Converted Industrial Buildings Where Past and Present Live in Formal Unity

converted industrial buildings where past and present live in formal unity

tamara rogić tamara rogić converted industrial buildings where past and present live in formal unity

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

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.

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. Educated as an architect with a professional career built up in the field of architectural conservation, I intend to propose a framework for both conservationists and architects within which they can create better conditions for both conservation and reuse of protected buildings. Furthermore, this framework could open up the way for collaboration between these two professions.

I.2 The Industrial Buildings: the Object of the Study Technological advancement, as well as changes in economic trends left numerous industrial areas abandoned, particularly those situated close to city centres. In most cases these were industrial sites built during the nineteenth century, at the time of widespread industrialization within Europe. Abandoned, these kinds of sites later became desirable city areas for urban regeneration. During the revitalization process of these areas, industrial buildings and other structures related to the production processes that formerly occupied the site were both demolished and reused in great numbers. Since the nineteenth century, and particularly since the 1960s, the scientific interest and approach to history that typified the nineteenth century has slowly but steadily been exchanged with an interest in the past that, whilst no less 1 D. Lowenthal, The Heritage scientific, shows a greater degree of emotional attachment.1 The Crusade and the Spoils of History (London: Pinguin Books Ltd., result of this increasingly populist interest in the past—from 1996) distant to as recent as yesterday—is the birth of the concept of heritage; as being worthy of care in some fashion. Lowenthal argued that both history and heritage cannot escape offering a biased picture of the past, yet while history strives towards diminishing the bias, heritage roots itself in it, and intents to 2 Lowenthal, 1996, 122 strengthen it.2 Consequently, Lowenthal called this shift of 3 Lowenthal, 1996 interest from history to heritage a ‘heritage crusade’3: Over ensuing centuries,[…] material relics played an increasing role as emblems of power and piety, then of popular purpose. Heritage today is more substantial, more secular, and more social. Three dimensions of its enlargement merit attention: Introduction 3 from the elite and grand to the vernacular and everyday; from the remote to recent; and from the material to the intangible.4 4 Lowenthal, 1996, 14 In the last fifty years the field of architectural conservation has blossomed as a result of this ‘heritagisation’ of the past. Vernacular buildings, from farmsteads to industrial buildings, have been the principle benefactors of this new-found historical interest, as can best be evidenced by their numbers swelling the rapidly growing national heritage inventories across Europe. The conservation charters from the late 1970s and 1980s show a shift in the conservationists’ traditional view of what is considered a monument in two main ways. On the one hand, the focus of interest expanded from an individual building to entire built areas and sites. 5 On the other, most likely as a consequence of 5 For example, UNESCO Recommendations Concerning the former, that the focus began to include buildings traditionally the Safeguarding of the Beauty considered to be of low culture rather than high, such as and Character of Landscapes 6 and Sites (1962) http://gillonj. vernacular buildings. The conservationists’ ensuing interest in tripod.com/uralheritage industrial buildings and sites was a consequence of just such an chartersandstandards/ Recommendations Concerning attitude developed towards the built environment. the Protection at National Level In order to prevent and regulate the disappearance of original of the Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972) http://gillonj. building fabric and form caused by demolition and/or reuse, tripod.com/culturalheritage conservationists granted legal protection to industrial buildings chartersandstandards/ ; ICOMOS The Florence Charter (Historic and sites through their process of systematic evaluation. gardens and landscapes); Charters specializing in the care of industrial heritage show Charter on the Conservation of Historic Towns and Urban Areas; that conservationists promote the idea of constant use of Council of Europe European these buildings and sites as the best method of ensuring their Landscape Convention ongoing maintenance.7 Since the industrial activity that originally 6 Council of Europe Recommendation No (89) 6 on occupied these buildings and sites had moved further afield the protection and enhancement or even overseas, constant use could only be ensured through of the rural architectural heritage; Recommendation No their reuse in other programmatic domains, such as housing and R (90) 20 on the protection and offices. conservation of the industrial, technical and civil engineering Thus, on the one hand industrial buildings and sites are heritage in Europe; ICOMOS protected in order to prevent change to their fabric when they Srbska Pleso-Brno Symposium Resolutions the Protection of are reused, while on the other they need to be reused as one of Folk Architecture 1971; Plovdiv the best ways to ensure their future life. Industrial buildings and Symposium Recommendations on Vernacular Architecture sites are therefore inevitably exposed to a degree of change in and its adoption to the Needs fabric and form. Because they are such desirable objects of both of Modern Life, 1975; (CIAV- ICOMOS) Thessaloniki Charter protection and reuse, industrial buildings and sites epitomise best on vernacular architecture the general conservation paradox: protection or no change against 1986 http://www.international. reuse or inevitable change of their fabric and form. As such, icomos.org/charters.htm industrial buildings are seen as the most appropriate objects 7 Council of Europe Recommendation No R (90) 20 on of architectural heritage for investigating the conservationists’ the protection and conservation problematic of reuse. of the industrial, technical and civil engineering heritage in Europe (1990) I.3 ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of a Building of Historic Importance: the Subject of the Study Reuse, or change of the original/most recent building function usually requires a much greater extent of change to the building fabric than any other action of maintenance. The kind and extent of change to the existing building fabric of a monument has 4 Introduction

traditionally been the central theoretical debate of architectural 8 For history of conservation conservation.8 While consensus always existed regarding the see J. Jokilehto, A History of Architectural Conservation conceptual idea that the intervention must be minimal, the (Oxford, Burlington MA: Lesevier translation of this conceptual standpoint into actual building Butterworth-Heinemann, 1999); W. Denslagen, form, that is, the kind of change defined through design of an Architectural restoration in intervention (even when only basic repairs were carried out such Western Europe: controversy and continuity (Amsterdam: as during the nineteenth century work throughout Europe) has Architectura&Natura Press, remained at the core of the debate, about which consensus has 1994) never been achieved.9 What exactly a minimal intervention should 9 Jokilehto 1999; Denslagen look like remains a permanently debatable issue. 1994 While minimal intervention as an ethical position has been discussed rather extensively, the discussion on its formal embodiment has received much less attention. It is through the actual design of an intervention that the ‘minimal’ theoretical position becomes a tangible category. That an intervention to a building protected for being an embodiment of a particular historic value should be minimal is almost a self-evident ethical position. Taking it as a starting point in the ethical debate, this thesis attempts to address something less evident: how minimal intervention can be achieved in formal terms. Guidelines for ”Aesthetic integrity and the coherence of the 10 ICOMOS International whole” were set in the Venice Charter10 and reaffirmed in the Charter for the Conservation and 11 12 Restoration of Monuments and 1972 Budapest Resolution, the 1979 Burra Charter, the 1983 Sites (The Venice Charter) (1964) Appleton Charter,13 and the 1992 New Zealand Charter14 as a set 11 ICOMOS Resolutions of the of basic conceptual rules that governed the overall design of Symposium on the Introduction of Contemporary Architecture an intervention and its assessment. Although the 1964 Venice into Ancient Groups of Buildings Charter - the Bible of architectural conservation - laid down the (1972) basic rules regarding the form of any intervention, these rules 12 ICOMOS The Australia were nevertheless further clarified in a number of charters that ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of followed (Appendix 1). The main aim of setting formal rules is to Cultural Significance (The Burra make it possible to assess the level of preservation of ‘aesthetic Charter) (Australia ICOMOS) (1979) integrity and the coherence of the whole’ within the design of an intervention. Thus, although by defining formal rules the charters 13 ICOMOS Appleton specify how the preservation can be assessed with regards to Charter for the Protection and Enhancement of the Built the ‘aesthetic integrity’, the charters do not define precisely what Environment[PDF] (ICOMOS ‘aesthetic integrity’ is. Canada) (1983) On the one hand conservationists present the ‘aesthetic 14 ICOMOS Charter for the integrity’ of the old as a historical asset of the highest Conservation of Places of Cultural Heritage Value (ICOMOS importance which needs to be altered as little as possible, while New Zealand, 1992) on the other a definition of this integrity is nowhere to be found. In the urban regeneration climate, where conservation assumes an ever more important role, a clear definition of the main conceptual guideline for the design of an intervention, such as ‘aesthetic integrity’, presents itself as a requirement. Thus, the present thesis questions what ‘aesthetic integrity’ may consist of within the field of architectural conservation. The conservation charters specify that the assessment of 15 This is shown at length in the preservation of the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of any old structure Chapter One through the intervention is conducted on a formal basis.15 In Introduction 5 architectural historical literature, the ‘coherent whole’ or ‘unity’ (‘integrity’ in this case carrying the meaning of physical unity of architectonic elements)16 are usually explained and evaluated 16 Oxford English Dictionary (OED) ‘integrity’ in the formal terms of a historical style, such as Romanesque, noun [mass noun] Gothic, etc. The nineteenth century conservationists’ debate 1 the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; on the form of the alteration to the building is presented in moral uprightness literature as being one of ‘stylistic restoration’ as opposed to 2 the state of being whole and 17 undivided; the condition of ‘conservation’. The former meant that the new intervention being unified, unimpaired, or must be executed in the same style of the old, whereas the latter sound in construction; internal consistency or lack or corruption meant that the new intervention must be distinguished from in electronic data the old in material usage and form. In the twentieth century, conservationists accepted the ‘conservation’ point of view by 17 Jokilehto 1999, 137-213 stating explicitly in the Venice Charter that the ‘unity of style’ is not the aim of the intervention.18 Rather, they required the 18 Venice Charter, [11] preservation of ‘aesthetic integrity’ as something different from the ‘unity of style’. How to understand ‘aesthetic integrity’, in terms other than those of ‘unity of style,’ is thus the main subject of this thesis.

I.4 International Conservation Charters: Primary Sources It is essential that the principles guiding the preservation and restoration of ancient buildings should be agreed and be 19 Venice Charter, [Permeable] laid down on an international basis, with each country being 20 Jokilehto, 1999, 70 responsible for applying the plan within the framework of its own 21 For the first comparative 19 study of the protection systems culture and traditions. in Europe see G. Baldwin Brown, The present practice of safeguarding the protected historic The Care of Ancient Monuments, and Account of the Legislative built environment in Europe is a result of interaction between and Other Measures Adopted in practices at an individual, national and international European European Countries (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, level. The former ‘individual’,‘national’ practices are defined 1905) through the protection legislation of each individual country, whilst the latter are achieved through international charters, 22 This is the case if the 1899 Hague Convention is excluded conventions, and recommendations. Historically, it was national since it is an international legislation for the protection and safeguarding of the built document which addresses the care of protected monuments environment that appeared prior to international legislation: in a very specific war situation. the first national register of protected buildings and art was For the text of this Convention 20 see http://www.yale.edu/ developed in France in 1790, following the Revolution, while lawweb/avalon/lawofwar/ in other countries this occurred later, during the nineteenth lawwar.htm; for the text of 21 Athens Charter (1931) see http:// century . The first international document on safeguarding www.international.icomos.org/ protected elements of the built environment was issued in centre_documentation/chartes_ 1931, titled “The Athens Charter”.22 Following the end of the eng.htm Second World War, the internationalisation of the protection 23 UNESCO http://whc. unesco.org/ ; ICOMOS http:// practice was intensified with the establishment of world-wide www.international.icomos.org/ organisational bodies, such as UNESCO in 1945, the International centre_documentation/chartes_ eng.htm; The Council of Europe Council of Museums, ICOM (1946), the International Council of http://www.coe.int/T/DG4/ Monuments and Sites, ICOMOS, (1965) as well as those more CultureHeritage/Default_en.asp regional in scope, such as The Council of Europe (1957). 23 These 24 The Council of Europe “Statute of the Council of bodies issued guidelines and recommendations for the care of Europe”, ETS no. 001, http:// the protected built environment. Countries which were member conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/ states of these bodies could ratify these documents,24 with an Treaties/Html/001.htm 6 Introduction

Act that obliged these countries to pass the ratified documents to the ruling national party, so that national laws and policies were formed in accordance with the guidelines of the ratified 25 On the following web page document.25 This internationally organised protection of the built the list of countries per ratified convention can be found. http:// environment at national level was the twentieth century follow- conventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN/ up of the nineteenth century national initiatives. v3MenuEtats.asp "European Conventions and Agreements, however, are 26 The Council of Europe, not statutory acts of the Organisation; they owe their legal “About Conventions and Agreements in the Council of existence simply to the expression of the will of those States Europe Treaty Series (CETS)”, that may become Parties thereto, as manifested inter alia by http://conventions.coe.int/ 26 general/v3IntroConvENG.asp the signature and ratification of the treaty." The statutes of these organisations state that “the Committee [of the Council 27 “Statute” http:// of Europe or the UNESCO] may request the governments of conventions.coe.int/Treaty/ en/Treaties/Html/001.htm, members to inform it of the action taken by them with regard article 15 to such recommendations.”27 Indeed in 1986, the Council of 28 The Council of Europe, Europe initiated the "cultural policy reviews" programme28 which “National cultural policy review programme”, http://www.coe. provided "comprehensive policy analysis and advice, geared at int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/ policy optimisation for the benefit of the country's citizens."29 Policies/Reviews/default_ en.asp#TopOfPage The Compendium of Cultural Policies and Trends was created as a result of this programme in 1998 and has since been updated 29 “National…” http://www. on a regular basis.30 The Compendium can be searched vertically, coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/ Policies/Reviews/default_ that is, by country, and horizontally/transversally, that is, by en.asp#TopOfPage subject-matter across different countries,31 thus allowing for 30 The Council of Europe, “The international comparisons. Compendium, Contents and features” http://www.coe.int/t/ For example, in 1975 the European Charter for Architectural dg4/cultureheritage/Policies/ Heritage was proposed by the Council of Europe and The The Compendium/contents_ 32 en.asp#TopOfPage consequently signed by almost all member states. It promotes 'integrated conservation': 31 “The Compendium” Integrated conservation is achieved by the application http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/ cultureheritage/Policies/The of sensitive restoration techniques and the correct choice of The Compendium/contents_ appropriate functions. In the course of history the hearts of en.asp#TopOfPage Transversal reports have been created by the towns and sometimes villages have been left to deteriorate and Council of Europe on sectors, have turned into areas of substandard housing. Their restoration such as, the role and structure of national institutions (John must be undertaken in a spirit of social justice and should not Myerscough et al. National cause the departure of the poorer inhabitants. Because of this, cultural institutions in transition: ‘desétatisation’ and privatisation conservation must be one of the first considerations in all urban (Strasbourg: The Council of and regional planning.33 Europe, 2001) CC-CULT(2001)10 (PDF) or cultural policies in In the Compendium, entry 4.2.9. by the United Kingdom, the general (The Council of Europe following can be found: "a need to acknowledge the important “Cultural policy and cultural diversity”, http://www.coe. role of the historic environment in regeneration projects and int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/ support this economically,"34 and under the entry 4.2.9, from the Completed/Diversity/default_ en.asp#TopOfPage). Transversal Netherlands: "Plans are being developed and implemented to study entitled Policy and Law in integrate concepts of cultural and historic value into the spatial Heritage Conservation examines the topic of implementation planning of the Netherlands as stated in the Belvedere policy of ratified conventions and document (see chapter 2.3)."35 Thus, some twenty years later this recommendations into national 36 policies on protection of built European Charter found its way into the countries' policies. heritage (Robert Pickard, Another example of the international charters influencing Policy and Law in Heritage Conservation, (London, Yew York: national practices of conservation, or simply another example SPON PRESS, 2001). of internationalisation of the conservation practice, is that of Introduction 7

England. Pickard conducted an analysis on how national English 32 For other examples see policies and laws on the protection and maintenance of the built Appendix 2 environment are translated into actual practice.37 When analysing 33 The Council of Europe, 38 “European Charter for "the philosophy and principles of repair and conservation" , Architectural Heritage”, 7 http:// Pickard found that in England, attitudes towards repair have www.coe.int/T/E/Cultural_Co- operation/Heritage/Resources/ moved away from those traditionally defined by SPAB at the Amsterdam_declaration. beginning of the twentieth century and practiced in England asp#TopOfPage since. Today, Principles of Repair by English Heritage reflects 34 “The Compendium” http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/ the attitudes of the Venice and Burra Charters which "may be cultureheritage/Policies/The differentiated from the desired objectives of SPAB",39 particularly The Compendium/contents_ with regard to the definition of 'original materials' as related to en.asp#TopOfPage the philosophical standpoint that the contribution of all times 35 “The Compendium” http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/ (in the form of built fabric) must be preserved in the protected cultureheritage/Policies/The buildings, which is the ethical basis of all three documents.40 The Compendium/contents_ The above examples of the effect of implementation of the en.asp#TopOfPage ratified international documents to the national legislation is by 36 The Council of Europe, “The Council of Europe’s cultural no means exhaustive. Rather, its sole intention is to illustrate the heritage Conventions: Europe’s following point: Internationally defined principles are perceived heritage – a shared asset” (Strasbourg: The Council of as universally valid and can, as such, be implemented in every Europe Publishing, 2007) national framework for the protection of the built environment, 37 R. Pickard, Conservation in the Built Environment, (Essex: just as the Venice Charter prescribes. In effect, they can become Addison Wesley Longman legally binding only if implemented at national levels. As can Limited, 1996) be seen from the above examples, international documents do 38 Pickard 1996, 141-173 shape national policies as well as the practice of protecting 39 Pickard 1996, 149 the built environment. The international conservation charters 40 Pickard 1996, 149 thus provide the basic theoretical and practical principles of this field in general. As such, they are the first and primary source of reference when studying any conservation principles.

I.5 Positioning of the Research

I.5.1 Architectural Conservation in Action During the late 1980s and 1990s, the study of heritage profiled itself as a field of study interested in social, political and economic aspects of the heritagisation process. The field of architectural conservation used the results of these studies to justify the need for including particular material as well as immaterial elements of culture under the concept of heritage, and consequently requiring its statutory protection. Heritage studies thus provide the answer to why we protect within the field of architectural conservation. Once the case is made for particular elements of culture to be included into ‘our common cultural heritage’, the phase of discrimination begins between the buildings of the same ‘group’ in order to protect only those of ‘architectural and historic interest’. While ideological agendas can often be the same for this part of the process as for the previous, the tools of enquiry used here are extended. When eventually a decision has to be made as to which building within a group should be protected 8 Introduction

and which should not, archaeological, architectural historical and aesthetics methods of analysis come into play. This part of the process is guided by the what we protect question. Put in the most general terms, conservation practice is divided into two major steps. The first involves the evaluation of the building or site, that is, the assessment of its overall cultural value, on the basis of which conservationists decide whether to grant protected status to a building. The questions answered during this phase are why and what to conserve. The second step involves management of the protected site or building, with the question answered during this phase primarily being how (scheme 1). Already at the end of the 1970s, conservationists recognized ‘a missing link’ between evaluation and management as part of the conservation process: often the results of the evaluation provided insufficient or inappropriate information for managing the protected building. The 1979 Burra Charter proposes to deal with the problem through the means of a conservation plan. Conservation plans were first 41 ICOMOS Australia, The Burra introduced in the Australian conservation system following the Charter, http://www.icomos.org/ 41 australia/burra.html Burra Conference in 1979, organised by ICOMOS, Australia. The aim of a conservation plan is to guide the management work 42 K. Clark, ed. Conservation involved in protected buildings. Conservation plans include Plans in Action: Proceedings of the Oxford Conference (London: both the research into the buildings' value, as well as research English Heritage, 1999) on the physical condition of the buildings in question. The 43 The Burra Charter interrelationship between the two kinds of research provides the 44 Clark, 1999: The basis for making decisions on the intervention of the building contributors to this publication, 42 all practicing conservation in question. 'The Burra Charter Process' is given in the table officers, reflected on the newly below.43 promoted practice within 44 English Heritage of organising Kate Clark, editor of the Conservation Plans in Action, and guiding their work on the summarizes 'The Burra Charter Process': basis of a conservation plan. In 2001, English Heritage issued A Conservation Plan sets out 'why a place is significant a publication entitled Informed and how that significance will be retained in any further use, Conservation (K. Clark, Informed conservation: Understanding alteration, development and management.' The Conservation historic buildings and their Plan process begins with the understanding of the site and moves landscapes for conservation (London: English Heritage, logically through an assessment of significance, to understanding 2001), a kind of guidelines for how that significance might be vulnerable and thus what policies both conservation officers and the public at large on step-by- or guidelines are needed to retain that significance. Once a step functioning of the overall Conservation Plan is in place, specific strategies or actions can conservation system. The main emphasis is laid on the ‘role of follow.[…] what matters is that as site managers [conservation understanding in conservation’, officers], we should do our best to hand on the significance of which is best achieved by 45 connecting as close as possible what we have inherited to future generations. the evaluation results and the guidelines for management of protected parts of built Reuse, the main subject of this thesis, can be considered environment. This publication one of the managing policies for old buildings, according to is a comprehensive version of a publication issued only two Scheme 1. Reuse of a building comprises of two phases: one is years prior, also by English the selection of a new programmatic use for the building, and the Heritage, entitled Conservation Plans in Action. other is the architectural design of it. According to J. Kerr, the so- called 'father' of the structure of a conservation plan, a thorough 45 Clark 1999, xxiv. research into all aspects of a building's history - architectural, Introduction 9 social, economic - is the foundation for satisfying a fully informative conservation/management plan of the building.46 46 J.S. Kerr, The Conservation Plan: a guide to the preparation The results of the evaluation of the building should enable of Conservation Plan for places conservationists to derive a list of possible uses for the old of European cultural significance (Sydney: The National Trust of building, as well as guidelines for the design of the intervention. Australia) As previously indicated, charters specify that the design of the intervention needs to be guided by the ambition of preserving the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the old, and by formal rules deriving from this. Regardless of whether the value attached to the building is historic—in the sense of socially or culturally so – or architecturally historic, the building is protected as a whole. This implies that the building form expresses or embodies a particular historic interest irrespective of whether that form has any architectural value in its own right. This means that the overall form of buildings, which do not have their own architectural historical value, is protected as a symbol of historic value. The guidelines for the design of an intervention are the same for both types of building form, i.e. those bearing their own architectural quality and those bearing another kind of historic value. The form of industrial buildings belongs to the latter type of value. The main question of this thesis is then narrowed down to the following: what is the ‘aesthetic integrity’ by which a form embodies a symbolic rather than architectural value, and in what way can it be formulated during the evaluation process so that is useful for the management of the protected building. According to Lowenthal, the relationship with the present is another element that distinguishes the past, as defined through historical enquiry, from that reconstructed through heritage. While historical enquiry is not concerned with the immediately obvious relevance for the present, a clear relationship between the past and the present is an imperative for the heritage definition of the past.47 The Conservation Charters recommend 47 Lowenthal, 1996, 124 that the best way to maintain or manage a protected building is to keep it in constant use.48 For many buildings, particularly 48 Venice Charter, [5] the vernacular industrial ones, this means change of use. We can thus conclude that the task of the last stage of heritage conservation is to create an agenda which makes clear how the past counts for the present. Instead of just preserving a dead history, architectural conservation promotes a living past through heritage. Architectural design for the conversion of a protected building form is the one element of this overall process which most directly shows that the past still lives on in the present. Within this chain of protected building management, architects constitute the profession most closely involved with the design of the intervention. They can therefore be said to be those who render visible the ways in which the past lives on in the present. If the value of the protected building identified during the evaluation process is to be preserved through conversion, architects must base their design-related decisions on the 10 Introduction

design guidelines deﬁned by conservationists. On the one hand, these guidelines must be formulated in relation to the evaluation results, if the connection between the evaluation results and the management of the protected building is to be achieved. On the other, they need to be operative in architectural terms as well.

THE BURRA CHARTER PROCESS SEQUENCE OF INVESTIGATIONS, DECISIONS AND ACTIONS

SCHEME 1 Introduction 11

The buildings that are protected because of their architectural value are evaluated in formal terms, that is to say, in the same formal way in which the design guidelines are formulated. Conversely, the buildings protected because of their other historic values are evaluated in terms other than formal. In the former case the relationship between the evaluation results and design guidelines is evident. However, in the latter case this relationship does not exist. Thus, the thesis focuses the enquiry on the relationship between the results of the evaluation and their use in the decision making for the architectural design of an intervention, with particular interest in the cases where a building is protected as a symbol, such as industrial buildings.

