Converted Industrial Buildings Where Past and Present Live in Formal Unity
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
tamara rogić where past and present live in formal unity in formal live and present past where converted industrial buildings buildings industrial converted converted industrial buildings where past and present live in formal unity tamara rogić Converted Industrial Buildings: Where Past and Present Live in Formal Unity To Vida, for perfect timing to come to this world. Converted Industrial Buildings: Where Past and Present Live in Formal Unity Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Technische Universiteit Delft, op gezag van de Rector Magnificus prof. dr. ir. J.T.Fokkema, voorzitter van het College voor Promoties in het openbaar te verdedigen op maandag 12 oktober 2009 om 10:00 uur door Tamara !"#$% diplomirani inženjer arhitekture, Arhitektonski fakultet Sveu!ilišta u Zagrebu (Kroatië) Master of Philosophy, University of Plymouth (Verenigd Koninkrijk) geboren te Rijeka, Kroatië Dit proefschrift is goedgekeurd door de promotoren Prof. ir. L.van Duin Prof. dr. W. F. Denslagen co-promotor Ir. H.J. Engel Samenstelling promotiecommissie: Rector magnificus, voorzitter Prof. ir. L. van Duin Technische Universiteit Delft, promotor Prof. dr. W.F. Denslagen Universiteit Utrecht, promotor Ir. H. Engel Technische Universiteit Delft, co-promotor Prof. dr. B. Colenbrander Technische Universiteit Eindhoven Prof. ir. S. U. Barbieri Technische Universiteit Delft Prof. dr. ir. J.M.J. Coenen Technische Universiteit Delft Dr. E. Nijhof Universiteit Utrecht Copyright © 2009 Tamara Rogi" All rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced in any manner what so ever without permission in writing from the Publisher and the copyright holder. Cover: B. Karanovic, Scaffolding , 1958, etching/ paper 560x450mm, inv.br.552; published in exhibition catalogue no 226 Industrial Landscape, ed. by mr.sc. D. Glavocic (Rijeka: Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art, 2005) Table of Contents VII Acknowledgements 1 Introduction 1 I.1 The Aim of the Thesis 2 I.2 Conversion of the Nineteenth Century Industrial Buildings: the Object of the Study 3 I.3 ‘ Aesthetic Integrity’ of a Building of Historic Importance: the Subject of the Study 5 I.4 International Conservation Charters: the Primary Sources 7 I.5 Positioning of the Research 7 I.5. 1 Architectural Conservation in Action 11 I.5. 2 Industrial Archaeology and Conversion Design Guidelines - a Dead End Street 12 I.6 The Nineteenth Century ‘Paradigm Shifts’ in Architecture: the Method 14 I.7 The Structure of the Thesis 17 Chapter One ‘AESTHETIC INTEGRITY’ OF ‘HISTORIC INTEREST’: A CONTRADICTION IN TERMS 17 Introduction 18 1.1 Protected Industrial Buildings: an Epitome of an Architectural Conservation Paradox 20 1.2 Methodological Principles of Industrial Archaeology 23 1.3 Protection and Management of Industrial Heritage in Europe Prior to 1985 24 1.3.1 On Problems With Definition ’Industrial Heritage’ 25 1.3.2 On Problems With the Evaluation of Industrial Buildings 26 1.3.3 On Problems With Recording 26 1.3.4 On Problems With Reuse 27 1.4 1990 European Recommendation on Management of Industrial Heritage 30 1.5 Evaluation Practice of Industrial Buildings in Europe After 1990 33 1.6 ‘Adaptive Reuse’ of Industrial Buildings: Which Way to Go? 34 1.7 Save the ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of the Old or On the Good Practice of ‘Adaptive Reuse’ 38 1.8 ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ as Opposed to ‘Unity of Style’ 39 1.9 ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ and ‘Technological Functionalism’ of Industrial Buildings 42 1.10 ‘Technological Functionalism’ Questioned 46 Conclusion 49 Chapter Two NINETEENTH CENTURY ORGANICISM: ‘AESTHETIC INTEGRITY’ OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE 49 Introduction 51 2.1 The Nineteenth Century Search for New Forms 51 2.1.1 The Tectonic Approach 54 2.1.2 The Spatial Approach 57 2.2 Nineteenth Century Engineer-Architect: A New Form of Education 64 2.3 Nineteenth Century Organicism: a New Form of Seeing the World 64 2.3.1 On Organicism 66 2.3.2 Rhetorical Character of Organicism 69 2.4 Nineteenth Century Organicism: Nineteenth Century Engineer-Architects Rhetorical Strategy for Design 69 2.5 ‘Aesthetic Integrity’: Rhetoric Strategy for Design 71 Conclusion 73 Chapter Three INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS: THE FIRST GRAND BUILDINGS OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY 73 Introduction 73 3.1 ‘The Wonders of Recent Times, Named Factories’ 78 3.2 Nineteenth Century Industrial Buildings: Testing Field for Formal and Structural Innovations 78 3.2.1 A New Form 80 3.2.2 A New Structure 84 3.3. Nineteenth Century Industrial Buildings and ‘The Fiction of Function’ 84 3.3.1 Functionalism of Building Making 88 3.3.2 Functionalism of Building Programmatic Planning 90 3.3.3 Functionalism vs Organicism 91 3.4 The Nineteenth Century Industrial Buildings and Organicism 93 3.5 Nineteenth Century Industrial Buildings Architecturally Revaluated 93 3.5.1 Tectonic Approach 99 3.5.2 Spatial Approach 102 3.5.3 Stylistic Approach 105 