Orchestrated Public Space: the Curatorial Dimensions of the Transformation of London's Southbank Centre
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Alasdair Jones Orchestrated public space: the curatorial dimensions of the transformation of London's Southbank Centre Book section Original citation: Originally published in: Golchehr, Saba, Ainley, Rosa, Friend, Adrian, Johns, Kathy and Raczynska, Karolina, (eds.) Mediations: Art & Design Agency and participation in public space, conference proceedings. London, UK : Royal College of Art, 2016, pp. 244-257. Reuse of this item is permitted through licensing under the Creative Commons: © 2016 The Author CC-BY-NC 4.0 This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/68373/ Available in LSE Research Online: November 2016 LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. ORCHESTRATED PUBLIC SPACE The Curatorial Dimensions Of The Transformation Of London’s Southbank Centre A. Jones Keywords: Public Space, Open Space, Curation, Southbank Centre, Ethnographic ABSTRACT Since 1999, London’s Southbank Centre, an assemblage of arts venues and constituent public spaces in central London, has been undergoing a gradual ‘transformation’ that continues to this day (Southbank Centre, 2016). In addition to works to refurbish the arts venues, this transformation has involved the renewal of the public realm between, around and (most infamously) beneath those venues. Using ethnographic data I seek to unpack the curatorial dimensions of the redesign and reappropriation of public space at this site. 244 1. INTRODUCTION A curious tension characterises contemporary This paper adds to a sparse but growing writing about urban public space. On the corpus of studies of how urban public one hand, a number of commentators and space (and the production of that space) practitioners, in design fields in particular, is experienced (Low, 2000; Degen, 2008). have proclaimed a public realm renaissance. The paper speaks to a set of interrelated In the UK context, this was signalled by the literatures. Theoretically, the paper takes publication of the Urban Task Force (1999) Lefebvre’s (1991) spatial triad – spatial report Towards an Urban Renaissance with practice, representations of space and spaces the Chair of this task force, Richard Rogers, of representation – as a basis for moving pronouncing that ‘we are on the way to beyond a focus on architectural objects giving London the best public spaces of to the production of space; as a means to any city’ (in Barker, 2007:53). And yet, while understand how urban space is constituted the landscaping of areas of public realm dialectically at the interface of physical form that were until recently treated as merely and social relations. In addition, the paper ‘spaces between buildings’ (Gehl, 1996) gains is situated substantively in relation to two increasing attention, many scholars lament the parallel, but rather disconnected, urban end of public space (especially Sorkin, 1992). studies literatures – the first pertaining to the commodification of ‘disneyfication’ of the There appears to be a fundamental urban public realm (e.g. Sorkin, 1992) and misalignment then, between the sorts of the second to the emergence of ‘creative public spaces that many urban theorists city’ approaches to urban governance (e.g. fear are disappearing and the sorts of public Mould, 2015). Finally, a separate literature spaces that are presently being produced in on the increasing prevalence of curatorial city centres. As Amin and Thrift (2002:135) practices in contemporary social life (O’Neill, observe: 2012; Balzer, 2015), including in urban planning and governance (Wong, 2011), The erosion of public spaces is seen underpins this work. Specifically, the paper to threaten the public sphere. And takes this literature as a starting point for so urban leaders are pressed to thinking about the sociological implications rehabilitate derelict spaces, reintroduce of a curatorial approach to place-making – cafes, fairs and bazaars in public whereby ‘curatorship’ is understood as ‘a places, pedestrianise streets, plan potentially independent, critically engaged multifunctional spaces …. The aesthetic and experimental form of exhibition-making desire cannot be faulted, but are the practice’ (O’Neill, 2012:2) – on London’s South above necessarily civic spaces? Bank. While there is a renewed emphasis on the The data analysed for this paper were production of urban public realm, this does not collected intensively over a four-year period necessarily translate into the manifestation of (2003–7) and supplemented through a characteristically ‘civic’ urban public space; number of follow-up visits to the Southbank of space that