I.5.2 Industrial Archaeology and Conversion Design Guidelines - a Dead End Street Industrial buildings and sites have so far been evaluated for conservation purposes by methods of industrial archaeology. As with art and architectural history, archaeology uses formal analysis as a basic tool for building description. The main difference lies in the usage of the formal analysis by these two ﬁelds of enquiry. In industrial archaeology, formal description and analysis of buildings is used as a dating device, whereas as in architectural history it is used as both a dating and evaluation device. Architectural historians add value judgement to their analysis by focusing on some parts of the building – usually characteristic or stylistic elements. However, industrial archaeologists claim to produce a plain description of all parts of the building equally: “all features of a building are given equal weight so that it is treated archaeologically rather than architecturally”.49 The review of the evaluation reports 49 M. Palmer and P. Neaverson, Industrial Archaeology: of industrial heritage from different European countries, Principles and Practice (London: conducted for the purposes of this thesis, shows that one of the Routledge, 1998), 103 main reasons why industrial buildings and sites are evaluated archaeologically, rather than in terms of architectural history, lies in the inappropriateness of the traditional stylistic analysis for the description and evaluation of these buildings and sites.50 50 See Chapter One Conservationists claimed that only through industrial archaeological investigations was it possible to justify the protection of this type of heritage building. However, the same review conducted herein shows that the choice of the type of investigation for industrial heritage was made solely on the basis of its suitability to justify protection. At no time since the mid- 1980s has the appropriateness of the results of archaeological investigations been tested against the design guidelines for conversion. Such an investigation has been conducted for the purposes of this thesis as the essential premise for the choice of a main methodological framework of investigation. Based on an example of a conversion of an industrial building, the investigation has 12 Introduction

shown that the conceptual basis of the archaeological formal analysis does not provide an adequate description of the ‘aesthetic integrity’ which can be used in the realm of design. As explained above, charters require that ‘aesthetic integrity’ should not be equated with the ‘unity of style’ implying that, whatever the style of the building, it possesses ‘aesthetic integrity’. The practice of conservation showed exactly the opposite. The choice of evaluation methods for industrial buildings is just one example of the discrepancy between conservation theory and practice: investigations into the architectural value of industrial buildings were rejected on the basis of the deficiency of their stylistic character. Consequently, no attempt was made at any time since the 1980s to define the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings. Since the archaeological method of definition is not operative in design terms, and since the main aim of this thesis is to propose a way to define the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of an industrial building in terms other than stylistic, the investigation turns now to the field of architectural history and theory, that is, to the cradle of architectural conservation discourse. It is in this field that during the 1990s new theoretical 51 See, for example, N. Pevsner, advances were made on the architectural value of nineteenth N. (1936) Pioneers of Modern Design: From William Morris to century architecture. They opened the door to considering the Walter Gropius (Harmondsworth: architecture of that century in a way that was different from the Penguin Books, 1966); N. Pevsner, (1968) The Sources traditional stylistic one. In light of these studies, the architectural of Modern Architecture and importance of industrial buildings will be re-examined and a Design (London: Thames and Hudson world of art, 2002); definition of ‘aesthetic integrity’ proposed. S. Giedion, Space, Time and Architecture: the Growth of a New Tradition (Cambridge, Ma: I.6 The Nineteenth Century ‘Paradigm Shifts’ Harvard University Press, 1947); in Architecture: the Method R. Banham, Theory and design in the First Machine Age, (London: Nineteenth century architecture gained its historical The Architectural Press, 1960); architectural revaluation since the late 1970s onwards. Unlike P. Collins, Changing Ideals in Modern Architecture 1750-1950, the studies from the first part of the twentieth century, which (Kingston and Montreal: McGill- interpreted the nineteenth century’s architectural formal and Queen’s University Press, 1967) conceptual ideas exclusively in terms of their influence on the 52 See, for example, K. rise of Modernism in architecture; such as those by Pevsner or Frampton, K., Modern 51 Architecture: A Critical History Giedion; the late twentieth century studies intended to define (London: Thames and Hudson the architectural ideas characteristic of the century itself, such Ltd, 1980); K. Frampton, Studies in Tectonic Culture: The Poetics as those by Frampton, Markus, Pfammatter, to mention but a of Construction in Nineteenth few.52 The studies of this latter group are used as the basis for and Twentieth Century Architecture (Cambridge, the methodological framework of this thesis. MA, London: MIT Press, Drawing upon original nineteenth century sources, these 1995); C. van Eck, Organicism in the Nineteenth Century twentieth century studies aim at identifying attitudes and Architecture, (Amsterdam: approaches to building design that the nineteenth century Architectura&Natura Press, 1994); U. Pfammatter, The architects and theorists may not necessarily have been able Making of the Modern Architect to formulate in such a way. A historical distance was needed and Engineer, trans. from German by Madelinde Ferretti- in order for them to become apparent and meaningful for Theilig (Basel,Boston,Berlin: architectural historical discourse. This means that it is not Birkhäuser, 2000) important whether the actual protagonists themselves Introduction 13 considered their attitudes and approaches to design in the same way in which they are considered by historians and philosophers of today. It is only important that historical evidence supports the theoretical hypothesis about the past, made at the present moment. The present heritagisation process described above could only begin and can further blossom as a result of an attitude according to which the value system of the assessor overrides that of the creator of the building. Historical enquiry conducted here into the architectural value of the industrial buildings aims at the same: to investigate the extent to which these buildings were designed with an aesthetic idea in mind so that today we can claim their architectural importance regardless of whether their creators ever wanted them to be discussed in this way. Two studies on the nineteenth century describe it as a time in which, as Pfammater53 puts it, a ‘paradigm shift’ took place, 53 Pfammatter, 2000 which greatly influenced the architectural thinking of the age. Investigating the philosophical background of the nineteenth century with an understanding of the aesthetic concept of unity, van Eck proposes that a shift took place in understanding unity as an a priori ‘given’, to that of arriving at an idea.54 Because 54 Van Eck, 1994 the advancement in the sciences inspired an interest in understanding the how of the making of the world, architects also became interested in understanding the making of the unity of a building. According to van Eck, for architects of the nineteenth century, the final unity of a building was considered a quality inherent to the act of making, that is, arriving at a quality, rather than an a priori given quality. She proposes ‘organicism’ to be the concept which communicates a new nineteenth century understanding of unity based on the desire to present to the viewer the making of the unity of a building, rather than only presenting the final form. Organicism is for van Eck the qualitative aspect of unity, which is rhetorical in character. She argues that unity in building cannot be achieved unless the methods of design, that is, the quantitative aspect of unity, are led by a plan or intention as a whole, being the qualitative aspect. Only when both are expressed through a building design does it convey unity. Because this qualitative aspect of unity is strategic with the sole aim of persuading the viewer – the educated public– about the message conveyed through the form, this qualitative aspect is rhetorical. Consequently, she proposes that all architecture is rhetorical. The main characteristic of rhetorics is that it does not want to search for or convey any indisputable truth. For that purpose rhetorics is governed by known rules but these rules are not fixed, rather, they are open to interpretation. According to her, all nineteenth century architects wanted to convey the same message about the built environment, which she termed as organicism. Where they differ is in the methods for achieving this. 14 Introduction

Since organicism, as a rhetorical concept, does not have fixed rules, many different methods can be said to be classified under it. It is this rhetorical aspect of unity, rather than the stylistic one, that is taken as the theoretical basis to interpret the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the industrial buildings. Pfammater translated van Eck’s philosophical thinking, although without reflecting on them, into a direct architectural historical proposal. He argued that a paradigm shift occurred in designing, from the ‘solution-based’ or typological way of designing to ‘procedure-oriented’ design. The former can be seen as an a priori understanding of unity, whereas the latter can be thought of as a process of arriving at unity. According to Pfammater, the paradigm shift in design took its first formal shape in the work of a newly emerged profession - that of an ‘engineer-architect’ - as a result of a newly developed type of engineering and architectural education in the nineteenth century. Industrial buildings were the principal works of this newly emerging profession of the engineer-architect. According to twentieth century sources, the nineteenth century industrial buildings were the kind of buildings in which all innovative design approaches were only tested, without ever arriving at any real architectural novelty. Conversely to this proposition, nineteenth century sources such as the work of Milizia, Blondel, Schinkel, just to mention some, suggest that the industrial buildings were considered by some of their contemporaries to be of particular architectural value. These same sources, however, do not define what that particular might be. Taking the above philosophical and historical proposals as an explanatory framework, this thesis explores what that particular architectural value is in the aforementioned industrial buildings. For this purpose, drawing 55 K. Frampton, Studies in upon the studies by Frampton55, Markus56 and Straton and Tectonic Culture: The Poetics of 57 Construction in Nineteenth and Trinder , a tectonic-spatio-stylistic type of analysis is proposed Twentieth Century Architecture here as an analytical tool instead of traditional stylistic one. (Cambridge, MA, London: MIT Press, 1995) This thesis proposes organicism, as defined by van Eck, to be a concept that defines the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the 56 T.A.Markus, Buildings and industrial buildings. Finally, this thesis ends with an example Power: Freedom and Control in the Origin of Modern Building of how this definition of the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of industrial Types (London: Routledge, 1993) buildings can secure its position in leading design guidelines 57 M. Stratton and B. Trinder, for conversion. The aim of this example is to investigate to what Industrial England, (London: English Heritage, 1997) extent the proposed definition of organicism can lead the design of conversion of an industrial building in a way which would ensure minimal change of the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the old building while accommodating all changes necessitated by the introduction of a new programme.

I.7 The Structure of the Thesis Chapter One introduces the problem of reuse of industrial buildings viewed in architectural conservation terms. In this Introduction 15 chapter, two of the main topics of this thesis are reviewed; the evaluation process of industrial heritage and its results, and the conservation design guidelines for conversion. These topics are important in order to enable a cohesive formulation of the main question of the thesis. Following an explanation of the choice of industrial buildings as the object of this study, this chapter proceeds with a review of the evaluation of industrial heritage in Europe, in order to investigate the way in which way historic interest has defined this type of heritage and why. The chapter then sets out a review of the international conservation charters with reference to the design guidelines for conversion. Finally, the evaluation results of industrial heritage are reviewed from the perspective of their usefulness for the formulation of the design guidelines for an intervention, as proposed by conservation charters. Chapter Two advances the proposed methodological framework for defining the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the industrial buildings, as well as the appropriate formal analysis. The above framework is based on the recent architectural historical literature of nineteenth century architecture, where a conceptual and formal historical revaluation was made of the architecture of the period. In Chapter Three the appropriateness of the proposed framework for the definition of the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the industrial buildings is tested through a historical revaluation of these buildings based on the usage of type of analysis different than traditional stylistic. In Chapter Four this same definition of the ‘aesthetic integrity’ is evaluated in terms of its appropriateness for guiding the conversion design of industrial buildings through an example of six conversion schemes for one industrial building. 16 17

Chapter One ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of ‘Historic Interest’: A Contradiction in Terms

Introduction The aim of this chapter is to investigate the extent to which the evaluation results of industrial buildings can be used as a tool for guiding the design of the conversion of these buildings. Conversion or reuse is an action of maintenance of old protected buildings which encompasses several actions, such as the decision on a new use, the architectural design of the chosen new use, and so on. In the Introduction it was shown that the main concern of informed conservation practice is bridging the gap between the evaluation process and the management of the protected building. The conservation plan proposes to do that by using the evaluation results as the main guidelines for the management of the building. Following this standpoint, first, the genesis of the evaluation of industrial heritage in Europe is examined here in order to discuss two issues: firstly; the internationalization of the evaluation principles at European level so that general conclusions, rather than country–specific, can be drawn; and secondly, the benefits of the chosen industrial archaeological evaluation approach to this type of heritage for its protection and safeguarding. Next, a critical review is conducted of the international charters regarding the issue of reuse in general, in order to define the conservationists’ position regarding the design of an intervention. Charters require minimal intervention which must secure the preservation of the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the old by altering the formal character of the old as little as possible. While it is clearly put forward that the intervention must be minimal, it is much less clear how the ‘minimal’ should be achieved in formal terms. Therefore, defining what ‘aesthetic integrity’ is so that it can be used as a conceptual yardstick for measuring the minimal intervention in formal terms becomes the objective of this chapter. Finally, the evaluation results of industrial heritage are critically reviewed in terms of their usefulness for defining the design guidelines for the conversion of an industrial building and, 18 Chapter One

in particular, for deﬁning the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings as a design guideline.

1.1 Protected Industrial Buildings: Epitomes of Architectural Conservation Paradox 1 See for example, Han In the 1960s the conversion of abandoned industrial buildings Mayer, City and Port (Utrecht: into artists' studios in New York turned out to be the start of the International Books, 1999) fashionable loft-living among a selected group of city dwellers. 2 Peti Buchel, Bert Hogervorst, This trend spread across North America and North West Europe The turning tide : the user’s role from the 1980s onwards. Abandoned industrial areas, including in the redevelopment of harbour harbour areas,1 of all major European cities became the home buildings in North-West Europe = Het kerend tij: de rol van de of alternative ways of living such as squatters with or without 2 gebruiker bij de herontwikkeling particular political and social agendas, alternative artists, etc. van havenpanden in Noord- Because of their activities, these groups of people managed to West Europa trans Annie Wright turn obsolete city areas into cultural oases of a particular kind. (Amsterdam: De Appelbloesem All of a sudden, areas that did not exist or were considered as Pers, 1997) no go areas in the mental maps of city inhabitants became part 3 For an overview on the of that map. By mentally enlarging the city territory, the city characteristics of this process as physically reclaimed its abandoned areas. well as the latest trends in Europe The above process is known in literature as urban see OASE 73 Gentrification, 3 editorial Pnina Avidar, Klaske gentrification. The subsequent part of the process was and Havik en Bart Wigger still is the appropriation of these areas by other groups of inhabitants, who in turn bring developers into the area. 4 Understanding listing: During this process the buildings which originally housed an Manchester Mills (London: industrial process or a part of it changed their use once and very English Heritage, 1995) possibly even twice. The gentrification process launched the idea 5 The Council of Europe of industrial areas and buildings as places desirable to live in due Recommendation No R (90) 20 on to their high level of adaptability to change. Industrial buildings the protection and conservation of and sites are then perceived as reusable because they can the industrial, technical and civil engineering heritage in Europe accommodate a variety of functions which in their spatial and organisational requirements, from those needing large and small empty spaces (picture 1) (gallery/art museum) to those needing cellular spaces of similar size (picture 2) (blocks of flats). The other part of reality regarding the life of industrial buildings is related to their mass-scale demolition. In England, for example, out of 2400 cotton mills only 247 survived demolition, thanks to English Heritage's initiative for their protection4. In 1990, the Council of Europe issued a Recommendation PICTURE 1: MUSEE D’ORSAY PARIS, CONVERSION OF A TRAIN STATION for the care of industrial ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of ‘Historic Interest’: A Contradiction in Terms 19

PICTURE 2: CONVERSION OF VIENNA GASOMETERS INTO A BLOCK OF FLATS heritage, requiring legal protection of this type of heritage.5 The 6 The Council of Europe, Recommendation shows the European consensus regarding the “Recommendations (89) 6E on need to legally control change induced on industrial heritage the protection and enhancement of the rural architectural through either its reuse or demolition. heritage”, https://wcd.coe.int/ This was the second Recommendation issued by the Council ViewDoc.jsp?id=711549 of Europe dedicated to the care of a specific type of heritage, the first one having been devoted to the care of rural architectural 7 The Council of Europe, heritage and issued in 1989.6 It was only in 2000 that another “Reference texts, Cultural specialized Recommendation appeared.7 The contemporaneous Heritage” http://www.coe. int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/ appearance of the first two specialized recommendations testify Resources/Texts/Heritage_ to the urgency for action in order to safeguard these types of en.asp#P116_6002 heritage, as both rural and industrial heritage came under the threat of disappearance through their derelict condition caused 8 Rec (89)6E https://wcd.coe. by disuse.8 The main difference between these two types of int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=711549 heritage lies in the recommendations for their management: introductory statements whereas the reuse of rural buildings has to be encouraged,9 9 Rec (89)6Ehttps://wcd.coe. the reusability of industrial buildings is presented as a specific int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=711549, characteristic of this type of heritage already existing.10 II.2.i. As Cherry11 pointed out when discussing the problem of 10 Rec (90)20E https://wcd. protecting industrial heritage in general, protection implies coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=603209, control of change, whereas reuse presupposes change.12 IV.2.i. Industrial buildings epitomise the paradox between protection 11 At the time of publishing his and reuse: they are the desirable type of protected built heritage text Martin Cherry was the Head because they are easily reusable, despite the fact that the act of Listing Division of English Heritage of protection restricts the way reuse can be achieved. This unique situation within the conservation field makes this kind of 12 M. Cherry, ’Protecting buildings the most appropriate tool for discussing the question Industrial Buildings: the role of of reuse as defined within the field. Listing’, Managing the Industrial Heritage, conference proceedings, The thesis deals with the question of reuse as defined in the ed. M. Palmer and P. Neaverson, field of architectural conservation by using industrial buildings as (1994) (119-124), 122-123 its main object of study. 20 Chapter One

Architectural conservation as the legally defined practice of care for protected architectural and archaeological sites is a fully European invention of the nineteenth century, primarily concerned with two main questions: one, what a monument is, and two, how to best secure the future life of these monuments. (scheme 1 of the Burra Charter) As the Burra Charter scheme shows, the interrelation of these two areas of interest is essential for an informed proactive conservation of the built environment. As the conservation plan suggests, the interrelation can best be achieved if the results of the evaluation process, conducted for the purposes of the first question, are used as guidelines for dealing with the second. Now, securing the future life of a monument is a process divided into several steps, as shown in scheme 1. Since it is through the architectural design of an intervention that all conservationists’ theoretical positions regarding the preservation of the old become visible, this thesis 13 The years, titles and is concerned only with the ‘policy development’ stage, and within bibliographic reference of it, with only one subquestion; that of the architectural design of an the conferences dedicated intervention to the old protected structure. exclusively to industrial heritage are given in Wehdorn, M., As the conservation plan suggests, the only way to secure Georgeacopol-Winischhofer, U. the preservation of a building’s significance, as recognised und Roth, P.W., Baudenkmaler during the evaluation process, is to base all the decisions der Rechnik und Indsutrie in about the maintenance management of the building, including Osterreich, Band 2, (Wein: the design of the conversion, on the results of the evaluation Bohlau, 1991) and they are listed here: Lyon, 1985, Industrial process. The evaluation reports therefore become the key to good heritage : What politics?; Madrid, maintenance management of a protected building. 1986, Engineering and Public Therefore, the aim of this chapter is to investigate the extent Works. A New Dimension of to which the existing evaluation approach to industrial heritage Heritage; Bochum, 1988, Mining and its results constitute a useful tool in designing the conversion Engineering Monuments as a Cultural Heritage; London and of an industrial building. First, however, a genesis of the unified Durham, 1989, Recording the European approach to the evaluation of industrial heritage will be Industrial Heritage. laid out here in order to investigate the underlying reasons and the resulting benefits for the safeguarding of industrial heritage. 14 Rec(90) 20E https://wcd.coe. The main objective of this genesis is to explain the extent to int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=603209 which it is possible to discuss the problem of design guidelines 15 The Council of Europe, for a conversion at an international rather than national level. The Architectural Heritage: Inventory genesis will be presented by reviewing the primary international and Documentation Methods literature on the protection and safeguarding of industrial in Europe: proceedings, Architectural heritage, reports heritage in Europe, that is, recommendations, as well as reports and studies 28 (Strasbourg: The that led to them. Council of Europe Press, 1993) 1.2 Methodological Principles of Industrial Archaeology 16 M. Wehdorn, ‘The Industrial Four conferences, organised by The Council of Europe and held and Technical Built Heritage annually between 1985 and 1989,13 and one document by way in Northern States of Europe’, of a Recommendation consequently issued in 1990,14 testify to Situation of the Technical and Industrial Built Heritage in the emergence of awareness of the historic value of industrial Europe, Architectural Heritage: heritage at European level during the 1980s. The focus of these Reports and Studies (The Council conferences was dedicated exclusively to industrial heritage, as of Europe: Strasbourg 1985), 46 was that of the 1993 conference on the methods of evaluation ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of ‘Historic Interest’: A Contradiction in Terms 21 of architectural heritage in general15 (see Appendix). These conferences show that until mid 1980s, the care for industrial heritage had primarily been of interest only to industrial archaeologists. It is only after these four conferences that the official conservation policy makers began to recognise the 17 M. Wehdorn 1985, heritage potential of this kind of built legacy at a Preliminary remarks European level.16 18 A systematic evaluation of As a consequence of these four conferences on "the industrial heritage exclusively, protection and enhancement of the industrial heritage",17 a governed by the main national conservation body, has survey of industrial heritage was initiated on a systematic basis been conducted in France, 18 in several European countries. As this paper was being written, England, Finland, Germany, surveys covering entire countries had been completed only in the Netherlands, Portugal, some countries,19 while others continued, regarding their surveys Spain, in The Council of as one of the priorities of the national conservation practice.20 Europe, Architectural Heritage: proceedings 1993; See also, The result of these surveys was the statutory protection of a Wehdorn, 1985 number of industrial complexes that should be representative of a variety of industrial activities in a given country.21 Therefore, in 19 England, France, The order to understand the decisions on the protection of industrial Netherlands, partly Germany is heritage and how they can be used as guidelines in designing the completed conversion of a protected industrial building, it is essential to be 20 in Spain, Sweden, Romania, familiar with the basic methodological principles of inquiry used Denmark; see The Compendium in industrial archaeology. 4.2.9. http://www.culturalpolicies. net/web/profiles-structure.php Industrial buildings and all the other physical legacies of industrial production had been the object of study of industrial 21 Rec (90)20E https://wcd.coe. archaeologists since the early 1930s in America and the 1950s int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=603209 in England, only to become a wider European practice during 22 See, for example, M. Palmer, the early 1970s.22 Nisser explained that the interest, focus and and P. Neaverson, Industrial methodology of studies into industrial archaeology changed Archaeology: Principles and Practice (London: Routledge, during the aforementioned period in the following way: "in the 1998), 8-14 infancy of industrial archaeology the dominating interest was history of technology in its narrowest meaning. The field of 23 M. Nisser, ‘Aspects of interest then widened to include industrial environments. By the International Co-operation’ mid-[19]70s there was discussion of preserving and documenting in Proceedings The Industrial 23 Heritage: What Policies?, the actual history of working life in [a] wider sense." The study Architectural Heritage Reports of industrial archaeology covers the technological, social, and Studies, no.6 (Strasbourg: economic and cultural aspects of the industrialisation period in The Council of Europe, 1987) (21- Europe and North America through the study of physical remains 27): 23; see also, N. Cossons, The as well as written sources.24 PB Book of Industrial Archaeology, (Newton Abbot: David and Cossons explained that until the 1950s the industrialisation Charles, 1975) 15-36; A. Raistrick, period was extensively studied by historians, "in other words Industrial Archaeology: An the accepted investigative technique was one based on archival Historical Survey, (London: Eyre research rather than excavations [the basic investigative Methuen, 1972), 1-14 technique of the archaeologists]."25 When archaeologists began 24 See, for example, N. the analysis of standing buildings, associated machinery Cossons, 1975.; Palmer et al, and other physical remains in the landscape as a tool for the 1998; K. Hudson, World Industrial Archaeology, (Cambridge: understanding of social organisations of the examined part Cambridge University Press, of the society, they enriched the historical research. In some 1979), 13-14 cases the studies of industrial remains next to the study of the written sources of the examined period, area or industry even 25 N. Cossons 1975, 15 22 Chapter One

26 See, for example, B. Gordon, helped to change the established historical views of the period.26 P. Malone, The Texture of Industry: Cossons proposed that industrial archaeology is "in essence, a An Archaeological View of the period or cultural archaeology as Neolithic archaeology, Roman Industrialisation of North America 27 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, archaeology or medieval archaeology are." 1994) For the purposes of studying the period of industrialisation, the physical remains need to be classified in a particular way 27 N. Cossons 1975, 16; see in order to be assessed. The standard archaeological criterion also: M. Palmer and P. Neaverson for the demarcation of the study period is the basic types of Industry in the Landscape technology of production. For the purpose of a study in industrial 1700-1900 (London: Routledge, 1994); C. Clark, ‘Ticking boxes or archaeology, the classification within the defined period was also telling stories? The Archaeology based on different types of production technology. Therefore, in of the Industrial Landscape’ 1972 Raistrick proposed that studies in industrial archaeology in Proceedings Managing the should be conducted on the industry-by-industry or functional Industrial Heritage, ed. M. Palmer basis. Raistrick stated that "it will always be of help when and P. Neaverson, Leicester Archaeological Monographs No. 2 investigating industrial remains of any age to know something of (Leicester: University of Leicester, the process of that industry and of the structures and evidence 1995) 45-48; C. Clark, ‘Trouble at that is likely to persist from them."28 t’mill: Industrial Archaeology in In the most general terms, all industrial sites can be divided the 1980s’, Antiquity, 61, (1987), into extraction and production sites. On an extraction site, for 169-79 example, the predominant physical remains include extraction 28 A. Raistrick 1972, 17 equipment, that is, the pit head, conveyors, and trail tracts The buildings on these kinds of sites typically accommodate storage facilities and offices. A production site, on the other hand, is a combination of various kinds of buildings where production takes place, including the existing production machinery, but also chimneys, conveyor belts, rail tracks, water canals. According to the technological requirements of various industrial activities, the

