THE FOORD ALMSHOUSES AT ROCHESTER
The delightful quadrangular formation of the Foord Almshouses, designed by Mr. Guy Dawber, has the special merit of being almost perfect in both character and style, while as an architectural composition it is of very great interest. Before giving a detailed analysis of this design, it may be well to distinguish as clearly as possible between these three important elements in a building. One often en
counters buildings right in character, but bad both in composition and in style; others are good in character and style, but faulty in composition — but there is no need to enumerate the nine combinations in which the three elements, whether good or bad, may be associated. It is, however, a quite useful method of criticism to estimate the qualities of an architectural design by reference to their separate criteria of character, style and composition.
The “Institution” Character of the
Design.
The first of these elements is largely a matter of deportment. We ask whether the building under consideration has the precise status and expression which its function warrants. In the presence of Mr. Guy Dawber’s design we recognise at once that it gives us the correct impression — without being told what the building is for we can interpret its purpose immediately. We see that it is institutional in character, it is a domestic building, and it also gives us a feeling that its occupants have retired from very active
participation in the affairs of the world. The quadrangle has, in fact, the quality of a retreat. How does it come about that Mr. Dawber has been able to express so completely in architectural terms the idea of a home for aged people. Let us first consider the institutional quality of the design. This quality is not present merely because the buildings have been grouped in a quadrangular formation. There have been designed a large number of quadrangles, such as the Bloomsbury Squares, for instance, which are free, and intentionally free, from an institutional character. The reason is that here the houses are all of approximately equal formal emphasis; we have a repetitive design in which Mr. Jones, Mr. Smith, and other occupants of the square are given abodes of almost identical status and importance. This is not the only expression of domesticity in architecture, but it is a legitimate one, inasmuch as each dwellingplace is separate from its neighbours, while no part of the composition is so much more prominent than the rest as to suggest that there is a hierarchy among them, a definite rule or dominion binding them together. In the Bloomsbury Squares we recognise at once that a number of people have chosen to share between them an architectural composition which, however, does not suggest that they are united by a particular social tie. In the present instance, however, our first impression of the group is the prominent triple arcaded main entrance, surmounted by a gable and clock tower, and while other smaller doorways and THE FOORD ALMSHOUSES, ROCHESTER: VIEW OF THE HALL.
E. Guy Dawber, A. R. A., Architect.
The delightful quadrangular formation of the Foord Almshouses, designed by Mr. Guy Dawber, has the special merit of being almost perfect in both character and style, while as an architectural composition it is of very great interest. Before giving a detailed analysis of this design, it may be well to distinguish as clearly as possible between these three important elements in a building. One often en
counters buildings right in character, but bad both in composition and in style; others are good in character and style, but faulty in composition — but there is no need to enumerate the nine combinations in which the three elements, whether good or bad, may be associated. It is, however, a quite useful method of criticism to estimate the qualities of an architectural design by reference to their separate criteria of character, style and composition.
The “Institution” Character of the
Design.
The first of these elements is largely a matter of deportment. We ask whether the building under consideration has the precise status and expression which its function warrants. In the presence of Mr. Guy Dawber’s design we recognise at once that it gives us the correct impression — without being told what the building is for we can interpret its purpose immediately. We see that it is institutional in character, it is a domestic building, and it also gives us a feeling that its occupants have retired from very active
participation in the affairs of the world. The quadrangle has, in fact, the quality of a retreat. How does it come about that Mr. Dawber has been able to express so completely in architectural terms the idea of a home for aged people. Let us first consider the institutional quality of the design. This quality is not present merely because the buildings have been grouped in a quadrangular formation. There have been designed a large number of quadrangles, such as the Bloomsbury Squares, for instance, which are free, and intentionally free, from an institutional character. The reason is that here the houses are all of approximately equal formal emphasis; we have a repetitive design in which Mr. Jones, Mr. Smith, and other occupants of the square are given abodes of almost identical status and importance. This is not the only expression of domesticity in architecture, but it is a legitimate one, inasmuch as each dwellingplace is separate from its neighbours, while no part of the composition is so much more prominent than the rest as to suggest that there is a hierarchy among them, a definite rule or dominion binding them together. In the Bloomsbury Squares we recognise at once that a number of people have chosen to share between them an architectural composition which, however, does not suggest that they are united by a particular social tie. In the present instance, however, our first impression of the group is the prominent triple arcaded main entrance, surmounted by a gable and clock tower, and while other smaller doorways and THE FOORD ALMSHOUSES, ROCHESTER: VIEW OF THE HALL.
E. Guy Dawber, A. R. A., Architect.