the more recent work of the United States. That enthusiasm appears to have slackened with the realisation that American achievement centres mainly in the skyscraper, and that the American architects have failed to devise an artistic treatment, either expressive of, or commensurate with, Its novelty of form. Probably the facility with which steel framing lends itself to fancy dress, whether in Beaux Arts stonework or Venetian Gothic brickwork, has been the pitfall. We should judge that Professor Reilly now looks to see the future architecture in reinforced concrete, and this is a material that will, to a great extent, dictate its own expression. ‘ ‘ The buildings of the future constructed in it will not be of the heavy monumental character bricks and stone imply. The
new architecture will be more akin to Gothic than to Classic, but with angular forms rather than curved ones, for the moulds of the latter are difficult to make.” Also expensive! It is one of the savingvirtues of reinforced concrete that, in these days of increasing building costs, i£ will not pay to make
moulds to perpetuate the old traditional motifs. That, at least, will force architects out of the rut, and to thinking along original lines. As yet we must look to the Continent, and particularly France, where reinforced concrete was invented, for the first. tentative experiments in a new architecture. “ To begin with,” says the Professor to his lay audience, “ we shall no doubt think the buildings ugly. In the end we shall find them possessed, we fancy, of strange power rather like that of some of the pictures of machinery in the ‘ Metropolis ’ film. Probably our appreciation will be speedier, if our own architects begin to experiment in the architectural treatment of reinforced concrete. The cosmopolitanism of the present age tends to leave us too much under the thrall of foreign idiom. All our architectural ideas originally came from other countries, but were developed here into a native tradition. “ The Age of Concrete ” will probably follow the same procedure.
* * * *
The full details of the proposals of the London and Home Counties Traffic Advisory Committee for co-ordinating the passenger transport facilities in the London traffic area have now been made public, and we see no reason to alter the views we previously expressed when an intelligent forecast of the main provisions was given in The Times. It is stated that the proposals for a common fund and management have, generally, been favourably received by the public and private bodies concerned in providing the transport facilities. This was only to be expected from the London County Council, which sees a prospect of eliminating much of the competition which makes their tramway undertaking a hopelessly losing concern. Lord Ashfield, the head of the Underground group, is less certain in his attitude. He is reported to have expressed a liking for adventure and for the risks of private enterprise, and a scheme which limits the scope and extent of his combine’s activities to certain lines and in certain directions can hardly hold a strong appeal for him. The most notable point about the report, however, is its negation or abrogation of the principle that unrestricted competition tends to the benefit of the people as a whole. It is the abandonment of a hitherto important tenet of British economics, and the truth of the converse
731 734 735, 736
. 737 738, 739 740, 741
. 742 742, 744 743/744 745, 746