PICTURE 3: FORM OF THE BRICK-KILN ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of ‘Historic Interest’: A Contradiction in Terms 23 physical remains of an industrial activity can further be divided into technological structures and buildings which, taken together, define the physical nature of any industrial site. The prevalence of structures or buildings on the site depends on the general type of the site. For industrial archaeologists, understanding each part of the site in its own right is equally as important as understanding the relationship between the individual parts of the site, regardless of their physical character.29 What binds 29 M. Palmer and P. Neaverson the parts to the whole is the technological functionality of the 1998, 43-77 production process in question (picture 3). Every single part tells as much about the functioning of the site as the whole tells about the functioning of an individual part. Consequently, when evaluated in industrial archaeological terms, industrial buildings are regarded as archaeological evidence of the process they housed rather than objects of potentially architectural interest in their own right. At the end of this short review of the methodology of industrial archaeology it can be said that the importance of the functional relationship between a part and the whole resulted in the need to protect the site as a whole in addition to protecting individual parts only. This implies that for industrial archaeologists preserving the logic of the functional unity of the site is the main reason for the site's protection. In physical terms, this can be achieved only by preserving the site as a whole. Let us now investigate in which way the methodological principles of industrial archaeology are used in order to meet the requirements of architectural conservation. Thus, on the one hand the investigation will focus on how the described methods are used as tools for the buildings’ and sites’ evaluation and the consequent selection for protection, and on the other how they are used as a tool for managing the protected buildings, in particular as the design guidelines of a conversion.. 30 Austria, Belgium, Denmark, 1.3 Protection and Management of Industrial Heritage Federal Republic of Germany, in Europe Prior to 1985 United Kingdom, Ireland, Iceland, Lichtenstein, Luxemburg, In order to critically examine the extent to which the processes Netherlands, Norway, Sweden of industrial archaeology successfully establish the link between and Switzerland analysed in M. the evaluation and management of industrial heritage, we Wehdorn 1985 need to look briefly into the history of how and why the tools of this branch of archaeology became universally accepted at a 31 Cyprus, France, Greece, European level. Thus, as a secondary objective, this review also Italy, Malta, Portugal, Spain opens up the possibility to critically examine the benefits and and Turkey are analized in A.F.Ordonez ‘The Industrial shortcomings of the internationalisation of the conservation and Technical Built Heritage practice by drawing upon the example of industrial heritage. in Southern States of Europe’, Two studies, one analysing the situation regarding the Situation of the Technical and heritage status and management of industrial heritage in Industrial Built Heritage in northern European countries30 and the other in southern,31 Europe, Architectural Heritage: Reports and Studies (The preceded the four conferences organised between 1985 and Council of Europe: Strasbourg 1989. The main aims of the four conferences were to develop 1985) 24 Chapter One

uniform recommendations on the evaluation and management of industrial heritage based on the results of these two studies. These studies were conducted as part of the 1981-1986 Council of Europe intergovernmental work programme on the promotion of industrial heritage. Although the aim of this survey was to open the way to an international comparative study, the two studies followed different methodologies of data-gathering, analysis, as well as the ﬁnal form of reporting. The study of the northern countries contained questionnaire answers on entries relating to laws, total numbers of monuments—the industrial ones in particular—new museums, conversions, working class houses, further action and research, as well as a summary report. 32 M. Wehdorn 1985, 7 32 The study of the southern countries however contained only a summary of the collected information on laws, restoration and 33 A.F. Ordonez 1985, 61 rehabilitation projects.33 Consequently, comparisons could be drawn only on some issues at the European level. In 1985, no country in Europe, except Norway, had a legal document dedicated only to the care of industrial heritage, although some countries had separate legal documents devoted to the protection and care of other building types, such as village architecture, for example. Nevertheless, all the examined countries had a number of protected industrial structures which can be termed 'industrial heritage'. However, it was not possible for any of the countries, with the exception of The Netherlands, to specify the exact number and different kinds of protected industrial monuments. It is clear from all the reports that, although no exact number of the potential industrial monuments could be given, the ones that were eligible by virtue of their industrial character outnumbered the protected ones by several dozen. However, the systematic surveying and recording of the industrial remains at some territorial level was registered only in the United Kingdom. All the countries had carried out some restoration and conservation work on pieces of protected industrial heritage at some level.

1.3.1 On Problems with the Definition of ’Industrial Heritage’ The biggest difference between the northern and southern countries lay in defining the term 'industrial heritage'. Whereas the summary part of the report on the northern countries drew 34 M. Wehdorn 1985, 4 the definition from the research in industrial archaeology,34 the report on the southern countries expressed the need for redefining industrial archaeological in "functional and 35 A.F. Ordonez 1985, 63-64 chronological terms"35 in order to include all public or civil engineering works. Ordonez's request for a functional and chronological extension of the definition targeted the possibility of including structures such as water supplies, canals, dams, aqueducts and lighthouses that predated the eighteenth century or 1750 - the year that was considered for a long time to have been the ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of ‘Historic Interest’: A Contradiction in Terms 25 starting point for the period of research interest of industrial archaeologists. According to Ordonez, in the southern countries, with the exception of France and northern Italy, industrialization based on technological developments, launched with the introduction of the steam engine into the production process, took off much later than in the northern countries, resulting in a much smaller number of industrial structures and built heritage of the time. On the other hand, the southern countries had many more structures that he classified as "civil engineering heritage" dating from the pre-1750 times, which were equally as technologically and structurally demanding as those built after 1750, although built in different materials.36 36 A.F. Ordonez 1985, 64-65 Ordonez proceeded by suggesting that the civil engineering structures, which excluded the industrial buildings, were not adequately understood by the existing conservation officers and consequently not protected. According to him, it is civil engineers who need to be in charge of historical and structural research of these kinds of structures. Certainly, additional training was needed for those appointed to deal with these structures. Northern countries maintained that education in industrial archaeology was needed at all levels, particularly at the university level, since the countries where that already existed, such as England, became the intellectual centres for all kinds of work on industrial heritage in general.

1.3.2 On Problems with the Evaluation of Industrial Buildings Inconsistencies in evaluation methods which sprang from the absence of a clear definition of the term ‘industrial heritage’ can best be illustrated in the way different countries dealt with industrial buildings in particular. The southern report revealed that, when protected, industrial buildings were evaluated and protected as general architectural heritage, meaning that no methods of evaluation were needed or used that were particular to industrial buildings. However, no specific attention is given in the report to the description of evaluation methods of these buildings, almost as if they were not part of the overall industrial heritage. In the report of the northern countries, the questionnaire entries of individual countries reveal another way of referring to industrial buildings. Although all participants were asked about the state of protection and management of 'technical and industrial monuments' in general, they all reported on the protected industrial buildings exclusively. This is surprising since the reports testified to a rising number of technical museums as well as to the activity of 'industrial archaeology' in those countries. In both cases, it is apparent that it is the machinery of production and the production process that 37 For the main methodological are of main interest37 rather than the buildings housing them. principles of industrial Since there were no legal documents dedicated to industrial archaeology see the section following this one. heritage alone, every country gave a longer or shorter account 26 Chapter One

of the way in which it was possible to accommodate the protection of industrial heritage. These explanations showed that the industrial buildings were protected under the legal acts for building protection, just like the buildings from any other period or other use. However, no clear answer was given on how the industrial structures were protected. Only the English questionnaire explained that the industrial structures and machines were protected under the category of 'scheduled monuments' reserved for objects of underground archaeology, whereas industrial buildings came under the category of 'listed buildings' reserved exclusively for buildings. Now, knowing that in many countries the protection of a building extends to all its internal ﬁttings, it is possible to imagine that the production machines were protected as soon as the building itself came to be protected. Since many countries have protected monuments 38 The Council of Europe, divided into groups of movable and non movable,38 the machines Architectural Heritage: could also have been protected as movable monuments. This proceedings 1993 situation raises a more fundamental question of whether the building is protected because of its own historic merit, or in order to secure the protection of the machines which are the main object of interest of industrial archaeology. All this goes to show that, because of its heterogeneous nature, the protection of industrial heritage gave rise to certain problems in the way in which the structure of the existing registers of national monuments can secure appropriate protection for this kind of heritage.

1.3.3 On Problems With Recording Another great difference between the northern and southern studies lies in the identiﬁcation of the bodies carrying out the survey and recording work. It is very clear from the report on the northern countries that the majority of work was carried out by groups of volunteer enthusiasts and specialists in the ﬁeld of industrial archaeology. The report from the southern countries tells us only that specialists participated in the study, yet the nature of their specialisation has not been made clear.

1.3.4 On Problems With Reuse Furthermore, the northern European report shows that Germany and The Netherlands had by far the highest number of industrial buildings or sites converted into other uses, whereas all the other countries, , only had a number of museums dedicated to either an industrial branch or some aspect of the country's industrialisation period. The southern report is silent on the issues of conversion. Rather, in the final recommendations Ordonez emphasised the need for civil engineering and other industrial structures to continually be in use, even if that use is different from the original one, as the only way to justify and ensure their future life. However, what remains unclear is to what ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of ‘Historic Interest’: A Contradiction in Terms 27 extent this is a shared view, or practice for that matter, of the southern countries and to what extent it refers to Spain alone. In the summative recommendations of the northern countries, the 'adaptive reuse' of industrial buildings in particular is evaluated as an emerging trend, given the fact that in America in 1981 three schemes of adaptive reuse of industrial buildings won the National Trust for Preservation prizes39 and some work 39 M. Wehdorn 1985, 52 of the same kind was carried out in France. It is Wehdorn's view that 'adaptive reuse' is more likely to be accepted in the southern countries of Europe than in the northern ones. This conclusion comes as a surprise since the report on Germany testified to extensive work of 'adaptive reuse' carried out in that country. Furthermore, in every country there were some examples of adaptive reuse of industrial buildings, the number of which certainly rose in the last twenty years, allowing us to conclude that Wehdorn was right in predicting the growing trend in Europe. In fact, Wehdorn himself contributed to it with a project of adaptive reuse of the Vienna gas holders, presently considered one of the model examples of this practice in Europe. The major concern raised in relation to the question of 'adaptive reuse' is connected with the fact that "without question during this process much of the original evidence of the building may be destroyed."40 (picture 2) 40 M. Wehdorn 1985, 52 The report on the northern countries concludes by identifying financing and management as a more serious problem related to industrial heritage than the legislative measures,41 a fact that 41 M. Wehdorn 1985, 53 the southern countries would agree on. The report proposed that the buildings chosen for protection must "ensure a well- balanced representation of the major branches of production"; that the recording of industrial legacy must become a priority and should 'perhaps follow' Great Britain's legislative machinery for recording; and finally that "recording and adaptive-reuse must be discussed at international level"42. 42 M. Wehdorn 1985, 53

1.4 1990 European Recommendation on Management of Industrial Heritage Five years and four conferences later the Recommendations on the Protection and Conservation of the Industrial, Technical and Civil Engineering Heritage in Europe resolved the problem of defining industrial heritage by dividing 'industrial heritage' into three categories, as the title of the Recommendations indicates. The Recommendations gave advice on four main issues. One was a need for systematic identification, survey and scientific analysis of this kind of heritage, where "modern and high performance methods and resources should be used in accordance with common criteria defined at European level."43 43 Rec (90)20E, https://wcd. The second issue advised on the protection and conservation coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=603209 of this heritage. Here the emphasis was put on the need for II.2. selection "more than in any other sector of the heritage […which] 28 Chapter One

will have to be made so as to ensure a balanced representation 44 Rec (90)20E, https://wcd. of the different branches of production.44 Legislative measures, coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=603209 at European level, must be adapted to the specific nature of III this heritage and the framework of land policy for deserted industrial areas [must be defined], which present reserve areas for future intervention in the form of research and possible 45 Rec (90)20E, https://wcd. protection."45 The Recommendations further promoted “setting coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=603209 up the strategies for providing incentives [for] salvage and III. ii enhancement of this heritage"46. The third issue addressed was 46 Rec (90)20E, https://wcd. the one on "alert[ing] the public to the technical, industrial and coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=603209 civil engineering heritage" where education on issues related to III. 2.i. this kind of heritage is promoted at all levels, from training the specialists at the university level to informing the "young people at school, who constitute a particularly receptive audience for 47 Rec (90)20E, https://wcd. this type of message".47 The last measure is to promote co- coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=603209 operation and intervention at European level promoting European IV, 2.iii. logistic and financial support for possible local projects of 48 Rec (90)20E, https://wcd. European importance.48 coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=603209 The Council of Europe Recommendations thus turned the V concluding remarks of the two preliminary studies, reviewed in the previous section, into "recommended measures" for dealing with protection and management of industrial heritage. The two studies, as well as the reports from the other four conferences, bear testimony to both the differences and similarities in the existing care for industrial heritage in different European countries. The Recommendations, however, are a summary of the similarities only. So how did the Recommendations deal with the differences that appeared in the reports examined above? One was the definition of what constitutes industrial heritage, the issue on which the Recommendations remain so general. Nowhere in the Recommendations is it specified which objects belonging to industrial activity in general constitute the industrial, technical or civil engineering category of heritage, nor is there any definition of the time frame. In this way the Recommendations leave room for various interpretations. Following the developments in industrial archaeology, the term 'industrial heritage' refers to all physical manifestations of modern industrial activity, from rail tracks and water canals to coal pits, to buildings accommodating production processes, to storage facilities, to entire landscapes morphologically defined with structures like water canals, rail tracks or quarries. This shows that the structures such as those mentioned in the report of the southern countries are already the objects of study within this field. Thus, by following the basic definition of the object of study within industrial archaeology this difference can be resolved. The other difference was the question of the study time frame in relation to which the southern countries proposed that a chronological definition should be abolished. Instead, ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of ‘Historic Interest’: A Contradiction in Terms 29 the criterion for selecting what it is that should be included under the category of industrial heritage must be defined on the basis of the structural achievements of public works regardless of the time, technique and material of their making. Industrial archaeologists are clear on this issue, that is, their objects of study are the artefacts strictly related to the industrialisation period of a country in question. The engineering artefacts predating this period are the objects of study of other archaeological branches. For this reason, the southern countries proposed that these structures should be recorded and evaluated by civil engineers with additional training in building history, thus resolving the non-existence of any substantial industrial archaeological activity, with the exception of France. However, if all physical remains of the pre-industrial periods are the object of study of other archaeological branches, this begs the question of why they would not be studied by archaeologists in the southern countries as well, since archaeology is taught at university level in all these countries. Both of these questions are methodological and only represent, in essence, different ways of addressing the same problem, namely, the definition of the term of 'industrial heritage'. In each of the four main topics of the Recommendations, the methodological issue is always addressed in the most general way possible, such as, the requests for the "training of specialists in this sector". Neither the 'specialists' nor the 'sector' are ever specified in the Recommendations. Also, the term of 'industrial archaeology' is never used in the document. The most important and the most basic methodological question of what constitutes industrial heritage is thus left open to interpretations at European level. The third difference between the north and the south was the attitude towards appropriateness of adaptive reuse as a management measure for industrial heritage. In addressing this issue the northern countries primarily referred to actual industrial buildings, such as warehouses and factories, whereas in the case of the southern countries these were public works, such as bridges and aqueducts. The actual industrial buildings were protected and dealt with in the same way as were any other pieces of architectural heritage in general. Since dealing with the issue of reuse in relation to a particular subgroup of industrial heritage would imply dealing with the main methodological issue, once again this problem is not addressed in the Recommendations. However, the Recommendations do support "the possibilities resulting from action centred on enhancement and new forms of use"49 of this type of heritage. 49 Rec (90)20E, https://wcd. By promoting similarities and accommodating differences, coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=603209 the Recommendations for the management of industrial heritage IV.2.i. function primarily as a moral document, obliging the state signatories only to take particular care of industrial heritage. 30 Chapter One

Which types of structures those are and in what way the care will be carried out is the responsibility of each country. The Recommendations for the care of industrial heritage were formulated in the manner recommended by the Venice Charter, that is, the essential principles governing the management of industrial heritage were agreed at international level but in such a general manner that every country can implement them in line with their speciﬁc conservation practice. This primarily moral obligation undertaken by the countries signing the Recommendations aims towards unifying the value system regarding a discussed heritage issue, while leaving a free hand in interpreting these values through the actual practice speciﬁc to every country. The following section examines the way in which the Recommendations are implemented in the national practices of care for protected industrial heritage.

1.5 Evaluation Practice of Industrial Buildings in Europe after 1990 In 1993, following an initiative from the Council of Europe, 50 The Council of Europe, conservationists from twenty four countries50 gathered in order Architectural Heritage: to discuss methods of recording architectural heritage. (Appendix proceedings, 1993 2) The aim of the conference was to establish the Core Data Index (CDI), that is, the minimal amount of data needed for a building record, on the basis of which the building's ‘artistic and historic 51 J. Bold, 1993, 11-15 interest’ can consequently be identified.51 It was explained that such an index was needed in order to unify national buildings’ databases at the European level. Following the conclusions of this conference, the CDI was proposed and its full content can be 52 Rec (95) 3E http://cm.coe. found in The Council of Europe Recommendation No. R (95) 352. int/ta/rec/1995/95r3.htm The methodologies employed by national surveys for the purposes of recording the built heritage and selecting it for protection were the main object of study and discussion. These methodologies were presented in terms of: the approach to the assessment of the country's territory, i.e. topographic and typological; the professional background of the team members conducting surveys and the team structure; the kind of buildings 53 The Council of Europe, assessed; technical aids employed; and type of data collected.53 Architectural Heritage: According to the participants, the topographic approach is used proceedings, 1993 for the assessment of urban and rural areas,54 and the typological 54 All countries participating at for industrial heritage.55 In some cases, such as in France and the conference. England, both were used but under different circumstances. The 55 The Council of Europe, main characteristic of the topographic approach is that various Architectural Heritage: building types are assessed at once in one topographic area proceedings, 1993, 91-121 of the country, while the typological approach focuses on one building type in either an area or the whole country. The amount of the assessed territory of a country depends on the scope of the survey conducted. The Finnish survey is particularly valuable in the assessment ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of ‘Historic Interest’: A Contradiction in Terms 31 of the appropriateness of the topographical and typological approaches for the evaluation approach to industrial heritage.56 56 E. Haro, ‘Inventory Methods After both these approaches were used in Finland, the of Industrial Heritage in Finland typological approach proved more appropriate for industry.57 and examples of their practical application’, in Proceedings of The main reason was a lack of the existing documentation Architectural Heritage: Inventory on different industries. The Finnish participants emphasised and Documentation Methods that the produced documentation became the most important in Europe, Cultural Heritage, element on which the analysis was based. Thanks to the 28 (Strasbourg: The Council of collected documentation, it became clear that the historical, Europe 1993): 107-111 economic and social aspects of a particular industry played a 57 E. Haro 1993, 108 key role in understanding the historic interest of a particular industrial sector on the one hand, and of a particular production site within the sector in question on the other. The French and English participants emphasised that the 'thematic knowledge', or the general knowledge of a particular industrial sector, is "vital for the selection of the most outstanding features or items, either because they are exceptional, or conversely, because they are representative of a type of industry in a specific region, or because they are of technological or even symbolic interest."58 The English 58 C. Cartier, P. Smith, C. participants explained that, as far as industrial heritage is Chaplain, ‘Identification of concerned, that only on the basis of research, "it [particular industrial heritage: objectives and methods’, in Proceedings of building type] needs to be assessed as a whole [and] detailed Architectural Heritage: Inventory 59 selection criteria established." and Documentation Methods Those explaining the use of the typological approach to in Europe, Cultural Heritage, recording and evaluating industrial heritage explained the steps 28 (Strasbourg: The Council of involved. Of the five participants who focused their reports on the Europe 1993): 99-107, 100 evaluation of industrial heritage, all but the English participant 59 M. Cherry, ‘The Criteria described each step of the evaluation in detail. Instead of for the Statutory Protection presenting the methodology in detail, the English participant of Industrial Structures in England’, in Proceedings of presented the English methodology in the form of titles for the Architectural Heritage: Inventory six steps. He entitled these steps as follows: "identification and Documentation Methods and description of the industry overall; detailed data gathering; in Europe, Cultural Heritage, collation and reporting; selection; consultation; protection."60 28 (Strasbourg: The Council of When these titles are compared with the French, German, Dutch Europe 1993): 95-99, 96 or Finnish explanations of each step, it becomes clear that these 60 M. Cherry 1993, 97 same titles could be used for naming the methodological steps of other participating countries. This title-content matching shows that industrial heritage has been assessed in the same way in all the five countries. Once it is accepted that industrial heritage needs to be assessed sector-by-sector, or as the English and French participants call it, theme-by-theme, a general knowledge base of the sector is created by applying the inductive method of analysis, that is, by gaining general knowledge of the examined sector through an analysis of individual examples. Comparison becomes the main analytical tool for gaining general knowledge of the sector. As all the participants emphasised, the created general knowledge base needs to include historical, economic- 32 Chapter One

historical, socio-historical, history of production technology and architectural historical aspects related to the sector. According to the experience of those who conducted and completed surveys on this basis, the selection criteria for each theme in question will be different and it will be possible to identify them only on the basis of the created knowledge base. And finally stating what is obvious by now: all the participants who dealt with the evaluation of industrial buildings and sites pointed out that the main methodological principles of assessments were borrowed from the discipline of industrial archaeology. Therefore, the standpoint regarding the context for evaluating industrial buildings in particular, as expressed by all the participants who presented the survey of industrial heritage in their countries, does not come as a surprise. They all emphasised the importance of understanding socio-economic, production technology and sometimes even political contexts of the examined industrial branch in order to understand the historical importance of industrial buildings of the pertinent branch. Understanding the architectural characteristics of industrial buildings solely within the architectural context and outside of other historical contexts is not sufficient for justifying their protection. It can be concluded that the historic value of an industrial building in particular lies in its other historical contexts, rather than the architectural. In the majority of cases industrial buildings are protected for their historic value, that is, as symbols of their pertinent technological, socio-economic and political context. It seems that in the case of industrial buildings, the relationship between architectural data and other historical contexts is exactly the opposite from that identified in other building types: while churches or palaces from various historic periods can be evaluated architecturally and protected for their purely architectural merit, be it spatial, structural or decorative, the architecture of an industrial building can only be understood and consequently protected in relation to some other historical context. This brief review of the evaluation practices of industrial heritage in Europe, after the Recommendations were issued, clearly shows that the methodological principles of industrial archaeology were accepted as the main tool of evaluation for all structures belonging to the category of ‘industrial heritage’. The above review suggests that the industrial buildings in particular have been totally deprived of any investigations and evaluations regarding their possible architectural rather than solely archaeological value. Now that we have familiarized ourselves with the process of the internationalization of the methodological principles of industrial archaeology as the main tools for the evaluation of ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of ‘Historic Interest’: A Contradiction in Terms 33 industrial heritage, we can next examine the consequences of using these tools for the management of industrial heritage, in particular for guiding the conversion of industrial buildings. First however, let us summarize the main points of investigation addressed so far in this thesis.