Conclusion 107 Chapter Four PRESERVATION THROUGH CHANGE: AN EVALUATION 107 Introduction 107 4.1 Giles G. Scott and the Nineteenth Century Organicism 110 4.2 Bankside Power Station 110 4.2.1 Bankside’s Tectonic-Spatio-Social Analysis 112 4.2.2 Bankside’s Organic Formal Totality 113 4.3 Bankside: Giles G. Scott’s Unprotected Masterpiece 114 4.4 Bankside and Its Architectural Vision by the Tate 115 4.5 The Benefit of the Hidden Paradox 117 4.6 Coexistence, Imposition, Fusion: Three Approaches to the Interpretation of the Old 127 4.7 Subversiveness of the Aesthetics of the Old 130 Conclusion: Organic Aesthetic Integrity of Old and New 133 Conclusion 133 C.1 Exposition 134 C.2 Raising Action 135 C.3 Climax 137 C.4 Falling Action 138 C.5 Dénouement or Catastrophe or Resolution 141 Appendix 1 145 Appendix 2 149 Bibliography 157 Summary 159 Samenvatting VII Acknowledgements This book exists because my supervisors Leen van Duin and Henk Engel were interested enough in the topic and consequently gave me space and time to pursue the research that resulted in this book, and, because my friends - Irena Vitasovi", Sanja Plavljani" Sirola, Elizabeth Grey, Pamela van den Goorbergh, Filippo Zimbile, friend and colleague Emre Altürk and specially my Sis Sandra Rogi" Jurkovi" - helped me to find again and again the trust in myself at the moments of doubts over the last five years. Thank you all. Special thanks goes to my supervisor Wim Denslagen for thought provoking and inspiring discussions as well as for fine words of support at the most critical times during the whole process of writing and completing this book. Special thanks goes also to The completion of this book would be unnecessarily delayed if it was not for Tanja Zagajski’s superspeedy proofreading and Lara Schrijver’s unconditional help in finding a solution for the final proofreading. In this respect thanks goes to Lara and her connections Simon Rochowski and D’Laine Camp. I am also indebted to Ilmar Hurkxkens for layouting my manuscript into this book. Thank you my parents for being what and where I am now. And finally, François, thank you for knowing me so well. 1 Introduction I.1 The Aim of the Thesis The primary aim of this thesis is an exploration of conservation design guidelines for the conversion of industrial buildings. During the last twenty years, this building type has increasingly been protected as a symbol of the historic value attached to the physical remains of the industrialization process. The best way to secure their continuing role in the urban fabric for the future was through adaptive reuse. Conservationists prescribe design guidelines for the conversion schemes of all protected buildings in formal terms, requiring that the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the protected building is maintained as much as possible. The same set of guidelines apply to the conversion of buildings that are protected for their historic interest as well as those protected for their architectural value. Since industrial buildings are largely protected primarily for the former as opposed to the latter the question arises of how the guidelines reflecting the importance of a building’s aesthetics can govern the conversion of buildings which are considered to be without either aesthetic or architectural value in the first place. The main aim of this thesis is thus to investigate how ‘aesthetic integrity’ can be understood in relation to a building which is considered as being without architectural value, in this case industrial buildings, so that ‘aesthetic integrity’ understood in this new way can guide the design decision of a conversion scheme. In the most general terms, architectural conservation deals with three questions: why, what and how we can protect buildings. Conservationists, coming from various professional backgrounds (historians, art historians, archaeologists, sociologists), provide answers to these questions. Architects are those who have to translate conservationists’ guidelines for the how into the actual architectural design for the conversion of the building. Traditionally, each question has been dealt with separately, resulting in the loss of the architectural or historic value (the why) because of an poorly informed translation of the 2 Introduction guidelines into an architectural design (the how). Recent voices in the field of architectural conservation discussion encourage the approach of dealing with three the questions as three sub- components of one larger process. The main aim of this approach is to ensure that the question of “why” informs as clearly as possible the question of “how”. As it will be shown below, conservationists traditionally promoted ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the old building as it’s main asset, which firstly explains why the building is protected, as well as how this value can be retained if/ when the building is converted. In this thesis, I propose that the clear definition of such a concept, occupying a central position in the overall process of a building preservation, can further ensure that the why, what and how questions are indeed recognised as being individual parts of one overall process.