affords ‘mutual engagement, Centre. The fieldwork was conducted during and so mutual obligation and loyalty’ (Sennett, the ongoing transformation of the Centre and 1999:24). Notably, many of the claims about sought to explore how visitors used the public the revitalisation of public space and counter- spaces available to them, how professionals claims about its decline have been made in charged with redesigning and managing its abstract, decontextualised accounts. City spaces accounted for the transformation of authorities on the one hand emphasise the these spaces and how the proposed changes centrality of revitalised urban public spaces were represented in formal designs for, and to their visions, while critics lament the loss of accounts of, the transformation. This multi- seemingly idealised forms of public space and facetted approach afforded a more holistic constituent civic-ness. understanding of the spatial production 245 processes constitutive of Lefebvre’s spatial It was at this point that aspects of a proposal triad, by amassing data on how the spaces to regenerate the South Bank as a cultural are architecturally and managerially produced, district (as part of the 1943 County of London how they are used and how they are Plan) were revived. Specifically, Clement represented. Attlee’s Labour Government (1945–51) chose a 29-acre parcel of land on the South Bank for In particular, through a thematic analysis the centrepiece of the ‘Festival of Britain.’ This of accounts of the experience, use and ‘South Bank Exhibition’ – comprising a concert production of public space at the Southbank hall (the Royal Festival Hall (RFH), arts festival Centre, this paper elucidates one reason why and temporary industrial design installations – we might be experiencing the concomitant attracted 8.5 million people over its five-month production and decline of public space. This (May–September 1951) run. argument draws on Kevin Lynch’s (1965) notion of the ‘openness of open space.’ At While the subsequently elected Conservative the Southbank Centre the transformation Government decided to raze the entire (and importantly realisation) of public space exhibition site, except the RFH, to the ground, appears to threaten to ‘enclose’ that space a new and continuing era of cultural activities (to extend Lynch’s conceptual terminology). in the area had been initiated. Thus a series Moreover, this threat to the openness of space of additional arts venues (the National Film experienced around the Southbank Centre Theatre, the Queen Elizabeth Hall and the is not only material (in terms of how the local Hayward Gallery) were built in the environs morphology is physically configured) but of the RFH between 1958 and 1967. Their also symbolic (in terms of how the ‘use value’ delivery was presided over by the London (Lefebvre 1991) of public space is arguably County Council (LCC) and its successor the increasingly prescribed by the Southbank Greater London Council (GLC). Notably, Centre). That is, in accounts of those these additions were the product of post-war responsible for transforming the Southbank LCC/GLC commitment to civic, rather than Centre there is an evident will not only to ‘narrowly cultural,’ policy (after Matarasso, physically reshape the Centre’s urban realm 2001:24). When the GLC was abolished in but also to curate the content of that realm. 1986, responsibility for the-then ‘South Bank Centre’ (comprising all of the institutions listed 2. THE SOUTHBANK CENTRE above except the Royal National Theatre) was handed to the Arts Council and an The South Bank, the riverside district on the independent South Bank Board set up in 1987. south embankment of the Thames in which The influence of the Arts Council, a much the Southbank Centre is located, has a long more arts-focused organisation than the GLC, history as a site of leisure. This dates back signalled a refashioning of the purpose of to the opening of Cuper’s Gardens, one the Centre towards much more artistic (and of London’s main pleasure gardens, in the access-to-the-arts) ends. area in the 1630s. Leisure gave way to more industrial and transport-infrastructural uses Given this diverse history, the ‘design and in the 19th century and right up to the Second content’ of the Southbank Centre has been World War. During the war extensive bomb described as being an ‘agglomeration of damage left much of the area gutted and layers and meanings rather than a coherent seemingly abandoned (Mullins, 2007:26) and whole’ (Matarasso, 2001:24). With a view to as a result by the early postwar period ‘[t]he addressing this perceived incoherence the South Bank had become “a term of despair Centre has been the subject of numerous and reproach”’