1.6 ‘Adaptive Reuse’ of Industrial Buildings: Which Way to Go? There are two issues on which the Recommendations for industrial heritage require practice unification at the European level: one is the methods of data collection and analysis, whereas the other is promoting the 'enhancement and new forms of use', meaning that the other requirement promotes an 'adaptive reuse' of industrial buildings. 'Adaptive reuse' of industrial buildings is one issue on which the practice of unification is required. The Burra Charter (scheme 1), as well as Bell,61 show that the results of the 61 D. Bell, Guide to International evaluation process constitute the content base for developing Conservation Charters, a management plan for the protected building. In other words (Edinburgh: The Historic Scotland, 1997), 34 the report of the evaluation process is the content base which unites the two main conservation actions, i.e. evaluation and management. The main aim of the management plan is to define how the identified value can be secured through the maintenance process. 'Adaptive reuse,' as the most desirable management approach for industrial buildings, is thus related to the evaluation process and its findings. Although 'adaptive reuse' is promoted as the way forward for managing industrial buildings, there is no consensus at the European level as to what constitutes good practice of 'adaptive reuse', which is not the case with the issue of recording and evaluation as described above. Northern and southern countries have different views on the topic of ‘adaptive reuse’, meaning that in Europe there are several approaches to 'adaptive reuse' that are considered ‘good practice’. We are therefore confronted with the paradoxical situation regarding the ‘adaptive reuse’ of industrial heritage: unification of practices on the topic is agreed, yet there are no guidelines on how to achieve it. At this point our investigation turns from the type-specific heritage principles to the general ones in order to deal with this paradox. A number of international conservation charters laid down general guidelines for what is considered good practice of adaptive reuse in general and of architectural design of an intervention to existing protected buildings. In the following section these guidelines are critically reviewed in order to deal with two issues. First, it will be investigated how the conservationists propose to deal with the paradox of ‘protection– no change’ / ‘reuse–change’ epitomised in industrial buildings, as introduced at the beginning of this chapter. Second, this review is seen as a theoretical basis critically examining the appropriateness of using evaluation results as guidance in 34 Chapter One

designing the conversion of industrial buildings.

1.7 Save the ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of the Old or On the Good Practice of 'Adaptive reuse' By reviewing the more recent Charters from the 1964 Venice Charter onwards, Bell's summarized conservationists' general theoretical principles which guide an intervention into the protected buildings and sites as follows:

a. any intervention should be only the minimum necessary for the site's survival, b. only minimal loss of the existing fabric is acceptable, c. any intervention should, as far as possible, be reversible, and 62 D. Bell 1997, 1 d. new work should be clearly differentiated from the old.62

The Charters and, thus, the whole world conservation community, suggest that the interventions in most general terms should be 63 D. Bell 1997, 33 definitions minimal63, reversible64 and visually clearly distinguishable65. of ‘minimal intervention and loss In order to achieve these three ethical principles in formal of fabric’ terms, the Charters bring a number of recommendations 64 D. Bell 1997, 33 concerning the design of an intervention with regards to the use and form of the intervention. When dealing with the use, 65 D. Bell 1997, 33 regardless of whether it is a new one or an adoption – new use, reuse, adoption, utilisation, these are terms defined with the same course of actions – the Charters define the relationship between the new use and the allowed changes to the old fabric and form as follows:

1. consideration of new use should begin with respect for existing and original patterns of movement, layout and 66 D. Bell 1997, 42 decoration66

and related to it

2. every reasonable effort should be made to provide a 67 D. Bell 1997, 42 compatible use which requires minimal alteration.67

And then deﬁned in more detail:

An appropriate choice of new use is one which

3. i. involves no changes to the culturally signiﬁcant fabric, only changes which are substantially reversible, or changes which require minimal impact, 4. ii. affects neither the structure nor the character [of the old] as a complete entity, whether internally or externally, 5. iii. avoids those which would cause excessive use and the deterioration that would result from such use, for ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of ‘Historic Interest’: A Contradiction in Terms 35

6. iv. access must be restricted to the extent demanded by the site's size and vulnerability in order that its physical fabric and cultural message may be preserved (e.g. historic gardens)68 68 D. Bell 1997, 42

Once the new use is deﬁned, the design of the new must respect the following:

Additions cannot be allowed except in so far as they do not detract from the interesting parts of the building [requiring that] the design should be in harmony with the general character of the old.69 69 Venice Charter [13] http:// www.international.icomos.org/ In charters that followed the Venice Charter, Bell showed that the charters/venice_e.htm above statements have been further elaborated as follows:

New work in protected fabric is acceptable only if:

7. i. the existing fabric is accepted as the framework by which the design of later interventions should be set, 8. ii. it is identiﬁable on close inspection or to the trained eye, but 9. iii. does not impair the aesthetic integrity or coherence of the whole.

When assessing the aesthetic integrity and coherence of the whole the following factors should be taken into account:

10. i. the relations of mass and colour and 11. ii. the traditional setting, the balance of its composition and its relation to the surrounding; 12. iii. form, scale, colour, texture and materials; 13. iv. tonality, texture, proportions, pattern of ﬁlled and empty spaces, and overall composition; 14. v. existing and original patterns of movement and layout; 15. vi. the (vernacular) plan, volume and shell. 16. i. any contemporary additions must be creative works in their own right, and 17. ii. a facile imitation of traditional and picturesque forms should be avoided, but 18. iii .the design should be in harmony with the general character [of the old or existing]."70 70 D. Bell 1997, 41

As indicated in the Introduction, since the Venice Charter where the international conservation community promoted the view that keeping a protected building in constant use is the best way to secure its long life, the issue of 'adaptive reuse' in general has been discussed in a number of international conferences. As a result, a consensus has been achieved regarding different 36 Chapter One

aspects of the topic named therein, and these international documents are considered the conceptual basis for defining the good practice of 'adaptive reuse' at international level. There is no such comparative study at European level as would discuss the extent to which these documents guide each individual national practice of adaptive reuse, nor does a study exist on differences in practice which apparently exist within Europe, as mentioned above. Pickard's comparative study into the legislative and conservation practice differences and similarities in Europe thus provides the only point of reference 71 Pickard, R. Policy and Law in for the topic.71 Out of a number of topics compared, the topic of Heritage Conservation, (London, 'conservation philosophy' deals with the problems of interest Yew York: SPON PRESS, 2001) in this thesis, that is, with the intervention into the old. It is clear that in all countries the "respect for original materials and authentic documentary evidence" is of highest importance; that "any restoration work must […] be honest, showing a 'contemporary stamp'" and finally; 'the notion of allowing alterations to accommodate new uses" is the most promoted 72 R. Pickard 2001, 325 – all approach at European level.72 When these conclusions are the quotations in this sentence compared with Bell’s summary of what the charters recommend come from the same page on the topic of interventions in general, it can be concluded that at international level the theory has been put into practice to the letter. The charters deal with the question of reuse in ethical terms: minimal intervention, respect for the existing, compatible use, and aesthetical terms: the whole, the character, the harmony. Minimal intervention is conservationists’ prime ethical position regarding intervention to the old in general. The charters suggest that minimal has been interpreted in a quantitative way, that is, the amount of change caused by the design to the physical fabric of the old, as well as in a qualitative way, that is, the extent to which the design of the new impairs the aesthetic integrity of the old. Unfortunately, to what extent and what kind of change is allowed in practice has not been discussed anywhere. Thus again there is information missing in the literature on the actual relationship between evaluation results and their use in the maintenance part of the process. In other words, a study does not exist on the translation of the value - be it historic, technological, social and thus intangible by its nature, as in the case of industrial buildings - into the actual, practical 'dos and don'ts' of the building's maintenance plan, regarding the amount of allowed changes to the examined building. However, years of European conservation practice have shown that quantitative measurement has gained privileged 73 R. Pickard 2001 status over the qualitative one.73 Drawing upon the design guidelines presented above, such a course of practice is not surprising since the charters describe in minute detail all formal elements of the old while leaving undefined what is meant by the qualitative term of ‘aesthetic integrity’. Consequently, ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of ‘Historic Interest’: A Contradiction in Terms 37 the building’s existing fabric has become the most important historical asset which should stay unchanged as much as possible. Now, this ‘quantitative’ measuring of the change to the physical fabric is only relatively quantitative because it is also based on an interpretation by the conservation officer on the importance of the particular piece of fabric. Furthermore, by focusing on individual parts of the building, its totality is taken out of sight. For example, in the case of the Vienna gas holder, the original spatial organisation of the building is much more altered than the fabric of the walls with the sole aim of preserving the existing fabric as much as possible (picture 2). ‘Quantitatively’ speaking the intervention is minimal. But it also shows that minimalism has been achieved at the expense of losing the building’s original formal characteristic. If by a building we mean its fabric and spatial organisation, thenit can be said that the building’s totality is considerably altered through this intervention although its fabric stayed (almost) intact. The charters do prescribe minimal alteration to every formal element of the building including its totality. Thus, it is the theoretical position of this author that, if one wants to evaluate the intervention as minimal, both qualitative and quantitative measurements must be taken into consideration. If both are taken into consideration it means that, in addition to describing individual formal characteristics of the existing building which would be very useful for the 'quantitative measurement', it is then equally important to define the principle of the 'aesthetic integrity' of the old in order to facilitate the 'qualitative' measurement. The relationship between the quantitative formal elements and the qualitative conceptual element is defined in the charters in a way which implies that the conceptual element of ‘aesthetic integrity’ regulates the relationships between individual formal elements of the old. Furthermore, the charters require the assessment of the new design on the basis of the preservation of the "aesthetic integrity or the coherence of the whole", where 'the whole' refers to the old and new together. Since the fabric and form of the old must set the framework for the new, the ‘aesthetic integrity or the coherence of the whole’ of the old and new together can be assessed only if the ‘aesthetic integrity or the coherence of the whole’ of the old itself is known before. It can be concluded that the definition of the ‘aesthetic integrity or coherence of the whole’ of the old, exclusively, is on the one hand the prerequisite guideline for the design of the new intervention. On the other hand, the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the old is also a tool for measuring the minimality of the intervention. Therefore, it is proposed here that, if one wants to define whether the intervention is minimal in qualitative terms, clearly visually distinguishable but not impairing the old, it is essential that the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the 38 Chapter One

old is clearly deﬁned. However, it still remains unclear what ‘aesthetic integrity’ in itself is.

1.8 ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ as opposed to ‘Unity of Style’ Let us first start with the purely linguistic analysis of the term of ’aesthetic integrity’. In this phrase ‘aesthetic’ is used as an adjective of the noun ‘integrity’. The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) defines the adjective ‘aesthetic’ as: “concerned with beauty or appreciation of beauty; giving or designed to give pleasure through beauty; of pleasing appearance.” And ‘integrity’ is defined as follows:

noun [mass noun] 1 the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; moral uprightness 2 the state of being whole and undivided; the condition of being uniﬁed, unimpaired, or sound in construction; internal consistency or lack or corruption in electronic data.

As shown above, “aesthetic integrity’ is equated with the ‘coherence of the whole’. As we can see, ‘integrity’ refers to both the spiritual as well as physical wholeness of a person or an object. The equation of the two terms would imply the second, physical, connotation of the word ’integrity’. Thus, purely from the linguistic point of view, it can be suggested that the charters require that, in the conversion, the old and the new create a pleasing appearance of undivided, unified and unimpaired wholeness in formal terms. The above design guidelines refer to any protected building regardless of whether the reason behind its protection is architectural or purely historical. In the latter case, the building is protected simply as a symbol of various kinds of historic values it embodies – be they social, archaeological, economic or otherwise. For example, industrial buildings are one such case. The protection of such buildings is not justified in aesthetic terms. And yet, their conversion design must be led by an aesthetic category. Proposing that the ‘aesthetic integrity’ in such cases should not be applied here is one option. However, the ‘minimal’ is in that case interpreted only in quantitative terms, and every element of form can be both altered and not to the liking of the conservation officer in charge. Therefore, since the building as a whole is a symbol, the need to preserve its physical wholeness or integrity or unity comes to the fore as an ever more prominent necessity. Now, the charters require that the ‘aesthetic integrity of the old and the new, based on the rules of the ‘aesthetic integrity’ ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of ‘Historic Interest’: A Contradiction in Terms 39 of the old, be retained through conversion. This can be achieved if the new follows the formal characteristics of the old. Yet, this solely formalistic interpretation leads only to confusion: while on the one hand all formal characteristics of the new must be similar to the old, on the other they must also be clearly different. How different or similar is an intervention executed in exposed concrete finished with the same pattern and colour of an old brick wall? The Venice Charter clearly states that “the valid contributions of all periods to the building of a monument must be respected, since unity of style is not the aim of a restoration [emphasis added].”74 Consequently the new must also be clearly 74 Venice Charter, [11] distinguishable from the old. However, if the style is understood in the most basic way, that is, in terms of rules of combining formal elements in a building and the decorative appearance of these elements, e.g. Romanesque or Gothic, the request for the similarity of form between the old and new suggests that the new should be executed in the same style as the old. This implies that an exclusively formal explanation and description of the ‘aesthetic integrity’ as given in the charters equates ‘aesthetic integrity’ with ‘unity of style’. But if ‘unity of style’ is not the aim of the restoration, and modern intervention should be similar but not the same, then what is ‘aesthetic integrity’ in itself rather than ‘a style’ of particular formal characteristics that it regulates? If, according to the charters, ‘aesthetic integrity’ regulates the relationships between individual formal elements, then it can be proposed that it is a theoretical concept that describes a building’s totality. Even the buildings which do not have aesthetic quality do present themselves to the world in their formal totality or finished unity. This formal unity of a building can have aesthetic integrity or not. If we accept that every building can be described in terms of its formal unity or totality, regardless of whether this formal totality represent any aesthetic value, then the rest of this chapter will investigate in which way the description of formal totality of industrial buildings can be achieved by means of industrial archaeology. For that purpose, a model report on the evaluation of industrial buildings conducted in line with the principles of industrial archaeology will be examined with regard to the type of data collected and framework of their interpretation.

1.9 ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ and ‘Technological Functionalism’ of Industrial Buildings Following the conclusions of the four conferences dedicated to the protection of industrial heritage, the English method of data collection and recording was accepted by the participating countries as the model for systematic recording of industrial 40 Chapter One

75 The Council of Europe, heritage.75 English conservationists consider the study of Architectural heritage, new the cotton mills of Greater Manchester as a seminal study in technologies in documentation, the area of surveying and evaluating industrial heritage. 76 It Report set the standard in terms of the structure and methodology 76 Palmer et al 1998, 80; of the analysis applied to all the studies conducted through Falconer 2000, 70 two programmes for recording and evaluating architectural and archaeological heritage in England. Therefore, in order to understand the basic methodological characteristics of the evaluation process of industrial buildings, the English study of cotton mills will be reviewed below. In 1985 the RCHME and Manchester Archaeological Unit (MAU) conducted a survey of the cotton mills, the aim of which was to identify and record those selected for protection. Out of 77 M. Williams and D. A. around two thousand four hundred examined,77 twenty-six mills Farnie, Cotton Mills in Greater were included in the inventory. In order to interpret the collected Manchester (Preston: Carnegie material, D.A. Farnie and M. Williams conducted a historical Publishing Ltd., 1992) viii, 137 study of the mills which focused on the technological aspect of cotton production. The study can be divided into two parts. The first part relates the geographical, historical and socio-economic aspects which characterised the beginnings, development and decline of cotton industry in the Greater Manchester area. This part of the study 78 M. Cherry, ‘Listing: Current provided the knowledge base or "a comprehensive coverage",78 Developments’, Context, 51 as Cherry labelled it later in the conservation literature, of the (1996): 16-17 industrial branch as a whole, created by examining documentary and physical evidence. The second part of the study is the inventory of the selected mills with the gazetteer of all the identified, existing and demolished, mill complexes, containing 79 These details are: name, their basic identification details79. The inventory provides National Building Record file individual descriptions of the mills selected for protection. number, date, grid reference, In the first part, Farnie and Williams identified four stages economic branch archive, in Williams et al, 1992, 187-188 of development of cotton mill buildings within the recognized historical life cycle of this industry. These stages are defined on the basis of "a range of interrelated factors, such as development 80 Williams et al 1992, 3 of construction technique, machinery and power system."80 Each stage of development is described in terms of size and layout of the complex, external details of the buildings, methods of construction, internal organisation and power system. They argued that the formal characteristics of each of these features of the mill buildings are an expression of the functional needs of either the technology of the process, or the power system, or the safety fire regulation requirements. For example, the disposition of the buildings within the complex was governed by the need to satisfy the functional unity of the industrial process. Furthermore, the size and shape of the windows on individual buildings had to do with the quality of internal daylight they provided; the flat stone lintels "indicate that mill contains 81 Williams et al 1992, 56 fire-proof brick-vaulted ceiling"81 as opposed to the segmental- headed windows which could be found in the non-fireproof ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of ‘Historic Interest’: A Contradiction in Terms 41

mills.82 Structural and construction methods were described in 82 Williams et al 1992, 56 minute technical detail justifying the use of materials, such as, wrought and cast iron with their technological performance. They justified the need for wider internal spaces, achieved by using these materials, by referring to the need for accommodating bigger and technologically more advanced spinning machines83 83 Example is taken from or a power system.84 They argued that the idea that governed the second stage of the the internal spatial organisation of the mills was the disposition development of the mills. Every further stage is described in the of different parts of the production process in the way which is same way. Williams et al 1992, 74 most suitable for the functioning of the process.85 Thus, the technology of production is taken as the essential 84 Williams et al 1992, 85 factor which influenced the development of the architectural 85 Williams et al 1992, 83-85 characteristics of these buildings. The only architectural feature the origin of which was not explained by way of technological process is the style of the buildings. Style is understood exclusively in terms of the manner of handling the external ornamentation of the buildings.86 They made a distinction 86 Williams et al 1992, 57: between the early mills, that originating from the eighteenth “Stylistic considerations appear and the beginning of the nineteenth century, and the examples to have played little or no role in early mill design in Manchester. of the later periods by stating that the level of elaboration of Ornamentation in most early the ornament was higher in the later examples. For these later mills was restricted to the use periods, the authors identified the characteristic style87 as well of stone voussoirs at the arched as the architects who specialised in this kind of architecture main entrance.” over time. They argued that their specialisation was evident 87 Williams et al 1992, 100: through the "develop[ment of] a variety of new methods of Williams et al stated that “the fireproof construction and encouraged the creative use of most widely used style may be loosely referred to as ‘Italianate’” ornamentation."88 In conclusion, this study shows that the mill buildings 88 Williams et al 1992, 98 are only described in architectural terms, that is, in terms of their building technology, organisation of their internal space, ornamentation of the elevations, size and number of floors of the buildings as well as the layout of the complex. However, all these elements are described in isolation from each other, that is, neither their functional nor aesthetic relationships are established. For example, the increase of the window area is said to be the essential factor for the improvement of natural lighting quality on which the working conditions depended. But the relationship between the internal organisation of the production process and the related working conditions which might have been caused by the increase of the window area is neither established nor investigated in the study. The only relationships established are those between each of the individual architectural elements and the technology of production. Such an industrial archaeological approach to the analysis and interpretation of a piece of architecture89 does not allow for 89 For the details on the site the consideration of the building as a whole, as a spatial and analysis in the field of industrial formal unit, but rather as the sum of architectural elements of archaeology see Palmer and Neaverson, 1998. which each can have a different value because it is analysed and evaluated in relation to its functional group. In this respect 42 Chapter One

structural systems always have the highest value whereas the organisation and the decoration of the elevations the lowest. In summary, what binds the entire complex into a unit, and in some cases defines the relationship between individual architectural parts, is the functioning of the production process housed in the complex. It is evident that to understand the functioning of a production process is of the highest importance for industrial archaeologists. Architectural and compositional characteristics of the complexes are the embodiment of the production process examined. But it is because they housed the process that these buildings need to be protected in their completeness. When defining the allowed change to a protected industrial building, conservationists must have at their disposal the description of the formal characteristics of the old as well as the definition of the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the industrial building and site in question. As illustrated, the evaluation reports provide the description of a building's formal characteristics, such as, internal organisation, structure, external form, building material and composition of elevations. The principle that unites all the 90 W. van Maanen ‘Kathedralen architectural elements into a whole and the buildings into a van arbeid’, in De Groene whole site is the functioning of the production process at the level Amsterdammer, (6/10/2006): of the individual building as well as of the whole site. It is then 32-33 proposed here to term this archaeological explanation of the relationship between individual building elements, as well as between all the structures on the site, as 'technological functionalism'. Since this principle describes the architectural totality of a building and the site, ‘technological functionalism' can be understood as the principle of the 'aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings and the whole site. The remainder of this chapter examines the extent to which a rather strictly defined set of rules on why and how architectural parts of the building are bound and related together in a whole, hence ‘technological functionalism’, can be used as a concept which guides the design of an conversion.

1.10 ‘Technological Functionalism’ Questioned Let us now examine how “technological functionalism” is used in practice as a way of describing the “aesthetic integrity” of industrial buildings. Van Maanen reports on the negotiation process for the Koolhaas-OMA intervention to the “Kohlenwäsche” building in Zollverein, Ruhr area of Germany.90 (pictures 4-9) The building is protected together with the PICTURE 4: KOHLENWÄSCHE PRIOR production machinery present in situ. It is an example AND DURING THE CONVERSION where the building was protected as a symbol of ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of ‘Historic Interest’: A Contradiction in Terms 43 the production process because it housed production machinery important for the history of technology, rather than for its architectural merit. Following the guidelines of the conservation officer in charge, OMA needed to change their original design proposal of the intervention to a way in which neither any part of the original machinery nor any part of the building could be removed or changed respectively. Following several rounds of negotiations PICTURE 5: CONVERSION OF A COAL REFINERY INTO A between OMA and the conservation office MUSEUM AND VISITORS CENTRE, OMA, EXTERIOR VIEW the following agreement was achieved on several fronts91: First: The building originally housed two absolutely identical 91 Information based on processes for coal washing, positioned parallel to each other. the private interview with Such a disposition of the process created a symmetrical OMA’s project manager Floris Alkemade on 11 January 2008 spatial organisation of the building. Conservationists allowed the machinery of one entire process to be removed while the other had to be retained in its totality. Such a proposal changed the spatial organisation of the building. In order to maintain the original symmetrical spatial organisation of the building, OMA managed to persuade the conservationists to retain the essential machinery of both processes while removing those of less importance so that a new space can be created for the new functions. Second: The new use, a museum, needed thermal insulation which the old building did not have. Conservationists proposed adding insulation to the inside of the existing wall. The consequence of this action would be to cover the columnar part of the building's main structure, since the wall was approximately 30 cm thick. In order to preserve an uninterrupted visual presence of the main structure (picture 7), OMA proposed, successfully, that the existing wall with its original materials be 'moved' outside the existing building perimeter by 30 centimetres (picture 8). Third: In terms of mass composition, the building was a simple closed box standing on the columns on the open ground floor. The ground floor was opened in order to allow access by train underneath the building. The conservationists proposed closing off the ground floor with glass in order to gain additional PICTURE 6: CONVERSION OF A COAL REFINERY INTO A MUSEUM AND closed space, to be preferably used VISITORS CENTRE, OMA, INTERIOR VIEW 44 Chapter One

as an entrance and visitors' centre. Instead, OMA proposed partial closing of the ground floor by placing the museum's depot there. In this way the appearance of the cube 'sitting' on the columns was retained. OMA placed the visitors' centre at a higher level, connecting it directly with the ground floor by an escalator (picture 9). By adding an escalator which formally and functionally resembled, yet did not copy, an existing conveyor belt, as well as by making all the above described formal interventions, OMA achieved a coherent whole between the old and new in formal terms, while at the same time minimally changing the original building fabric and its inventory. Eventually, OMA managed to persuade the conservation officer that the building itself could be changed because it did not have architectural merit in its own right, while the machines could stay intact. In 2007 the project was awarded Deutscher 92 “Projects, ZOLLVEREIN Architekturpreis 2007.92 KOHLENWÄSCHE, GERMANY, Thus, it was originally the 'technological functionalism' that ESSEN, 2006” http://www.oma. guided conservationist's interpretation of the aesthetic integrity nl of an industrial building, resulting in the fact that a building which did not have any architectural value in its own right was treated as important because it housed machines important in terms of history of technology. For industrial archaeologists, in order to best understand the technological production process in question, the presence of the building in unchanged condition is of equal importance as the presence of the machinery. This

PICTURE 7: UNINTERRUPTED PRESENCE OF PICTURE 8: OLD AND NEW CREATING A THE MAIN STRUCTURE COHERENT WHOLE ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of ‘Historic Interest’: A Contradiction in Terms 45 means that the building itself does have archaeological value because it is considered the immediate physical context of valuable machinery that was decided to be preserved in situ. According to this approach, the building and the machines are just different pieces of one and the same object. By allowing the building to be changed, the overall object was changed. The compromise that was finally achieved reflected a standpoint whereby the technological whole was broken into physical parts, each of which was further treated according to different value systems: archaeologically important machinery stayed intact while the architecturally unimportant building was adapted to the requirements of a new use. The solution of compromise negated the archaeological value of the building although that was the justification for its protection in the first place. This example shows very clearly the clash between the preservation of archaeological value of an industrial building and its reuse. 'Aesthetic integrity’ defined PICTURE 9: ‘ENTERING in terms of 'technological functionalism' only further deepens ESCALATOR’ this clash. The main definition of 'technological functionalism' is based on the conviction that formal characteristics of an industrial building reflect the technological process the building housed. By extension, in terms of reuse, this implies that no other function could fit into this particular formal arranngement of the old without making less clear the original character of the old. In this respect, 'technological functionalism' can guide the reuse of an industrial building only to its conversion into a museum of the industry once housed in these buildings. Giving any other function to an old industrial building is paradoxical to its archaeological value. Since 'technological functionalism' does not allow any change, it cannot be considered a yardstick for measuring the minimal intervention, but rather an absolute value. The results of industrial archaeological evaluation of industrial sites justify the protection of industrial buildings in archaeological terms. As emphasised already at the four conferences on industrial heritage in the late 1980s, this was the only way in which a far greater number of industrial buildings could be protected. A much smaller number of industrial buildings would have been protected had they been evaluated in architectural terms only. However, the "Kohlenwäsche" case showed that the results of an industrial archaeological evaluation, although justifying the protection of the buildings, is extremely limiting to the building's future management options. This example raises the question of how useful it is to justify the protection of industrial buildings in industrial archaeological terms only, considering the likeliness of converting these buildings into another use. 46 Chapter One

The "Kohlenwäsche" case testified to the fact that an architectural interpretation of the building successfully satisfied even the preservation of its industrial archaeological value. Since 'technological functionalism' does not accommodate justification of any alterations to the building, it remains to be investigated in which way the 'aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings can be defined in architectural terms.

Conclusion Industrial archaeological methods of investigation secured the recognition of the historic value of industrial sites, and industrial buildings in particular, to a wider extent than the existing architectural historical views did. Furthermore, the industrial archaeological methods of analysing buildings do provide a description of the architectural totality or ‘aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings. However, these same methods prove inadequate in deﬁning the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings in a way which would ensure at once the retention of the old and the accommodation of the change to the new. Archaeological interpretation of the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings only emphasises the conservation paradox between ‘protection=no change and reuse=change’. Therefore, one should search for a conceptual basis—different from that of ‘technological functionalism’ as deﬁned by industrial archaeologists—as a regulating tool between the old and the new in a converted industrial building. If we accept that every building can be described in terms of its formal totality, the primary concern of the following chapter will be how to describe the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the formal totality of an industrial building in terms other than those adopted by industrial archaeology. Traditionally, architectural history aims to reveal how, at different times and by different architects, ideas such as unity, harmony, character or integrity are presented to the world in 93 E. Fernie, Art History and Its formal terms.93 What these ideas are, in and of themselves, is Methods: A Critical Anthology, the primary concern of the philosophical branch of aesthetics. (London: Phaidon Press, Hence, it is proposed here that one should investigate further 1995)PICTURE 9: ENTERING ESCALATOR into the world of aesthetics in order to comprehend and discuss the way in which ‘aesthetic integrity’ or ‘coherence of the whole’ may be understood, so that it may be used as a concept regulating the relationship between the old and the new regardless of their individual formal characteristics. 47 48 49

Chapter Two Nineteenth Century Organicism: ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of Nineteenth Century Architecture

Introduction The aim of this chapter is to set a theoretical framework for defining the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings in terms of architectural history. In Chapter One it was shown that it was exclusively the historic value of industrial buildings that was recognised when evaluated by the tools of industrial archaeology. Consequently, they were protected as symbols of a specific branch of industry . Through such an evaluation, ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the overall form of industrial buildings’ is defined in terms of ‘technological functionalism’, that is, the form is considered to be the direct result of the need to house a particular production process. However, it was shown that, when this concept was used to guide the design of conversion, the formal integrity of the building was jeopardised at the expense of the material integrity of the old. Since it is the form of the building that is the bearer of historic value, it is the formal totality of the building that needs to be altered as little as possible, and not just the building fabric itself. The search for1 a way to describe the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings turns then to another field which treats the building form as the main source of knowledge, that is, architectural history. The genesis of the evaluation process of industrial buildings showed that industrial buildings were not evaluated architecturally because their stylistic characteristics did not comply with the traditional architectural historical stylistic classification categories. From the mid 1980s when this decision was taken regarding the way to evaluate industrial buildings, several studies appeared which dealt with the historical revaluation of nineteenth century architecture in both theoretical and actual formal terms, by using approaches to building analysis other than stylistic. Studies are reviewed here which deal with the theoretical background of nineteenth century architecture. Architectural historians and theorists began to recognize the 50 Chapter Two

1 See, for example, P. Collins, architectural value of nineteenth century architecture only as P. Changing Ideals in Modern recently as the 1990s On the one hand, this century was primarily Architecture 1750-1950, understood as a period which had laid conceptual grounds for the (Kingston and Montreal: McGill- 1 Queen’s University Press, 1967) rise of Modernist tradition in architecture. This group of studies focuses on the identification of the roots of functionalism as an 2 R. Middleton and D.J.Watkin, aesthetic notion that defines Modernism. Conversely to these Neoclassical and 19th Century studies, those of Watkin, Middleton, or Witkower2, to mention Architecture, (New York: Abrams, just the most influential, approached the nineteenth century as a 1980); D. Watkin, The Rise of Architectural History (London: period when the ideological background of the classical tradition Architectural Press, 1980); R. in architecture was questioned and consequently abandoned. Wittkower, (1949) Architectural The primary aim of this latter group of studies was to identify the Principles in the Age of genealogy of the dissolution of the classical idea in architecture. Humanism (London: Academy Elaborating on the concept recognized as the one responsible Editions,1988) for overthrowing the primacy of the classical idea became 3 C. van Eck, Organicism the secondary goal of these studies. Consequently, because of in the Nineteenth Century the particular aims of both groups of studies, the nineteenth Architecture, (Amsterdam: century—explained as either the starting point of a new tradition Architectura&Natura Press, 1994), 36 or as the end point of an old tradition—was deprived of its own ideological identity. 4 Collins 1967,149-185 Van Eck's study entitled Organicism in Nineteenth Century Architecture fills this gap in the literature. She showed that 5 E. Panofsky, ‘ The First Page the abovementioned authors of the second group found in of Giorgio Vasari’s “Libro”: A organicism a new aesthetic notion of the nineteenth century, Study on the Gothic Style in which had overthrown the primacy of the classical aesthetic the Judgement of the Italian Renaissance With an Excursus tradition. Van Eck agreed with them as far as the identification on Two Façade Design by of the new aesthetic concept was concerned. However, she Domenico Beccafumi’,in Meaning argued that organicism did not represent new aesthetic grounds, in the Visual Arts, (Doubleday but that it was rather a continuation of the classical aesthetic Anchor Books: New York, 1955) tradition. On the other hand, van Eck dismissed the studies on (169-235) organicism which belonged to the first group because of their 6 For example, Van Eck 1994, strong ideological bias: only insofar as the history of organicism 24; K. Frampton, Studies in in architecture "corresponds with the interests of the author— Tectonic Culture: The Poetics of design theory, or the critical evaluation of an important aspect Construction in Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Architecture of modernism, such as the biological analogy as one of the (Cambridge, MA, London: MIT ingredients of functionalism—is nineteenth-century organicism Press, 1995), 30-31 studied and discussed."3 In fact, she closes her study with a 7 Van Eck 1994, 92 recommendation for further research into the reassessment of 8 Van Eck 1994, 92 functionalism in the same manner as she reassessed organicism, 9 Frampton 1995, 29-59 that is, by anchoring it to classical tradition. Thus, in her view, 10 Frampton 1995, 61-91 organicism is not only an ingredient of functionalism, as Collins 11 Van Eck 1994, 95 suggests4, but rather an independent theoretical concept which 12 According to Frampton can be used in order to describe the architectural quality of the the main difference between entire nineteenth century architecture and, thus, of industrial French and German buildings as well, as will be shown in Chapter Three. counterparts of the debate lies in the particular philosophical This chapter is structured in such a way as to first familiarize influence to the latter. During the reader with the main theoretical dilemma of the nineteenth the late eighteenth century, a century architectural discourse, summarized by the following particular cultural climate was question: ‘In what style should we build?’ On the one hand, emerging in Germany based the presentation of this dilemma opens up the possibility of Nineteenth Century Organicism: ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of Nineteenth Century Architecture 51

on the philosophical works of an investigation into the relationship between architects and I. Kant and Hegel related to the newly emerged nineteenth century profession of engineer- art. (Frampton 1995, 62-63) architects, since their collaboration came to the fore in the But, it was the work of F.W.J. making of the buildings of utilitarian nature, such as train von Schelling and J.G.Fichte stations or industrial buildings. On the other hand, this dilemma that Frampton saw as directly influencing the work of the is van Eck’s main object of analysis. As such, familiarity with it most prominent architects of is essential for understanding van Eck’s argument. The chapter the time, such as, Schinkel (For next proceeds to explain organicism and finally concludes by the influence of Schelling to proposing that the way engineer-architects designed reflects the Schinkel see Frampton 1995, theoretical basis of organicism as proposed by van Eck. Drawing 75-76, while for the influence of Fichte see Frampton 1995, upon this review, the chapter finally proposes the way in which 80). In the philosophical ‘aesthetic integrity’ can be understood, which is different from works of the aforementioned that of stylistic understanding. philosophers, Frampton saw the theoretical pillars of the rational 2.1 The Nineteenth Century Search for New Forms architecture of the period of German Enlightenment from which evolve a new set of ethical 2.1.1 The tectonic approach and cultural values appropriate It is a commonly accepted theoretical position in architectural to a rational and scientific age. history that builders and later architects desired to express (Frampton 1995, 62) […] The the character of their own time through architectural form. term ‘classical romanticism’ thus comes to imply a good deal more Panofsky, for example, showed that already in the Renaissance than a stylistic characterization, architects and builders wanted to express their ‘modern’ world for it expresses precisely that view in a formal way different from the one used to express the synthesis of Greek and Christian traditional worldview of the Middle Ages, which preceded theirs.5 cultures with which intellectuals The nineteenth century architects only continued this existing such as Hegel and the architect K.F. Schinkel would attempt tradition of perceiving architecture and its role in society. They to sublimate their nostalgia were preoccupied with the search for a ‘new style’, or simply with for a lost golden age, through a search for an architectural form, which would appropriately their separate formulation and express the character of their own time. representation of Prussia as Historiographers and philosophers dealing with the nature a rational, Christian nation. (Frampton 1995, 63) Thus, on and sources of the nineteenth century stylistic debate in one hand German theorists architecture trace its beginnings to the theory of Laugier on and architects expressed the the primitive hut from the mid-eighteenth century.6 Observing rational and scientific spirit of architecture and treating it as a scientific experiment in his their age in the explorations studies, Laguier came to the conclusion that the structure and of the essence of architecture 7 by the means of structure construction elements of any building constituted its essence. the same as the French A father of neo-classicism, together with C. Perrault, he thought did. Yet, that same age was that the parts of an architectural order “must be employed characterized by the raise of in such a way that they do not only decorate the building, but national consciousnesses and constitute it.”8 belonging all around Europe. Strongly present in Germany Laugier clearly defined two issues regarding the role of in the nineteenth century, it ornament in architecture, which would demark the nineteenth found its embodiment also century stylistic debate: first, the essence of architecture in the architectural debate of discussed through the relationship between the structure and the time. Considerations for the ornament; second, the appropriateness for using a particular the representational role of architecture became, thus, the historical manner of building (Classical, Gothic, Renaissance) other side of the coin of the for a particular functional kind of building. Frampton named the German stylistic debate, which first issue the ontological9 and the second the representational10 did not characterize the French aspect of the nineteenth century stylistic debate. Laugier contemporary debate. 52 Chapter Two

<< 11 was indecisive regarding the part that the classical orders, << 12 and consequently decoration, must play in the creation of 13 H. Hübsch (1828), ‘In What architecture: whether they are a constituent and therefore Style Should We Build?’, In What essential part of architecture or only decorative.11 As it will Style Should We Build?: The be shown, the question remained inconclusively answered German Debate on Architectural Style, intro. and trans. from throughout the nineteenth century despite numerous plausible German by W. Herrmann (Santa theoretical proposals. Monica, CA: The Getty Centre Whereas in France theorists-architects were primarily for the History of Art and concerned with the ontological aspect of the debate, in Humanities, 1992): 63-102 Germany the question of essence was interwoven with that 14 R. Wiegmann (1829), of architecture's representational role.12 Historiographers of ‘Remarks on the Treatise In What the nineteenth century stylistic debate, such as W. Herrmann, Style Should We Build’, In What Collins, Frampton or Van Eck, recognized two lines of thought Style Should We Build?: The German Debate on Architectural which shaped the search for a new architectural form at both the Style, intro. and trans. from ontological and representational levels during the nineteenth German by W. Herrmann (Santa century itself. In Germany, Hübsch was a spokesman of those Monica, CA: The Getty Centre who believed that a new 'style', that is, the formal expression for the History of Art and of the pertinent time, could be invented on the basis of the Humanities, 1992): 103-112; In What Style Should We Build?: The knowledge of architectural characteristics of the past historical 13 German Debate on Architectural styles. Wiegmann and Metzger opposed the invention theory by Style, intro. and trans. from advocating the development theory of a new style14. German by W. Herrmann (Santa The opposition was built up around the view on the use Monica, CA: The Getty Centre of new materials in architecture. Those who maintained for the History of Art and Humanities, 1992), 42 that the use of new material would dictate the appropriate structural system as well as ornamentation believed in the style 15 Herrmann 1992, 43 development theory. Claiming at ﬁrst in 1837 that such new 16 Hübsch was the ﬁrst to material did not exist at the time, Metzger recognised it in iron argue that the system of the already in 1845.15 Yet, those who preferred to believe that a new round arch used during the style could be invented, for example, Hübsch, did not see any Roman period and during the times of early Christianity in particular potential in the use of iron for further architectural 16 the western parts of Europe achievements. In France, the same dispute existed between

PICTURE 10: H. HÜBSCH, POLYTECHNINISCHE HOCHSCHULE, KARKSRUHE (1833-1835) - RUNDBOGENSTIL Nineteenth Century Organicism: ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of Nineteenth Century Architecture 53

was the structural system which existed between the two perfect ones, that is Greek and Gothic. (Hübsch 1828, 66-68). As it was not developed to its full structural potential, Hübsch, later followed by others, saw in this system a potential basis for inventing a new style. Wiegmann and later Semper agreed with Hübsch’s view that round arch offers the possibility of further development because of its imperfection. Semper choose the arch of Renaissance as the basis for further development. (Herrmann 1992, 48). Hübsch, in fact, designed a style called Rundbogenstil (Hübsch (1828), 90-98) which he used in his buildings constructed during the first half of the nineteenth century. For a long time he was convinced that he invented a new style. The round arch system is the basic building structure of Rundbogenstil. It is made in stone or brick depending on which material was considered more local. Windows and doors are round-arched, the shape usually expressed in the small pieces of the building material used so that it expresses the best the tectonic laws of round arch. Furthermore, the lessens or pilasters on the elevations PICTURE 11: GOTTFRIED SEMPER, ILLUSTRATION FROM DER STIL are representative of the IN DEN TECHNISCHEN UND TEKTONISCHEN KÜNSTEN, 1860- structure and internal spatial 1863. THE CARIBEAN HUT IN THE GREAT EXHIBITION OF 1851 arrangement. Windows are usually grouped in two or more Ecole Polytechnique and the Ecole des Beaux Arts, with the together. In the most cases the elevations are left unplastered former advocating the developmental stylistic theory with so that the structural material Viollet-le-Duc and his disciples as their most pronounced and is exposed. If the building is influential proponents.17 plastered from the outside, Among the works focusing on the relationship between then the plaster on the ground structure and ornament, twentieth century historiographers floor is usually rusticated. As Hübsch did not approve of the singled out the works of Bötticher and Semper. It was the use of classical orders, the theorist and architect Bötticher who first proposed the following ornamentation of the building relationship between the structural elements of buildings and is very simple, usually reduced the ornament: the former constitutes the building’s core-form to some abstract ornament whereas the latter its art-form. “The core-form of each part on the columns’ capitals. It can mainly be found in the [of the building] is the mechanically necessary and statically (cont’d on next page) functional structure; the art-form, on the other hand, is only the characterisation by which the mechanical-statical function is 17 >> made apparent.”18 Art-form, whether embodied in the ornament 18 >> 54 Chapter Two

(footnote 16 cont’d:) or cladding of the building,19 has a representational function in churches whereas from the relation to the core-form which has an ontological one. Yet, as he public buildings, such as, emphasised, the distinction must always be apparent between Polytechnische Hochschule in 20 Karlsruhe, the ornament has core- and art-forms. After Schinkel’s death in 1841, his theory completely disappeared. (picture was used as the “primary ideological text in the Bauakademie [in 10) All these characteristics Berlin]”.21 The significance of Bötticher's theory lies in the fact remind one the most of the that it was not developed in relation to any historical style, but Romanesque buildings, as rather as an explanation of the difference between the essence Wiegmann indicated already 22 in the 1830s (Herrmann 1992, and appearance in architecture. Although he "condoned the 16), and of the Byzantine adaptation of traditional stylistic formats to a new situation, […] architecture, as Kugler Bötticher will argue that any new spatial system or future style wrote around the same time will have to be brought into being by a new structure and not the (Herrmann 1992, 22). Although other way around",23 as Hübsch proposed. Hübsch used this style for churches as well, he managed to Frampton argued that it was Semper who, in his The Four 24 follow his own rules most to the Elements of Architecture (1851), managed to synthesise letter when applying this style most aptly the way in which way tectonic form is the carrier of to the public buildings which, in ontological and representational role in architecture.25 the nineteenth century, did not Semper distinguishes four elements of architecture: firstly, have a historical president, such as, schools, museums but also the heart of the house that is, the social relationships that take industrial buildings. place in the building, as being the “first and the most important, 17 Frampton 1995, 40-59 moral element of architecture. Around it were grouped the 18 Quoted in Frampton 1995, three other: the roof, the enclosure and the mound.”26 (picture 82; For more detailed analysis 11) Frampton emphasised that for Semper the essence of of Bötticher’s and Semper’s architecture is expressed in the elaboration of joints between the theoretical work on core and art form see H .Quitzsch, four elements, but particularly between the pair of stereotomic G.Semper, Praktische Aesthetiek elements, that is, the heart and the mound on the one hand, und politischer Kampf, and the pair of tectonic elements, that is, the roof and the (Braunschweig, 1981), series: enclosure on the other. As joints fundamentally imply transitions, Bauwerk Fundamente Frampton argues that transition is to Semper the very essence of 19 Frampton 1995, 82 architecture.27 20 Frampton 1995, 82 21 Frampton 1995, 81 2.1.2 The spatial approach 22 Frampton 1995, 83 Regardless of which line of thought architects and theorists 23 Frampton 1995, 83 decided to follow, they all agreed upon the goal of their search: 24 In 1851, G. Semper the new form should express the 'spirit of their time'. Analysing advanced some arguments the texts which influenced most the stylistic debate of the early similar to Bötticher’s regarding nineteenth century, W. Herrmann showed that all the nineteenth the role internal carpet wall played in evolution of classical century authors began their search for architectural expression architecture, yet without of their time by arguing the inadequacy of using the styles of knowing for Bötticher’s study classical antiquity to express the needs of their time.28 Hence, which was published between the search for new forms which could express the 'modern’ 1843 and 1852. W. Herrmann, Zeitgeist. The original nineteenth century texts shows that Gottfried Semper: in search for architecture, (London, Zeitgeist was referred to as the “needs of our time” or “spirit of Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT artist’s age”, yet these phrases were never further developed, that Press, 1984), 96 is, what characterised the spirit of the age was never described. 25 Frampton 1995, 84-89 The authors refer to it as to something that every educated 26 Herrmann 1984, 102 person is familiar with. It can be said that the writers took for 27 Frampton 1995, 86 granted the knowledge of the spirit of their own time. 28 Herrmann 1992, 2 Rosenthal and Bötticher are among the rare architectural Nineteenth Century Organicism: ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of Nineteenth Century Architecture 55 theorists who did try to describe the characteristics of the Zeitgeist of times past, as well as of their own time, in order to explain why and how the main architectural characteristics of a particular time expressed its particular Zeitgeist.29 Rosenthal 29 C. A. Rosenthal (1844) ‘In related the Zeitgeist of each period to the relevant religious What Style Should We Build? teaching which defined the worldview of the period in question.30 A Question Addressed to the Members of the Deutsche And, consequently, he discussed the expression of the Zeitgeist Architektenverein’, In What Style only in relation to places of worship. How the Zeitgeist was Should We Build?: The German reflected in other spheres of life and consequently other building Debate on Architectural Style, types is something that Rosenthal did not investigate. intro. and trans. from German by In 1846, in his lecture given on the anniversary of Schinkel’s W. Herrmann (Santa Monica, CA: The Getty Centre for the History birthday, C.G.W. Bötticher is very precise in defining the of Art and Humanities, 1992): relationship between the Zeitgeist of the time in question and its 113-124 architectural embodiment: 30 Rosenthal (1844)

Apart from the manner of how to enclose space, the first matter that has to be dealt with in our examination is the concept that lies behind the spatial organisation of the building. It is self-evident that only the history of the religious and moral life of [the society under examination] can provide some information on this. […] Indeed, how can we explain the spatial form and arrangement of the temple, if we do not know the ritual of the cult for whose performance it was intended?[…] Again, how can one possible know the purpose of the occupants? Our lack of progress in this matter is shown. 31 31 C.G.W.Bötticher, ‘The Principles of the Hellenic and Here Bötticher summarises the mid-nineteenth century Germanic Ways of Building with Regard to Their Application to views on the architectural expression of Zeitgeist. On the one Our Present Way of Building’, In hand Bötticher acknowledges that the Zeitgeist of any time What Style Should We Build?: The is expressed through the way of making the building, that is, German Debate on Architectural its tectonics. On the other, Bötticher underlines the fact that Style, intro. and trans. from space, enclosed and structured by tectonic elements, is also German by W. Herrmann (Santa Monica, CA: The Getty Centre structured with the social interactions happening in that space. for the History of Art and It can be said that he tries to emphasise the fact that the social Humanities, 1992): 147-168, 162 structure of space is equally as important as the tectonic one for understanding the architectural expression of Zeitgeist. Apart from Rosenthal and G. Semper, other architectural theorists of the time were not concerned with the relationship between the social structure of space as a way of expressing the Zeitgeist. It is therefore, not surprising that Bötticher maintained that the research into social issues of the past and present societies was underdeveloped in the mid-nineteenth century. Semper connected the character of the spirit of the age to the definition of 'style'. Having been aware that the word ‘style’ could be understood in a variety of ways, Semper gave his own definition in which he emphasised that style was a result of “preconditions and circumstances of its becoming”32 32 Semper (1860-63), 269 rather than an absolute.33 By listing examples of the changes 33 Semper (1860-63), 269 in political, economic, cultural and social circumstances throughout the history, Semper showed that the circumstances 56 Chapter Two

of a particular time which had the most impact on the change of 34 Semper (1860-63), 264-284 architectural style were social.34 He argued that when socially new relationships arise or develop, architects offer a new 35 Semper (1860-63), 264-284 response in formal terms.35 However, he concluded that his time did not come up with a new style because “nowhere has a new idea of universal historical importance, pursued with force and consciousness, become evident. […] Until that time comes, however, we must reconcile ourselves to do as best we can with 36 Semper (1860-63), 284 the old.”36 By the end of the nineteenth century, as indicated by 37 Hermann 1992, 49 Hermann37 and Mallgrave38, the stylistic debate came to an end 38 Empathy, Form and Space: without ever reaching a consensus on its topical questions, or Problems in German Aesthetics agreeing on the form that would be representative of the 'modern 1873-1893, intro. and trasl. by time'. During the 1880s and 1890s, architects turned their H.F.Mallgrave and E.Ikonomou (Santa Monica, CA: The Getty theoretical and practical investigation for a new form through Centre for the History of Art and style towards questions of form and space. Humanities, 1994) 1-2 In conclusion, neither by learning from historical styles nor by investigating the formal expressions of new materials, namely iron, did a truly new form emerge. The nineteenth century search for new forms to appropriately express the spirit of the time was unsuccessful according to its main protagonists. Following Botticher’s and Sempers understanding of architecture, we can propose that the reason for this unsuccessful ending can be found in the missing research link between the tectonic and spatial aspect of a structure of architecture. The majority of the protagonists of the debate strongly supported the second line of thought, that is, that a new form could only emerge out of the innovative use of new materials for structural purposes. This conviction could only have been pursued through acquiring knowledge about the structural behaviour of the new materials. This knowledge of materials could only be obtained through scientific experiments, whose main characteristic was ‘rationalisation’. ‘Rationalization’ can therefore be said to have been the new modus operandi for the nineteenth century.The specialization of knowledge brought to life new, independent sciences, as well as professions specializing in them. In the area of building science, Collins considered ‘rationalization’ a typical engineers’ approach which strongly influenced the Modernist architects’ way of thinking, as opposed to the traditional architects' practice of simply copying the forms created by engineers. Depending on the ideological background of the researchers of the nineteenth century, but also of the particular work described therein, authors chose to write either the name of the architect only (buildings of public, cultural importance), or the names of both the architect and collaborating engineer (utilitarian buildings, engineers' structures like bridges, for example). Thus, it became clear that these two professions collaborated, yet it was not clear to what extent the engineers influenced the architects' thinking Nineteenth Century Organicism: ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of Nineteenth Century Architecture 57 and decisions on design. The next section will further investigate the influence of the nineteenth century engineers’ ‘rationalized’ way of thinking, (over architects who were their contemporaries in order to investigate how their way of thinking influenced the architectural stylistic debate described above. Since engineers are usually quoted as designers of industrial buildings, as will become clear in the next chapter, the investigation that will be carried out here is seen as the theoretical basis for developing an understanding of the nineteenth century appreciation of industrial buildings.

2.2 Nineteenth Century Engineer-Architect: A New Form of Education At the beginning of the nineteenth century it was still possible for an engineer like Telford to be commissioned to design a church.39 39 Collins 1967, 185 However, by the middle of that century the types of works associated with engineers across Europe were roads, railways and railway stations, bridges, military facilities which included buildings within garrison towns, as well as industrial buildings.40 40 Collins 1967, 194 Conversely, dwellings, both manor houses for the rising bourgeois elite as well as blocks of flats for the rising working class in the cities, but also buildings for ecclesiastical, educational and cultural purposes in the growing European metropolises, were considered architectural works.41 While the reason why works of 41 See for example, S. Giedion infrastructure were considered exclusively engineering feats is (1928) (1928), Building In France, quite obvious, it is much less obvious why industrial buildings or Building in Iron, Building in Ferro- Concrete, intro. by S. Georgiadis, railway stations, that is, structures which housed and organized trans. by J.Duncan Berry (Santa a certain function just like the theatre or library or school does, Monica, CA: The Getty Centre belonged to the same category. for the History of Art and Collins suggested that this ‘specialization’ in different Humanities, 1995); N. Pevsner building types and works associated with different professions (1936) Pioneers of Modern Design: From William Morris to was a result of the split between the two professions caused Walter Gropius (Harmondsworth: primarily by the adopted education system. Collins studied Penguin Books, 1966); S.Giedion, the relationship between engineers and architects from the Space, Time and Architecture: time when the first school for engineers was opened in 1747 in the Growth of a New Tradition France42 until the end of the nineteenth century. According to (Cambridge, Ma: Harvard University Press, 1947); Collins, during that period two events furthered the distance R.Banham, Theory and design in between architects and engineers: first, the establishment of the First Machine Age, (London: the Ecole Polytechnique in 1795 and, second, the inclusion of the The Architectural Press, 1960) teaching of architecture at the Ecole des Beaux Arts in 1806.43 Collins 1967; Frampton 1995; A. Architects, who were educated at the Ecole des Beaux Arts Saint Architect and Engineer: A Study in Sibling Rivalry at the time, received their education focused on the study of (New Haven and London: Yale historical styles and theoretical nineteenth century discourse University Press, 2007) on the ontological and representational role of architecture, 42 Collins 1967, 185 particularly focusing on the role of ornament in relation to 43 Collins 1967, 203 these two questions.44 They were not taught about building 44 Collins 1967, 203 construction prior to Rondelet’s suggestion, which was to incorporate lessons on building construction into the standard curriculum.However, this was only accepted around the mid- 58 Chapter Two

45 Collins 1967, 203 nineteenth century.45 The future engineers and architects who were educated 46 Collins 1967, 192 at the Ecole Polytechnique46 , (oras Pfammatter argued even more so those who were educated at the Ecole Centrale des 47 U. Pfammatter, The Making Arts et Manufactures which opened in 182947), received lectures of the Modern Architect and on architectural planning, although the details of building Engineer, trans. from German construction occupied the major part of the course. At the Ecole by Madelinde Ferretti-Theilig (Basel,Boston,Berlin: Birkhäuser, Politechnique, these lectures were written and deliverded by 48 2000): 103; 131-150 J.N.L. Durand and his disciples. Durand's treaty Precis des 48 Collins 1967, 192 lecons d’architecture donne a l’Ecole Polytechnique was the 49 S. Villari, Durand (1769- basic course material.49 According to Villari, all the four stages 1834): Art and Science of of scientific analysis, as defined by Durand’s contemporary Architecture, (New York: Rizzoli philosopher Daunou50, can be identified in Durand’s work: International Publications, Inc., 1990), 58 “perception or apprehension of events; analysis or recognition of elements; measurement or appreciation of relationships; 50 Villari 1990, 59 abstraction or conception of general ideas and principles; 51 Villari quoting Daunou in invention or formation of new combinations.”51 As a result of defining these four phases; in an inductive analysis of a wide range of functionally different Villari 1990, 59 buildings, Durand proposed a set of genres.52 These genres 52 Villari 1990, 63 were different in terms of generic principles which Durand 53 Villari 1990, 63 maintained as being essential for leading the composition of a building.53 These principles were: “functions that [a building] had to perform or ensure, the combining of these functions, their 54 Villari 1990, 63 spatial translation, and finally the articulation of these spaces.”54 In order to design, or in Durand’s words, “to compose” an architectural work, two steps needed to be carried out. Firstly, to gain knowledge of the basic architectural elements and, second, to understand the way in which these elements were combined together. Durand can therefore be said to be advocating a process of first creating an architectural part and then using 55 Villari 1990, 60 these parts to create the whole building.55 Furthermore, by drawing upon the example of two treaties and one architectural lecture course written and delivered by 56 These treatises are J.A. engineers in the school for engineers,56 Collins showed that Borgnis, Elementary Treatise on engineers were aware of, and had a clearly developed attitude Construction from 1823 and L. towards, the architectural theoretical discourse of the nineteenth Reynaud Traite d’Architecture from 1850. century. Collins summarised Reynaud’s attitude on the essence of architecture as follows:

no form […] is advocated without reference to the rational data which caused it to originate, and he [Reynaud] deﬁnes architecture as ‘an eminently rational art’. Nevertheless, he also claims that architecture ’demands a lot of our imagination’. Similarly he insists that there must be a ‘complete harmony between form and function’, and that just as there exist an intimate relationship between from and function in God’s creatures (whereby ‘the exterior is the result of the interior composition’) so architecture demands that the form shall be result of satisfying a given purpose with order and simplicity, 57 Collins 1967, 193 admitting nothing except what appears founded on real needs.57 Nineteenth Century Organicism: ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of Nineteenth Century Architecture 59

As far as the role of ornament in architecture is concerned, Collins proposes that engineers treated it by following Borgins’ s treatise:

Engaged columns and engaged pilasters which merely formed an ‘architecture in relief’ had neither the beauty nor magnificence of isolated columns, and it was only permissible to use them provided one did not lose sight of the fact that this architecture in relief constituted, like an open peristyle, an integral part of the building. […] The parts in relief ‘constitute the carcass of the building’ and ]…] must be composed of solid materials carefully worked out. The rest of the building, ‘being only an infill’ could thus be of flimsy materials without the solidity of building noticeably suffering. Hence a good architect should regard architecture in relief not as simply decoration, but as something utilitarian, and composed of fundamental elements which would guide him in the positioning of apertures and partitions when the building was being planned.[…] [Borgins] assured his readers that it was an error to believe that an architect only produced dull and inelegant designs if he subordinated the choice of forms, relationships and dimensions to the essential purpose of the building. Architecture, he insisted, was like nature; for ‘the sovereign Master of the universe has established that in organised beings, the parts which best fulfil their special destination are also most pleasing to the sight.58 58 Collins 1967, 202

The lectures on architectural planning at the Ecole Centrale were prepared and given by Charles-Luis Mary, himself a student of Durand.59 These lectures followed Durand’s treaty on building 59 Pfammatter 2000 planning and design. However, Pfammatter argued that it was Mary who created a “paradigm shift in the process of design: from solution-based to procedure-oriented design, or, from working with building types [Durand] to working with problem patterns.”60 60 Pfammatter 2000, 140 Therefore it is clear that both professions received similar tuition, yet with a different emphasis. The above quotations reflect not only the engineers' familiarity with Laugier’s and Durand’s ideas on the two topical nineteenth century theoretical architectural questions,61 but also with the philosophical 61 Collins 1967, 202 foundation of the work of their mentors as expressed in the comparison of architecture and nature. Education of this kind was not unique to France during the nineteenth century. The French education system for architects and engineers, as well as the curricula, were imported to all the German countries by D. Gilly and his son in 1783, when Gilly opened a private school for architects. 62 Villari showed that, next 62 Frampton 1995, 64 to Gilly, it was Durand’s students, Coudray and L. von Klenze,63 63 Villari 1990, 58 who brought his teaching to Germany. Coudray supervised in 1831 the first German translation of Durand’s Precis des lecons d’architecture donne a l’Ecole Polytechnique.64 Precis influenced 64 Villari 1990, 58 60 Chapter Two

65 Villari 1990, 58; Frampton Schinkel65 as well as a whole generation of German architects 1995, 75; 80 of Romantic Klassizismus.66 The curriculum of the Bauschule 66 Villiari 1990, 58 reﬂected Gilly’s structural considerations, but it was also 67 Frampton 1995, 64 strongly based on Durand’s typological teachings.67 Because of that, Frampton maintained that “the Bauschule curriculum [was] closer to the practical engineering standpoint of the Ecole Polytechnique than to the emerging postrevolutionary 68 Frampton 1995, 64 rhetoric of the Ecole des Beaux-Arts.”68 Pfammatter sketched the chronological line of the emergence of polytechnic schools in 69 Pfammatter 2000, 209-302 Europe and America,69 all of which followed the teaching model of the ﬁrst two French schools, Ecole Polytecnique and Ecole 70 Pfammatter 2000, 11 Centrale.70 The main characteristic of this novel ’layered model’ of learning was:

a methodological correlation between theoretical basic subjects, applied exercises and practical courses as a continual system with increasing weight placed on reference to praxis and on 71 Pfammatter 2000, 10 professionalism in the working methods.71

As of 1825, when the first school of polytechnics was opened in Karlsruhe, other schools of the same kind were already 72 For a detail explanation established across Germany,72 which boasted separate of the development of departments for the teaching of architecture.73 Despite the architectural educational separate departments, architects often criticized their curricula system in Germany see, V. Clark, ‘A Struggle for Existence: The for being too technical and not leaving enough space for 74 Professionalization of German developing their artistic capacities. Referring to articles in Architects’, German Professions periodicals shared by both professions, Collins showed that 1800-1950, ed. by G. B. Cocks throughout the nineteenth century in France engineers criticized and K.H. Jarausch (New York, architects for their reluctance to take into account in their Oxford: Oxford University 75 Press,1990): 143-160 design the latest technological discoveries, whereas architects blamed engineers for their apparently exclusively functionalistic 73 Clark 1990, 146-147 approach to architecture coming out from the exclusive following 74 Clark 1990, 146-147 of technological rules.76 Thus, engineers criticized architects for 75 Collins 1967, 204 their unscientific methods of designing, whereas architects in 76 Collins 1967, 191 turn criticised them on aesthetic grounds. This brief account of the teaching curricula of architects and engineers in the two most influential countries in Europe at the time shows that both architects and engineers were not only aware of the theoretical and practical advancements in their adjacent fields but also taught about them. This was primarily the case with the profession of “engineer-architects” educated at one of the newly established polytechnic schools across Europe. According to Pfammatter:

an “engineer-architect” educated at modern schools was therefore not only “modern” in his thought and actions because he took on novel building tasks or worked and experimented with iron, glass and concrete. He was modern because he considered his discipline to be part of a whole, as a means to create structures of culture and Nineteenth Century Organicism: ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of Nineteenth Century Architecture 61

social utility. In this respect the era in which a new-material as also mental – tradition of building and education became manifest acted as a challenge of cooperation between architect and engineer and as a chance to bring forth novel achievements.77

Pfammatter suggests that the newly introduced education system and particularly its curriculum brought the architectural and engineering professions closer together because both realized that they could not work PICTURE 12: CHOCOLATE FACTORY IN NOISIEL-SUR-MARNE, SETTING without each other. He illustrated this standpoint through several examples of collaboration between engineer-architects educated at one of the French Polytechiques and architects normally educated at the Ecole des Beaux-Art.78 The building works on which they collaborated primarily included railway stations, fair buildings, department stores and industrial buildings. How exactly, according to Pfammatter, the collaboration between the architect and the engineer worked will be illustrated by reference to the most quoted example of an industrial building which inﬂuenced the history of architecture, namely, the Menier chocolate factory in Noisiel-sur-Marne east of Paris (picture 12- 15):

Architect Jules Saulnier, […] developed a building complex that was based on functional spatial and supporting structures which PICTURE 13: CHOCOLATE corresponded to the production process and its conditions. […] FACTORY IN NOISIEL-SUR- Saulnier decided to erect a steel skeleton structure for the central MARNE, ELEVATION mill with facades made of crossed metal rod grating similar to those used in bridge building. […] It was the ﬁrst time that a pure 77 Pfammatter 2000, 12-13 steel structure and a non-supporting building skin was developed 78 Pfammatter 2000, 150-202 in France like the ones used by architect Peter Ellis in 1865 in Liverpool. […] Saulnier cooperated with Moisant [‘Construceur’ from Ecole Centrale] in order to realize and work out the engineering aspects of the facility. The building is an invention that statically, structurally and technically combines the metal frame, i.e. a non- supporting façade made of diagonal rods attached to and reinforcing the inner structure of all four outer sides and decoratively adorned with glazed bricks. […] As an engineer and in cooperation with an architect, Moisant was therefore capable of solving structural and architectonic problems.79 79 Pfammatter 2000, 179-181

This suggests that the architect decided about the spatial organization of the complex, decorative elements, as well as the structural system he wanted to use, whereas the engineer 62 Chapter Two

was the one carrying out the actual design of the structure. Yet, the architectural value of this particular building within all the published material80 was always given in terms of its structural achievement, therefore, as being the work of the engineer. The complexities of the building planning, as well as the decorative aspect, that is, the architect’s work, never appear in these descriptions PICTURE 14: CHOCOLATE FACTORY IN NOISIEL-SUR-MARNE, PLAN as being relevant for the architectural importance of the building. This division of work between architects and engineers, although executed in a collaborative manner, is possibly shown most clearly when it comes to railway stations. These buildings were examples of joint effort on the part of architects and engineers, where the former designed the entrance and waiting halls facing the city while the latter designed the actual transportation-related part attached to the back side of the entrance area.81 The front, 'representational' part of the station thus hid the unrepresentational yet ontological part behind, in PICTURE 15: CHOCOLATE FACTORY IN NOISIEL-SUR- both functional and structural MARNE, STRUCTURAL DETAIL terms (picture 16). The architect-engineer 80 See for example Giedion, but education system was ideologically set up in such a way that also Pfammater who reprinted it promoted the act of building as being composed of two the description of Lemoine, equally important and interrelated actions, that is, structural Marrey, 181 and spatial planning, regardless of the building’s functional 81 See for example, S. type. Pfammatter’s interpretation of the collaboration between Parissien, Station to Station architect and engineer-architect suggested no differentiation (London: Phaidon Press Ltd. between the architectural and technological value of the 1997) building. They are simply two components of the overall act of building. Nineteenth Century Organicism: ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of Nineteenth Century Architecture 63

Aesthetic considerations were inherent to the act of building and, as we have seen, the educational curricula of the Polytechnics did not neglect them. However, as indicated, there was criticism between the two professions regarding the aesthetic considerations. As Pfammatter’s interpretation of the work division as well as differences in the curricula of Polytechnics and Beaux-Art show, it can be suggested that the aesthetic considerations simply related to the formal style, excluding the philosophical component of aesthetics. Weston helps us add an aesthetic note to PICTURE 16: AMSTERDAM CENTRAL STATION SIDE VIEW the functionalistic image of the nineteenth century engineers work when stating that "the only major features of the [Eiffel] tower for which there was no structural rationale are, in fact, the circular arches between the legs of the piers – but they make for a graceful transition, and Eiffel was concerned that people would be alarmed at the piers' slenderness without them."82 (picture 17) It can therefore 82 R. Weston, Modernism, be argued that the selective nature of historical research (London: Phaidon Press Limited, brought to our late twentieth century attention has been based 1996), 34 primarily on the evidence of the exclusively functionally-based design intentions of engineers, overlooking their aesthetic considerations. In conclusion, it can be said of the nineteenth century that the adopted education system of architects and engineer- architects in Europe promoted a new idea of architecture, according to which the artistic value of a building was inherent to the process of making a building in material and spatial terms. The line of architects who advocated the birth of a new style using new building materials and techniques for building purposes paved the way for the architectural appreciation of new forms that were to emerge. However, what remained unresolved during this debate was the recognition of the formal expression of these technological advancements. Thus, nineteenth century architecture, both in terms of the so-called ‘high’ and ‘low’ arts, needs to be revalued in aesthetic terms. Let us now brieﬂy summarize the point being made so far. The architects of the nineteenth century could not agree on the form that expressed the character of their own time. Some accounted for that inability by reference to the fact that no social idea of universal value had emerged until then in order to be expressed in form. In other words these architects suggested that, in whatever way their contemporaries in other professions may have perceived their time as being different PICTURE 17: EIFFEL TOWER 64 Chapter Two

from some previous point, the difference had not yet taken a distinctive social form and thus could not be caught or expressed in physical form either. However, no matter which of the two lines of search for a new form they advocated, all architects and engineers alike shared one common interest: they were all interested in the way of making the buildings; some were as interested as in the form as achieved through making, while others were primarily concerned with the technology of making itself, of which form was considered a result. Thus, despite the differences, it can be proposed that the nineteenth century architects and engineers did share a common interest because they were all equally preoccupied with the act of making buildings. Taking as the starting point of her argument of the act of making a building as a common architectural interest of the nineteenth century, van Eck questions the philosophical background of this preoccuption with the ‘making' , and consequently unfolds the idea of a world of architects and engineers wanting to communicate through their formal work. What van Eck next reveals is a common aesthetic notion to the entire nineteenth century architecture. So let us see what kind of structure of the world lies beneath the architect's interest in the act of making buildings, or to which extent the structure of the building resembles the structure of the world of the nineteenth century.

2.3 Nineteenth Century Organicism: a New Form of Seeing the World

2.3.1 On Organicism In her study Organicism in Nineteenth Century Architecture van Eck proposed organicims as the common aesthetic denominator for nineteenth century architecture. While studies of the nineteenth century focused on either one author or one philosophical or cultural circle of influence in Europe, van Eck managed to tie in authors as diverse as Schinkel, Semper, Ruskin and Viollet-le-Duc, with her rhetoric interpretation of organicism as a 'strategy for invention and interpretation' of nineteenth century architecture. As van Eck wrote: "Put briefly, the role of organicism can be described as a strategy of invention, by which stylistic decisions are made and justified, or as a strategy of interpretation, through which the meaning of architecture, and especially of the 83 Van Eck 1994, 19 architecture of the past, can be formulated."83 She distinguished between three different sorts of organicism: religious, tectonic and scientific organicisms. Their main difference lay in the theoretical background defining the understanding of the structure of nature. In Ruskin's religious organicism, nature 84 Van Eck 1994, 187-215 is explained primarily through God;84 Bötticher's tectonic Nineteenth Century Organicism: ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of Nineteenth Century Architecture 65 organicism is based on an explanation of nature grounded partly in philosophy and partly in physics;85 and Viollet-le-Duc's 85 Van Eck 1994, 144-179 and Semper's scientific organicism is based on a biological explanation.86 These same authors were presented as the most 86 Van Eck 1994, 216-258 influential theorists of the nineteenth century and, therefore, as individuals who influenced the teaching and understanding of architecture among architects and engineer-architects alike. Whereas in other studies they are often presented even as opposing parties, the rhetorical explanation of organicism laid the foundation for their comparison based on similarities rather than differences. The nineteenth century pluralism of styles discussed above, van Eck argued, was a consequence of losing the common aesthetic ground in architecture and consequently resulted in a subversion of the unquestionable dominance of classical orders as the formal expression of Vitruvian aesthetics.87 However, 87 Van Eck 1994, 65 van Eck continued, the rejection of the Vitruvian aesthetics of proportion for the interpretation of classical orders only resulted in a search for new grounds for the justification for their use, rather than in a rejection of their use in architecture altogether.88 88 Van Eck 1994, 64-98 According to van Eck, the redefinition of the Vitruvian aesthetics of proportion is based on the changed perception of the ways in which nature is imitated in order to create art. In both Renaissance and post-Renaissance times, nature was the object of admiration, with art concerned with imitation based on its observation. Yet, whereas Renaissance architects and artists tended to represent the idealized idea of nature through the doctrine of mimesis,89 from the 1750s onwards architects 89 Van Eck 1994, 23 started to base their work on the imitation of actual physical laws existing in nature. For Alberti, the architect was mimicking – mimesis – the teleology of nature, that is, its goals and ends 90 driven by the notion of concinnitas. Van Eck concludes that, 90 Alberti VI 2 as the human understanding of nature progressed over the centuries with the advancement in the natural sciences, the conceptual notion of concinnitas was transforming into a more practical and - for architects – a more creative process from mimicking nature's goals to imitating nature's laws.91 91 Van Eck 1994, 92 Since the comprehension of these natural laws is determined by familiarity with their methods, the shift from mimicking the ends to imitating the methods as a drive of the creative process resulted in the change in the understanding of concinnitas from an a priori, external notion in nature, called either God or Divine Creation, to the notion of internal, ‘built-in’ natural laws. The nineteenth century philosophers and architects saw "the law of 92 Van Eck 1994, 239 unity in the universe as the principal characteristic of nature's 93 Van Eck 1994, secularisation method of creation."92 As such, unity still remains the main of nature explained by her in regulating rule between the parts and the whole.93 Thus, still in order to explain the basis of her concept of organicism and the nineteenth century, the architect strove towards a purposive concluding on p.240 unity of the building. But now the architect did this because this 66 Chapter Two

unity is part of a building law which the architect follows and not because the architect copies some a priori given goals of nature. Van Eck thus showed that in nineteenth century organicism, in all three guises, was embedded the philosophical tradition which acknowledged and recognized within this purposive unity’ that force which drives everything in nature, and consequently the work and life of humans. For the nineteenth century architectural debate discussed above, this implies that whichever guise of organicism architects embraced, they did strive towards one and the same goal: to achieve purposive unity in a building through their design. From the 1750s onwards and particularly during the nineteenth century, it became important to understand and convey how this natural plan is achieved. Conveying the newly-discovered physical laws of nature through architecture could only be achieved by experimenting with the behaviour of building materials, which inﬂuenced the overall building form. The overall building form was then the only tool architects had at their disposal in order to communicate this common cultural knowledge to the rest of the world. In other words, the building itself, as in the works of any other form of art, is rhetorical, as van 94 Van Eck 1994, 80 Eck states in her work.94

2.3.2 Rhetorical Character of Organicism 95 Vitruvius, De architectura Aesthetics is a branch of philosophy concerned with the ways libri decem, ed. and transl. by of comprehending concepts, such as truth, unity or wholeness, F.Granger (Cambridge, MA, by the means of formal appearance. In architecture, as one of London, England: Harvard University Press, 1931,1995), the formal arts, achieving unity through the act of building was Book I, 3 considered the ultimate goal of every building design through to 96 L.B. Alberti, De re the mid twentieth century. The history of architecture has shown aedificatoria [On the Art of that throughout that time, with the exception of the Gothic period Building in Ten Books], trans. by in architecture, this goal was formally achieved by following the J.Rykwert, N.Leach, R.Tavernor, (Cambridge, MA, London, same aesthetic canon composed of Vitruvius's triad of firmitas, 95 England: The MIT Press, 1996), utilitas, venustas. IX.5, 301-309 Alberti, who recovered Vitruvius's treaties from the past 97 Alberti, IX.5 and adapted them to the Renaissance period, exchanged the 98 Vitruvius Book III, 1-2 and 4; word venustas with concinnitas.96 Both define architectural Alberti IX.5 beauty as deriving from the observation of nature, thus forming 99 Vitruvius Book III, 1; Alberti relationship between architecture and Nature.97 Since Nature's VII. 3 main goal is to strive towards the unity and wholeness of every 100 Wittkower 1988; Middleton individual object,98 Vitruvius and Alberti maintained that the and Watkin 1980; J. M. Crook The unity and wholeness of architectural design can be achieved Dilemma of Style. Architectural through the use of a module in designing, which regulates the Ideals from the Picturesque 99 to the Post-Modern (London: relationship between the parts and the whole. Following Murray, 1987), 13-42; R. Padovan, Vitruvius's and Alberti's reference to the modular way of Proportion: Science, Philosophy, designing, a number of architectural historians and theorists, Architecture (London and New among whom Wittkower is the most influential,100 understood York: SPON PRESS, 1999), 156- concinnitas exclusively in mathematical terms. As opposed to 251 the majority of architectural historians, Van Eck proposed that Nineteenth Century Organicism: ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of Nineteenth Century Architecture 67 by understanding concinnitas exclusively in mathematical terms, historians equated it with a design tool. She argued however that this understanding was incorrect; Van Eck showed that Alberti's view of nature was not exclusively mathematical.101 After analysing several passages in Alberti's De 101 Van Eck 1994, 47 re aedificatoria she explained:

we can deduce a view of nature in which mathematics is not the only characteristic; instead the emphasis is on firmness or adaptation to an end, and on a unity that regulates and connects all sorts of oppositions. Unity is here a dominant characteristic of nature as well; but it is not a unity that is modular, based on a common measure and expressed by mathematical proportions; rather it is a unity based on a plan or concept of the whole, that determines the structure of the parts. Such unity is the result of concinnitas. […] Our judgements on beauty are not matters of fancy or caprice, but of a reasoning faculty that is innate. Therefore, we react immediately to the smallest trace of excellence in the forms or figures of a building. This excellence consists of three things: numbers (numerus), outline (finitio), and position (collocation). But these are not sufficient; from their combination and connection there arise a larger quality in which 'beauty shines full face'; this is concinnitas, which can be translated as 'beauty based on skilful and elegant connection of the parts'. Concinnitas is the most important law of nature. […] By and through concinnitas, opposing elements and qualities in design are unified.102 102 Van Eck 1994, 48

What van Eck proposes is that, although the three essential elements of designing - numerus, ﬁnitio and collocation - can be interpreted by mathematical laws, they constitute beauty only when their relationship is regulated into unity through a concept of concinnitas. Thus, according to van Eck, beauty for Alberti does not lie in the method of designing alone, but jointly in the method and the plan that gives direction to the method. Mathematical laws of proportion are the way to quantify unity whereas concinnitas describes its qualitative side.103 103 Van Eck 1994, 50 It is this qualitative aspect of unity in the concept of concinnitas that is van Eck's main theoretical focus, in contrast to all architectural theory studies which focus on its quantitative aspect only. Concinnitas is a plan that leads the overall process of design towards an end, a goal. It gives unity to the design conducted on the basis of the rules of proportion. In other words, concinnitas cannot be reached in a building if both components - the modular method of designing and the plan - are not present. This qualitative aspect of unity within the concept of concinnitas is interpreted by van Eck as its strategic quality. She recognised it by tracing the roots of concinnitas into rhetoric. In the antiquity and Renaissance, as explained by van Eck, rhetoric 68 Chapter Two

was used as a "conceptual apparatus by which it became possible for visual arts and architecture to imitate nature, and 104 Van Eck 1994, 21 to formulate that endeavour in theoretical terms."104 This is how van Eck summarized the main characteristics of rhetoric which enabled, in her opinion, artists, architects and theorists to borrow concepts from rhetoric, such as concinnitas, in order to formulate 105 “Rhetoric is not fixed a theoretical basis of art and architecture. 105 body of general principles, Therefore, rhetoric is not a science that leads to fundamental formulated in isolation from truths, but a strategy for achieving "a well-defined goal, namely daily practice; it is a flexible formulation of the knowledge of the imitation of nature. But not only did rhetoric become a guide eloquence as it was constructed for creative process; it also informed the interpretation of works at given time, forever open to of art."106 Rhetoric is an instrument of communication between modification and addition. Its the orator, an architect in our case, and the educated audience. In aim in not to discover the a order to get the message across both groups must share common priori principles of universally 107 valid knowledge behind the cultural knowledge. world of appearance […]. Its In both the visual arts and architecture, common cultural aim is strategic one, in that it knowledge is communicated through forms rather than words. tries to develop instruments The message which is communicated through the form is 'a for reaching practical goals well-defined goal', that is, the predominant cultural idea of in community: persuasion by moving, instructing and the structure of the world. This structure consisted of ‘namely, delighting the public, taking its imitation of nature’ during the Renaissance, and this has chief persuasive strength from persisted all the way through to the end of the nineteenth its closeness to nature.” Van Eck century. Following van Eck's argument it can be concluded that 1994, 40 the tools of rhetoric were used in order to express the aesthetic 106 Van Eck 1994, 22 notion of the time which was, until the end of the nineteenth 107 Van Eck 1994, 27 century, the achievement of purposive unity. Organicism, just as with concinnitas, does not have written rules; its purpose is not to convey an undeniable truth but rather to achieve a goal in the community: 'persuasion, instructing and delighting the public, taking its chief persuasive strength from its closeness to nature.' Thus, van Eck argued that organicism could also be perceived as a rhetorical tool in architecture. What connects the three guises of organicism is their rhetorical character: each kind communicates a view, shared by a particular educated group, of the structure of nature and consequently of the world. All the three views communicate one and the same message: the idea of purposive unity that rules and moves everything in nature. What van Eck suggests is that throughout the nineteenth century, organicism was that aesthetic notion based on the idea of purposive unity, the rhetorical character of which enabled the formulation and communication of commonly shared cultural knowledge of the world. All architects of the nineteenth century, from Viollet-le-Duc to Bötticher to Semper, talk about joints in architecture, that is, the transition from one material to the other (Violet-le Duc) as well as from one building element to the other (Bötticher, Semper), as a building's main quality. Their main thesis is that the unity or totality of a building is achieved through proper architectural Nineteenth Century Organicism: ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of Nineteenth Century Architecture 69 articulation of all joints. Nature's strive towards purposive unity, explained in the nineteenth century through organicism, could then be found embodied in the architectural articulation of joints between different materials as well as different architectural elements. It is proposed here that the works of architecture which reveal the how of the making of the world, regardless of the historical style they are built in, can be perceived as an embodiment of this aesthetic idea and consequently as an embodiment of the highest architectural historical value.

2.4 Nineteenth Century Organicism: Nineteenth Century Engineer-Architects Rhetorical Strategy for Design Just like in the centuries before them, architects and engineers of the nineteenth century believed in, and wanted to express in form, the idea that 'purposive unity' is the main force that structures Nature and thus their world. But instead of being interested only in the final form through which Nature presents its main force to the world, architects and engineers became interested in Nature's process of making the final appearance, the final forms. Scientific developments brought that interest to the fore. We can conclude that the interest that architects and engineers had in making buildings revealed a new scientifically- based worldview in which knowing how something came to the world, knowing the structure of the object admired, became more important than satisfying oneself with the perfect final form of that process only, without genuinely knowing the process that led to that form. Pfammater argued that in the work of engineer-architects, a paradigm shift took place from the solution-based or typological work of Durand to the procedure-orientated work as promoted by Mary. If we consider the typological work as starting from a given form which is then adapted to a particular functional situation, whereas the procedure–orientated work as that which preoccupied itself with designing in the way of finding new formal solutions for the given functional and technological task, then the designing procedure of the newly emerged profession of the engineer-architect reflected van Eck's proposal of changed interest from understanding unity in the work of architecture as an a priori given into understanding unity as a method-based, ‘arriving at’ concept. It can be said that in the work of engineers- architects one must look for the best formal expression of the nineteenth century worldview interested in the methods or procedures of the making of Nature, rather than in her final forms of appearance. Organicism is the rhetorical concept which summarises this new design strategy.

2.5 ‘Aesthetic Integrity’: Rhetoric Strategy for Design Now, how is all the previos discussion relevant for our understanding of the ‘aesthetic integrity’ prescribed by the 70 Chapter Two

conservationists? Unity in architecture has its quantitative, formal and qualitative conceptual aspects. Unity is achieved only if the arrangement of formal elements is guided by a plan or strategy that regulates it. Because it is a strategy, the plan does not have fixed rules and formal arrangements, and can thus freely be made because their sole aim is to get the chosen message across as persuasively as possible. Since we operate in the world of aesthetics, the message, as van Eck proposes, is about the structure of the world as perceived at the time of designing. Thus, the form of an intervention can only be judged when the qualitative aspect of the unity of the old is understood in addition to the description of the formal elements which the qualitative aspect regulates into a whole. It can therefore be proposed that ‘aesthetic integrity’ is primarily the ethical position held by conservationists regarding the form of the intervention. If we accept that the qualitative side of the ‘integrity’ is rhetorical, it is proposed here that ‘aesthetic integrity’ is a strategic goal to aim for. During the evaluation process, save for the description of the individual formal elements of the building in question, what needs to be identified is the idea which was communicated through the choice and arrangements of these individual building elements. Reuse means change. If we accept that the idea behind the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the old has strategic quality and that it has therefore rules open to interpretation, it can be proposed that these rules should be used only as guidelines for the composition of the new form, rather than fixed norms that need to be followed. ‘Aesthetic integrity’ understood in this rhetorical way allows the old to accommodate change while at the same time preserving its own character. The quantitative elements of a building, such as colour or type of materials of the new, can totally be of their own time as long as their composition is based on the interpretation of the rules of the old. Finally, such a rhetorical understanding ensures that the old and the new do provide a coherent whole together. The charters suggest that the form of the new part has to be visually distinguishable from the old but should not impair it. It can therefore be further proposed that for a designer it is more important to know the conceptual basis of the unity of the old, than a detailed description of the form of the old, since the charters even require that to achieve unity the old strategy must be formally expressed in the new way. It becomes essential for a designer of the conversion that the predominant worldview of the time when the building was built, as well as the way this view was translated into architectural form, is described in order to guide the design of the conversion according to conservationists’ guidelines. Let us now illustrate this strategic interpretation of the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the old, and the old and the new together, Nineteenth Century Organicism: ‘Aesthetic Integrity’ of Nineteenth Century Architecture 71 in the conversion designs for an unprotected building carried out by some of the most established architects of today. Yet, prior to conducting this final step, what needs to be investigated is how organicism can be used as a tool to describe the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings.

Conclusion In conclusion, it can be said that the nineteenth-century search for new forms in architecture was guided by the aesthetic notion of achieving the 'purposive unity', but by understanding the methods rather than the goals Nature uses in order to arrive at unity. Until recently, both the nineteenth century protagonists of the search for new forms, as well as the twentieth century historiographers of this debate, shared the same opinion: no new form was produced during that time. However, recent studies into the aesthetics of the nineteenth century, as well as into the education system of architects and engineers of the century, proposed new theoretical grounds as the basis for re-examining this long-standing assumption. Organicism was identiﬁed as the rhetorical strategy for design which describes the aesthetic interest that architects and engineer-architects had in understanding the making of the world. The chapter that follows examines the extent to which early industrial buildings - works of engineer-architects or those who practiced their way of working through the new process-oriented design approach - can be perceived as the ﬁrst building forms where this novel way of designing was manifested and whether a new building form was produced. 72 73

Chapter Three Industrial Buildings: the First Grand Buildings of the Nineteenth Century

Introduction The aim of this chapter is to historically revaluate industrial buildings. The deﬁnition of organicism as proposed in Chapter Two creates the theoretical grounds for re-examining the architectural importance of these buildings to the history of architecture. Both the nineteenth and twentieth century historical sources about how industrial buildings have so far been described and perceived will be examined in the light of this theoretical background. Consequently, the present chapter will end with a new proposition for the historical architectural valuation of nineteenth century industrial buildings, as well as with a proposition for deﬁning the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings with reference to organicism.

1.1 ‘The Wonders of Recent Times, Named Factories’ There was one historically unprecedented building type which nineteenth century German architect and theorist Hübsch neither designed nor considered worth the architectural discussion. Terriﬁed, Hübsch exclaimed in 1847:

Instead of the monumental churches, the sleek industrial halls built of cast iron will become the architectural prototype-painted in shiny, fashionable colours and appointed with the pseudomonumental, dazzling shine of mirrors and gold-fringed velvet curtains to attract the haute volee.1 1 H. Hübsch (1847) ‘The Differing Views of Architectural Hübsch's reason for disapproving of industrial buildings is almost Style in Relation to the Present Time’, In What Style Should We obvious: being an opponent of the developmental approach to Build?: The German Debate the new style (Chapter Two) emerging from the structural and on Architectural Style, intro. decorative use of new materials, he would regard the stripped and trans. from German by W. (of decoration) facades with large mirror-like windows and hall- Herrmann (Santa Monica, CA: like spaces of industrial buildings, resulting from the structural The Getty Centre for the History of Art and Humanities, 1992) capabilities of iron, as the physical embodiment of the line of (169-177), 175 thought that he was opposed to. (picture 18 a+b) 74 Chapter Three

The eighteenth century architectural theorists also regarded industrial buildings as unworthy of any architectural decoration. According to Blondel, for example, in his Cours d'architecture from 1771, manufacture, as he called it, "should look simple and solid"2 while some fifteen years later Milizia maintained that they should look "simple but proud"3, a comment which could indicate a change in the architectural appreciation of these buildings. In 1805 Durand left factories out of his Precis, although he described barracks, prisons, slaughterhouses, lighthouses, markets or, in short, all the new building types characteristic of the nineteenth century.4 Picon explained this by reference to the fact that in 1805 PICTURE 18: LONDON SEWAGE the number and size of factories was "just plausible, PUMPING STATION UNDER […whereas…] this picture was far less so by the late 1820s, when RESTORATION the effects of the Industrial Revolution were beginning to make themselves felt in France."5 2 Blondel, Cours d’architecture, During the first half of the nineteenth century, when theorists 1771; in N. Pevsner, (1976) still believed that, one way or the other, their own era would A History of Building Types come up with a new style, industrial buildings were not built (Princeton, New Jersey; Princeton University Press, in France and Germany or in Central European countries in so 6 1997), 273 large a number as in England. How scarce these buildings must 3 Milizia, Principi di have been in Germany in the 1820s is confirmed by the following architettura civile, 1785; in N. Pevsner 1997, 273

4 J-N-L Durand, Precis des lecons d’architecture donne a l’Ecole Polytechnique (1802- 1805; 1821), Precis of the lectures on architecture; with Graphic portion of the lectures on architecture, trans. by D.Britt, intro. by A. Picon (Los Angeles, Ca: The Getty Research Institute, 2000), Vol. 2

PICTURE 19: PAGE FROM SCHINKEL'S DIARY OF JULY 16-18, 1826; FACTORIES AND MILLS IN MANCHESTER, ENGLAND Industrial Buildings: the First Grand Buildings of the Nineteenth Century 75

observation. During his visit to England in 1823, Beuth wrote 5 A. Picon, ‘From ‘Poetry of art’ to Schinkel: “The wonders of recent times are engines and the to Method’, in Durand 2000, 45 buildings to contain them, named factories”7 (emphasis added). 6 Only between 1830 and Just three years later Schinkel went to Britain on a study trip 1848 French industry grew to focusing on the industrial achievements of Britain.8 (picture 19) as yet unheard of proportions. (U. Pfammatter, The making The influence of that trip on Schinkel’s architecture is most of the Modern Architect and 9 visible in his design of the Bauakademie in Berlin. According Engineer, (Basel,Boston,Berlin: to Pevsner, this is the first building where all Modernist ideas, Birkhäuser, 2000) trans. from particularly the one of functionalism, were architecturally German by Madelinde Ferretti- expressed for the first time.10 In the text accompanying the Theilig, 198). The first phase of the industrialisation of Germany design of this building, written in 1828-1832, Schinkel wrote happened between 1850 and that “the framed fireproof structure had to be carried out in 1871 (H-U. Wehler, Deutsche brick and not as cast-iron structure, since iron foundries were Gesellschaftsgeschichte, Bd.3 still in their infancy in Prussia.”11 Schinkel employed a frame (1845-1914) (München: Beck, structural system and large semi-arched windows which almost 1995); Pevsner’s entry ‘Factories’ in his book A History of Building fully covered the wall area between the structural columns Types supports the above visible on the elevation. Decorations in classical style appeared statement as well. Pevsner, 1997, on the elevation, yet only above and below the windows and in 273-288 the roof cornice. As Frampton noticed, although Bauakademie 7 H. Lebherz, ‘Schinkel is considered “the most astylistic of Schinkel’s work”12, because and Industrial Architecture’, of these structural and formal characteristics, it was “all but Architectural Review, (8/1988): 41-46, 46 totally free of historical allusion. It is indebted in this regard to the British industrial mill construction of the last quarter of the 8 N. Pevsner 1997, 277 eighteenth century.”13 At the time when it was built, it was exactly 9 Frampton 1995, 65-67; because of these same historical allusions that the building was N.Pevsner, Pioneers of Modern both criticised and praised.14 (picture 20) Design: From William Morris to Walter Gropius (Harmondsworth: By extension, this implies that industrial buildings were Pinguin Books, 1966; first published 1936), 85 10 Pevsner 1966, 85 11 Lebherz 1988, 46 12 Frampton 1995, 67 13 Frampton 1995, 67 14 Herrmann 1992, 37

PICTURE 20: SCHINKEL, BAUAKADEMIE, BERLIN 1836 76 Chapter Three

both criticised and praised by their contemporaries. For those supporting the ‘style development’ theory, industrial buildings with their structural use of iron could not be anything but proof of their claims. Yet, using this type of building as a historical precedent gave industrial buildings a kind of symbolism which did not spring from the classical romantic philosophical background. For example, Semper disapproves of “private style inventors, who shine their inventive spirit on every large and small residence, railway station, and everywhere. In most cases they start from the erroneous assumption that the question of style is chiefly a constructive question and do not acknowledge 15 G. Semper (1860-1863) the inherited traditions of artistic symbolism.”15 Industrial ‘On Architectural Styles’, in W. buildings symbolized something else, something that the Herrmann, Gottfried Semper: in contemporaries were not defining but were obviously not quite at search for architecture, (London, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT ease to accept either. Press, 1984): 264-284, 267 Writing in the 1860s, Semper did not see how architects could come up with a ‘new form’, since a new world view had not yet been formulated. Although recognizing the existence of a new social class in the wealthy investors who hired the "private style inventors", Semper could not recognize in them the proponents of a new socio-economic idea, that is, 'a new idea of universal historical importance'. Consequently, Semper denied any architectural value to their work. Similarly, Hübsch criticized the part of the spirit of society which industrial buildings represented by contrasting industrial buildings with churches. Throughout the nineteenth century, big, empty and decorated- thus pseudo-monumental - industrial buildings were looming over 'Architecture Proper'; those equally big, empty and decorated museums, libraries, schools, churches, and fair buildings. The only difference was that the latter were representative of a new yet immediately socially accepted cultural idea, whereas the former represented an emerging socio-economic idea whose relationship with culture was yet to be formulated. It can be proposed that the nineteenth century theorists were well aware of the social change taking place and the kind of buildings that could be the expression of that change. And yet, the social culture related to these buildings, as well as their architectural expressiveness, were rejected as being worthwhile throughout the nineteenth century. However, whether their appearance was praised or rejected by the leading architectural theorists of the nineteenth century, industrial buildings were designed and built in ever greater numbers throughout the century in question. As indicated in Chapter Two, these buildings were mainly designed by the newly emerged profession of the engineer-architect who worked in collaboration with the architect. The collaboration between these two professions was achieved through a division of work: spatial planning and formal elaboration were the architect's tasks, while the work on the structure, considered in relation to the spatial Industrial Buildings: the First Grand Buildings of the Nineteenth Century 77 and formal, were the engineer- architect's task. As demonstrated, the method of design used in this collaboration was process- oriented, which meant that each party involved searched for a design solution appropriate for a particular functional task assigned to each party in the team. The illustrations below bear testimony to the fact that the search for an appropriate formal, spatial and structural solution for a given industrial task often ended in a similar overall building form, PICTURE 21: TEXTILE MILL GREATER MANCHESTER, UK regardless of advancements in production technology. This illustration directly questions the industrial archaeological conceptual explanation of the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings. (picture 21-22) For example, textile mills have the same formal, spatial and structural solution as a tobacco factory. A large number of industrial buildings, the mills of England in particular, were built before 1838,16 the year when Labruste's Bibliotheque Ste. Genevieve was built (pictures 23 and 25) Needless to say, both the mills and the Bibliotheque have the same spatial form, that is, an open plan, as well as the structural character, that PICTURE 22: TOBACCO FACTORY MARSEILLE, FRANCE is, an internally exposed iron frame combined with a thick load bearing wall on the perimeter of the plan. The only difference is in the height of the buildings: whereas 16 For the chronology of the height of the Bibliotheque is equivalent to a two storey mill, all textile mills in Greater the mill is several storeys high. Manchester see M. Williams and D.A. Farnie, Cotton Mills in We will close this brief examination of the way industrial Greater Manchester (Preston: buildings were perceived by nineteenth century architectural Carnegie Publishing Ltd., 1992) theorists and architects with a comment and proposal: the Bibliotheque was built much later than the mill and other early industrial buildings; thus Hübsch was right when predicting that industrial halls would become a new architectural prototype. As we can see, this proposal was already valid in his century. Irrespective of the overall formal similarities and despite the fact that industrial buildings bore the most advanced structural achievements, it is Labrouste's Bibliotheque that features in every twentieth century book on the history of architecture as one of the first examples of an innovative – that 78 Chapter Three

is to say, exposed - use of iron in buildings, rather than any mill or other industrial building. And yet, it is common architectural knowledge that industrial buildings were the ones to inﬂuence most the aesthetics of the architecture of the Modern Movement; the exposed structural system being one of its aesthetic premises. Drawing upon the most inﬂuential literature on the history of Modernism in architecture, let us now investigate the way in which these slick nineteenth century buildings, the new architectural prototype, were evaluated with a historical distance of almost a century, and let us consequently shed some light on the historical inconsistency presented above.

PICTURE 23: LABROUSTE, BIBLIOTHEQUE, STE. GENEVIEVE

3.2 Industrial Buildings: Testing Field for Formal and Structural Innovations

3.2.1 A New Form Le Corbusier’s promotion of the form of industrial buildings as buildings of a particular aesthetics, contained in his Modernist 17 Le Corbusier, (1931) Towards manifesto Vers Une Architecture,17 was probably what influenced a New Architecture, trans. from most the inclusion of industrial buildings into the list of historical French by F. Etchells (New York: influences over the definition of Modernist aesthetics. However, Dover Publications, Inc., 1986) as indicated in every account of the history of Modernism written during the twentieth century, Le Corbusier was neither the first nor the only one to be impressed with industrial buildings. Russian industrial buildings form one branch of influence on Modernism, introduced to architecture through Russian constructivists. The other branch includes 'Le Corbusier's' industrial buildings made in the United States. Banham, one of the main post-Second World War historiographers of Modern architecture, showed that it was Gropius who first published 18 R. Banham, A Concrete the same images of the American factory buildings which Le Atlantis: U.S. Industrial Corbusier borrowed from Gropius and consequently used in Buildings and European Modern his book.18 Gropius collected them from various sources in the Architecture 1900-1925, (Cambridge, MA, London: MIT United States and Canada during the preparation of an article in Press, 1986), 11 1912-1913 and he was to visit the United States in person only 19 Banham 1986, 11 in 1928.19 As Banham goes on to show, E. Mendelson was equally Industrial Buildings: the First Grand Buildings of the Nineteenth Century 79

impressed after his visit to the United States.20 20 Banham 1986, 6 Whilst all these architects were impressed with the form of these buildings, it is exclusively the formal characteristics that they write about. None of them, excluding Gropius, actually entered any of these buildings. Therefore, Banham put forward the argument according to which Modernism was the first style in the history of architecture which developed from an image rather than an understanding of the tectonic rules which led to or lay behind the image.21 It was the form that was imported to 21 Banham 1986, 18 Europe, yet without the technical knowledge about how to put together the concrete frame and the glass or finish the flat roof. That is why, so many years later, concrete roofs were still leaking in Europe, while there had never been any leaks on those flat roofs of the factories in the States which were the first to be executed, remarked Banham.22 22 Banham 1986, 17 Banham's book from 1986 consequently focuses on the development of structural innovations used for building purposes on industrial buildings from the beginning of their emergence in northern Europe and England around the mid eighteenth century23 until the birth of the American ‘daylight factory’ in the 23 Banham 1986, 39-40 1910s.24 To this day, the book remains the only publication of the 24 Banham 1986, 24 twentieth century which describes the architectural character of industrial buildings derived exclusively from a knowledge of the technical problems of building. Thus, Banham considers Larkin R/S/T building a grand building because "everywhere one looks 25 Banham 1986, 92 there is evidence of great care and ingenuity in dealing with 26 Banham 1986, 178 edges and corners, junctions and relationships of materials, and the proportioning of the whole.[…] It is totally self assured design, as if architects had been designing in this mode for four centuries, instead of four years!" 25 (picture 24) For Banham, the American daylight factory is the end of the developmental line for the frame based multi-storey industrial buildings that started in Europe, since at the time when the Modernists discovered them a new generation of industrial buildings had already begun to appear. These were long one- storey high sheds "where connectivity by rail and road seems to dominate all other design consideration."26 Banham's A Concrete Atlantis remains thus the first and still one of the very rare books which treat industrial buildings as Architecture, evaluating their architectural merits in their own right. For Banham, early twentieth century industrial buildings in the PICTURE 24: LARKIN R/S/T, END ELEVATION (PHOTO, United States are simply great buildings and BAZELON) 80 Chapter Three

monuments in their own right, because they show "obedience to 27 Banham 1986, 21 the Laws".27 Just like any other historical building fulfilling a high cultural purpose, industrial buildings are simply either good or bad within the set of their own aesthetic principles. Although Banham promoted the American daylight factory as the first building bearing architectural characteristics of Modernism, he did not acknowledge the architectural value of the industrial buildings which led to the daylight factory. In this respect, and only in this, his study is similar to those of Collins and Giedion with respect to the treatment of industrial buildings. Unfortunately, not even Bahnam’s study does justice to industrial buildings which remain unevaluated in their own right. Like the whole of nineteenth century architecture, industrial buildings too have historical importance only insofar as they influenced the birth of Modernism. To further investigate the importance of the role of industrial buildings, it is now necessary to examine how these new forms of industrial buildings first came to life.

3.2.2 A New Structure Following a number of quotations, Mauro F. Gullen showed that Collins, Giedion, Banham, Hitchock, Pevsner and Frampton are among the most influential historiographers of Modernism 28 M. F. Gullen, The Taylorized in architecture during the twentieth century.28 Whatever their Beauty of the Mechanical: approach to explaining the emergence of Modernist architecture, Scientific management and the be it 'revolutionary' like Giedion's or rather developmental such Rise of Modernist Architecture (Princeton: Princeton University as Collins's or Banham's, they all relate the development of Press, 2006), 35 Modernist architecture to either purely architectural or to overall cultural lines of thoughts developed during the nineteenth century. Curiously, however, these same authors never discussed the actual architectural works of the whole of nineteenth century architecture within these same lines of thoughts. Rather, they chose only one line of thought against which they judged nineteenth century architecture, that is, in terms of achieved formal novelties. They judge the extent to which the use of new materials created a new form rather than producing a copy of a form already achieved through traditional materials. For example, since concrete was used for a long time in a form which visually repeated that of a stone block, nineteenth century buildings built with concrete are not considered historically important because no new form emerged out of this kind of 29 P. Collins, Concrete the use of a non traditional material.29 Contrary to this, the visual Vision of A New Architecture: A presence of an iron or steel structure either in the internal Study of Auguste Perret and his spaces or in the elevation was considered a formal novelty. precursors, (London: Faber and Faber, 1959) In the previous chapter we saw that the nineteenth century architectural debate pivoted around two ways in which a new form could be invented: either through the use of new materials which would in turn produce a new form, or through the invention of a new style with new formal characteristics regardless of the Industrial Buildings: the First Grand Buildings of the Nineteenth Century 81 materials used. Although the nineteenth century protagonists of the debate agreed that no new form emerged, historiographers of Modernism obviously adopted the former nineteenth century line of invention as the evaluative criterion for the emergence of a new form which, according to them, did emerge at the very beginning of the twentieth century with the architecture of the Modern Movement. Rather than mathematical, as Le Corbusier thought, it was in fact the physical laws of the behaviour of materials that the engineers were preoccupied with from the mid eighteenth century onwards. It is the description of these physical experimentations that is the main subject of the book by Giedion in 192830 and then by Collins in 195931. Through a description of 30 S. Giedion (1928), Building In the positive and negative characteristics of the use of iron and France, Building in Iron, Building steel for building materials at first, and later including concrete, in Ferro-Concrete, intro. by S. Georgiadis, trans. by J.Duncan they showed how engineers finally discovered ferro-concrete, Berry (Santa Monica, CA: The that is, reinforced concrete, as the new building material which Getty Centre for the History of allowed the invention of: genuinely new forms in architecture. Art and Humanities, 1995) Collins dated the beginning of this search for "economical 31 Collins 1959 building methods"32 through the use of new building materials at 32 Collins 1959, 20 around 1780s in France, where 'beton' was first introduced and experimented with as building material. England was the first and the most advanced in the use of iron for building purposes from the mid eighteenth to mid nineteenth century, by which time France had gained the equivalent position in the use of concrete. Over the course of the nineteenth century, the leading position in the technological development of 'concrete' in particular was taken over shortly by England and the United States, only to be retaken by mainland Europe, Germany and France, and continuing in the States33 with the introduction of reinforced 33 Collins 1959, 63 concrete around 1900.34 34 Collins 1959, 72 The development and acceptance of new structural building materials was rather slow, Collins argued, either because of existing building regulations, as was the case in England, or because of the slow public acceptance of the material.35 The 35 Collins 1959, 58-59 public at large was suspicious of the actual technological capabilities of the new materials after the collapse of early concrete structures used for dwellings in Paris, for example. It also had its reservations towards the visual appreciation of the bare steel or reinforced concrete structures. Sir Owen Williams, for example, believed that reinforced concrete should never be used for monumental buildings, since "the function of reinforced concrete is as a conventional expedient for the production of cheap buildings".36 Nineteenth century engineers and architects 36 Collins 1959, 141 were thus confronted with both legal and cultural obstacles in their experimentation in the use of new materials for building purposes. However, obstacles existed only in the cases where experiments were carried out in cultural or public buildings and 82 Chapter Three

housing. Industrial buildings as well as railway stations were subject to different or indeed no building regulations, meaning that structural experiments could be carried out on these 37 Collins 1959, 78 building types.37 As Collins showed, this was precisely what 38 Collins 1959, 63 occurred. For example, Albert Kahn in the States38 or Hennebique 39 Collins 1959, 67 in France,39 to mention just the most influential protagonists, first tested their reinforced concrete frame structures on factory 40 Collins 1959, 67 buildings, that is, on "purely utilitarian structures"40. Collins writes on structural developments as exercised by Hennebique: "As might be expected, his first complete concrete buildings consisted of purely utilitarian structures, since it was here that the advantages of the new material were the most 41 Collins 1959, 67 apparent and the least contested."41 He cites the Raffinerie Parisien, the spinning and flour mills as being these 'purely utilitarian structures'. He admits the historical importance of "the ability to fill the structural concrete frames with nothing but sheets of glass […] exploited by Hennebique in his earliest 42 Collins 1959, 67 buildings"42, namely, the spinning mills dating from 1895 and 1896: "The fact that this was neither deliberately intended nor perceived by any of Hennebique's contemporaries does not 43 Collins 1959, 67 lessen the significance of the event."43 Despite this recognition from Collins’s side, he never put forward as clearly as Banham did that these same ferro-concrete industrial buildings were the first buildings in Europe where a truly new formal language appeared. However, as Collins indicated, it was iron and later steel that was used as the main structural material in nineteenth century industrial buildings before ferro–concrete. Collins observed:

Whereas in iron structures it had still been customary to conserve[emphasis added] the traditional heavy masonry walls with small apertures, Hennebique perceived that his columns, beams and floors were sufficient in themselves, so that traditional wall surface could be abandoned altogether in favour of an infilling that was 44 Collins 1959, 67 entirely transparent.44

Throughout his book, Collins presented industrial buildings as places of only structural, rather than formal, experimentations; claiming that the architectural form of these buildings was achieved by a purely functionally-driven desire to improve the ﬁreproof ability of the structure and the light conditions in the working areas, regardless of the structural material used (iron, steel, ferro-concrete). And then, all at once, he observed that it was customary to conserve masonry walls with small windows within iron structured buildings, rather than the formal result of pure utilitarian need. Why would engineers with no aesthetic intentions for their work, as both the nineteenth and twentieth century theorists claimed reproduce due to tradition the masonry walls of an industrial building, if the building was considered nothing more than a 'purely utilitarian building'? Industrial Buildings: the First Grand Buildings of the Nineteenth Century 83

For both Collins and Giedion, and in Giedion's case even exclusively so, industrial buildings were treated as 'purely utilitarian structures' although a new formal expression took shape in these buildings as a result of structural experimentations with either totally new materials, such as poured and reinforced concrete, or materials which had for the first time been used for structural purposes, such as, iron. However, for both these authors the buildings which received detailed descriptions of their structural systems were the ones fulfilling a cultural function, such as theatres or pavilions intended for large world exhibitions, and even housing. In the eyes of these historians it was only in these buildings that the structural developments first achieved in industrial buildings gained their 'higher', architectural, rather than purely utilitarian, value. However, apart from the fact that these buildings fulfilled a cultural function rather than being solely utilitarian, it was never explained in what way this 'higher' architectural value was actually achieved there, whereas the same was not the case for industrial buildings. The twentieth century historiographers of Modernism recognised the characteristics of the new aesthetic cannon, later attached to Modernist architecture, already present in nineteenth century industrial buildings. However, just like their nineteenth century predecessors, the twentieth century theorists denied these buildings their architectural historical importance because of their 'purely utilitarian function' unlike the buildings with a 'lofty' cultural purpose like theatres, for example. Through their treatment of industrial buildings these theorists showed that, regardless of their modernist preoccupation with social issues relating to architecture, particularly well presented in Pevsner's A History of Building Types on the issue of factories,45 45 Pevsner 1997 they did not manage to avoid their traditionally trained art historian's eye making a distinction between high and low art and considering only high art as worthy of artistic evaluation. In the twentieth century studies reviewed above, the whole of the nineteenth century architecture in general was primarily treated as of no architectural interest in its own right, but rather only as a developmental phase in the birth of Modernism. It has been shown so far in this chapter that both the nineteenth and twentieth century theorists recognised in nineteenth century industrial buildings the novel formal elements for which they searched. Yet, both authors were reluctant to openly recognise the architectural historical importance of these buildings because of their lower cultural status and because they were works of engineers. In both cases, these buildings were denied their architectural historical importance because historiographers failed to acknowledge their contribution to the 'making of the world' of the nineteenth century, namely, their aesthetic aspect. In Chapter Two we saw that the works of engineer-architects 84 Chapter Three

were largely a result of a newly emerging process-based method of designing which reflected an equally new and emerging way of seeing the world, that is, in terms of processes behind the forms of appearance. Thus new forms of appearance in the nineteenth century, particularly those designed by engineer- architects such as industrial buildings, were not the result of chance or the ‘unconscious will’ of their designers. Rather, they were the result of a new, meticulously studied and developed way of designing. This chapter re-examines the historical architectural importance of early industrial buildings in terms of their aesthetic importance, by investigating the extent to which these buildings can be seen as the representation of nineteenth century aesthetics, as summarized in the rhetorical concept of organicism as defined in Chapter Two. From these arguments, at this point, one could surmise the following: if industrial buildings are related to any aesthetic concept as such, then it is the concept of functionalism. Indeed, industrial buildings can be seen as being purely utilitarian buildings or, as Collins often put it, purely functionalistic buildings. The functionalism of these buildings was recognised and measured in terms of their structural performance and the suitability of their form in bringing the necessarry amount of light into the working space. Their form was exclusively the result of these two functional requirements. Collins and Giedion painted a 'functionalistic' picture of industrial buildings according to which any solely formal considerations were denied any role in their form making. For both of them, the overall formal character of these buildings, that is, their ‘aesthetic integrity’, was a product 46 Giedion, 1995; Collins 1959, of the unconscious will of the engineers.46 97-112 Let us then first familiarize the reader with the ways functionalism as an aesthetic notion is presented and used in the literature. The aim of this brief review is to help comprehend why this thesis proposes organicism, rather than functionalism, as the concept best describing the aesthetic integrity of industrial buildings.

3.3 Industrial Buildings and ‘The Fiction of Function’ In the context of aesthetic considerations, industrial buildings tend to be related only to functionalism. In order to be able to discuss industrial buildings in aesthetic terms in the ﬁrst place, which indeed is the main objective of this chapter, the theoretical grounds of this discussion must be laid down ﬁrst. Let us therefore examine the theoretical roots of the twentieth century connotations of functionalism.

3.3.1 Functionalism of Building Banham traced the consequential use of the word 'functionalism' in architectural critical and historical writings to the early 1930s. The meaning was taken from Le Corbusier's suggestion Industrial Buildings: the First Grand Buildings of the Nineteenth Century 85 to Alberto Sartoris in 1932 to replace the word Rational with Functional in the title of his book originally entitled Gli Elementi dell'architettura Razionale.47 Banham criticised authors such 47 R. Banham, Theory and as Giedion, Satoris or Mumford for their "limited" interpretation design in the First Machine Age, of Functionalism, which they equated with Le Corbusier's (London: The Architectural Press, 1960), 320 limited sense attributed to Rationalism. By arguing against rationalism, both Le Corbusier and Gropius rejected the "revival of a nineteenth century determinism […] summed up in Luis Sullivan's empty jungle 'Form follows function'."48 Banham 48 Banham 1960, 320 maintained that attributing functionalism, as understood in this deterministic way, to the buildings of the 1920s deprived them of being interpreted symbolically during the 1930s and for several decades afterwards. As Gropius stated, the true aim of the 1920s architects and their relation to the world of the Machine Age was "to invent and create forms symbolising that world [emphasis added]."49 Modernist architects were aware of the 49 Banham 1960, 321 new characteristics of the world they lived in, and they wanted to express them through architectural forms in order to share them with the rest of society. Deterministic Rationalism, which Le Corbusier contrasted against Functionalism, characterised the nineteenth century architectural debate together with the Academism of Les Ecole des Beaux Arts which was opposed to it, as discussed in Chapter Two. The distinction between the two lines of thought lay in their approach to development of new forms in architecture: rationalists defended the view that new forms would appear out of the scientifically defined use of new materials for structural purposes, whereas academicians believed in the development of a new form based on the knowledge of historical forms. Despite their differences, the two lines of thought have one thing in common: absolute belief in the power of the chosen scientific method, which leads to an ultimate answer to the question posed. Hence, the nineteenth century determinist mindset can be said to be based on the unconditional belief in the scientific method. The statement of ‘Form follows function', when taken at face value, is indeed the epitaph of the nineteenth century determinism in architecture. Collins traced the origins of nineteenth century Rationalism in the architectural debate to the rationalized way of thinking on the part of civil and military engineers of the late eighteenth and nineteenth century, rather than to the forms created by this way of thinking.50 This influence was passed on through the treaties 50 P. Collins, Changing Ideals in used in the education of both professions. Rationalization Modern Architecture 1750-1950, was conducted at three levels: "firstly, a reappraisal of the (Kingston and Montreal: McGill- Queen’s University Press, 1967), proportions of all structural elements with respect to the newly 197 established science of the strength of materials; secondly, a logical approach to planning with respect to the actual needs of the intended occupants; and thirdly, a more flexible approach to the Classical notions of symmetry and regularity, whereby, for 86 Chapter Three

example, windows lighting stairways could be placed more often in relationship to internal landings, rather than with respect to a 51 Collins 1967, 205 regular alignment of the exterior facades."51 Namely, at the level of structural behaviour, Rationalism determined a building’s planning and its composition. The nineteenth century rationalist engineers and architects alike focused their investigations on the structural rationalisation, whereas the other two levels were achieved mainly by following the rules of a building’s planning. The most influential work in terms of a building’s planning was Durand's treaty Precis des lecons d’architecture donne a l’Ecole 52 J-N-L. Durand, 2000 Polytechnique.52 Although to our minds, with twentieth century theoretical and practical advancements in architecture assumed as being understood, it may seem obvious that Durand's 53 Collins 1967, 223 teaching opened the possibility of arriving at new building forms 54 U. Pfammatter, U., The by understanding and inventively composing the individual Making of the Modern Architect functional parts of the building into a whole, Collins argued and Engineer, trans. from that this programmatic method for potentially arriving at new German by Madelinde Ferretti- Theilig (Basel,Boston,Berlin: forms was not exploited during the nineteenth century. Indeed Birkhäuser, 2000) Viollet-le-Duc proclaimed as late as 1863 that "the essence of 55 Collins 1967, 217 programmes changes little, for men's needs in a civilized state 56 K. Frampton, Studies in are approximately the same".53 Thus, Durand's textbook, as Tectonic Culture: The Poetics of well as others that were subsequently issued and contained Construction in Nineteenth and building types for the new age, were useful to nineteenth century Twentieth Century Architecture (Cambridge, MA, London: MIT architects and engineers insofar as they provided a generic Press, 1995), 29-91 typological building-planning solution for particular building 57 Frampton 1995, 3-5 functions. But the engineer-architects educated under Mary (see 58 For an application Chapter Two) used the rationalizing approach to the building’s of phenomenology to function at the planning level, based on a scientific method, as a understanding of architecture way of arriving at a new form. see Heidegger’s seminal text Building Dwelling Thinking, It can be concluded that the application of a scientific which Frampton used for his investigation in architecture led to a rational approach to explanation of the nineteenth building design as practiced at two levels; structural and building century tectonic culture. planning. All the studies, apart from Pfammater's,54 proposed M.Heidegger, Basic Writings: that, while structural rationalization was perceived as the main from Being and Time (1927) to The Task of Thinking (1964), tool of invention, since it was believed that it could lead to the edited by D.Farrell Krell, birth of much desired new architectural forms appropriate for (London: Routledge, 2000), expressing the spirit of the times, planning rationalisation was 343-364 only perceived as an auxiliary tool of comprehension helpful for 59 Frampton 1995, 1-2 logically arranging the given function. Pfammater's study is the 60 Le Corbusier (1931) first to propose and show that the rationalisation of building 61 Mies van der Rohe, planning was, particularly in the second half of the nineteenth ‘Building’, G, no.2 (September century, also a design method used to investigate the possibility 1923), p.1, reprinted in F. of arriving at a new form. Neumeyer, The Artless Word: Mies van der Rohe on the Structural Rationalism, according to Collins, "is still Building of Art trans. by potentially one of the most vigorous ideals of the modern M.Jarzombek(Cambridge, MA, age, and it would not be an exaggeration to say that it is the London, England: The MIT Press, notion which offers the most fruitful prospects for the future 1991) 242 development of modern architectural thought."55 Some thirty Industrial Buildings: the First Grand Buildings of the Nineteenth Century 87 years after Collin's study, Frampton expanded the study of nineteenth century Rationalism in France with the German counterpart of the same architectural debate. Structural considerations and investigations were imported to Germany from France through education, as presented above. According to Frampton, this line of both French and German nineteenth century structural rationalism is the cradle of the tectonic culture in architecture.56 The study of tectonics is a field of scientific investigation specific to architecture, meaning that architecture could be considered an independent science.57 Frampton presents the nineteenth century debate as primarily materialistic-phenomenological, in the sense that the essence of architecture can be identified through the study of materials, structure, construction and the nature of their relationships which influence the human experience of space they create, hence the phenomenology.58 For Frampton, it is in the nature of these relationships that the artistic expression in architecture should be sought, in addition to, rather than exclusively in, the spatial considerations as the twentieth century architectural theories have done.59 PICTURE 25: TYPICAL BRICK COURSING The twentieth century tectonic trajectory that began BY MIES (RECONSTRUCTION BY with the work of what Collins called nineteenth century WARNER BLASER FOR THE BRICK COUNTRY HOUSE OF 1923) Rationalists was sketched out by Frampton through the works of authors as disparate as Wright, Perret, van der Rohe, L. Kahn, Utzon and Scarpa. Such a line up of twentieth century architects certainly confirms Collins's prediction of the influence that the thinking of nineteenth century rationalists would have on the course of modern architecture. This rationalist way of thinking PICTURE 26: MIES VAN DER ROHE, WOLF HOUSE: exhibited by nineteenth century RECONSTRUCTION OF ORIGINAL WORKING DRAWING SHOWING THE engineers at all three levels can be PRECISION WITH WHICH THE BRICK COURSING WAS WORKED OUT found in different aspects of work of the majority of the main protagonists of the 1920s Modernism. Le Corbusier's fascination with the engineer's methods of design is best expressed in the seminal book of Modernism Vers Une Architecture.60 Mies asserted that "we know no forms, only building problems. Form is not the goal but the result of our work"61 (pictures 25, 26), and explained that "Technology is 62 Mies van der Rohe, far more than a method. It is a world in itself. As a method it is ‘Architecture and Technology’ superior in almost every respect. But only where it is left to itself, Arts and Architecture, 67, no.10 (1950), p.30 , reprinted as in gigantic structures of engineering, there technology reveals in Neumeyer 1991, 324 and in its true nature. […] Where technology reaches its real fulfilment it Frampton 1995, 186 transcends into architecture."62 88 Chapter Three

Or F.L. Wright on reinforced concrete structures: "All we would have to do would be to educate the concrete block, reﬁne it and knit it together with steel in the joints and so construct the joints that they could be poured full of concrete after they were set up and a steel stand laid in them, The walls would thus become thin but solid reinforced slabs and yield to any 63 Wright, Frank Lloyd Wright: desire for form imaginable."63 (picture 27) It is not surprising Writings and Buildings, ed. by then that, after such passages and Le Corbusier's suggestion to E.Kaufman and B.Raeburn (New replace rational with functional, historiographers of Modernism York, Horizon Press, 1960), 215- 216; reprinted in Frampton 1995, renamed the Structural Rationalism of the nineteenth century 109 into the Functionalism of the twentieth, which bears the same connotations. One of the widespread notions of twentieth century functionalism is thus deﬁned in terms of structural and technological explorations which lead to New Architecture.

3.3.2 Functionalism of a Building's Programmatic Planning 64 L. van Duin, ‘Functionalism’, Probably the best known and most widespread notion A Hundred Years of Dutch of Functionalism relating to the Modern Movement is its Architecture 1901-2000: Trends, relationship with the building programme, that is, a building's Highlights, (Amsterdam: Uitgeverij SUN, 2003) (41-49), 43 function. At the turn of the twentieth century, when the big European metropolises were already formed, the issue of the 65 S. Anderson, ‘The Fiction living and working conditions of the rapidly increasing number of Function’, in assemblage 2, of city dwellers became topical for architects as well. Le (1987), 19-57, 22 Corbusier's as well as Bauhaus' teachers' considerations for 66 Van Duin 2003, 42 the sufficient amount of daylight, air and living and working space – Hanes Mayer's, Gropius's, Muthesius, Oud's, Van der Broek's64 – were widely published and interpreted in terms of architects' engagement with pertinent social issues. In addition to this line of architects interested in programmatic issues yet driven by the desire to improve the quality of living and working conditions for everybody, another line of self-proclaimed functionalists emerged at the turn of the century.65 The best known proponent of this line was Hugo Häring with his design of the cowshed made with the conviction that the form of the building has one-to-one relationship with its functional requirements.66 Neither lines were interested in formal investigations per se but rather PICTURE 27: FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT, PATENT-DOUBLE-WALL, LIGHT-WEIGHT perceived the final form of the BLOCK SYSTEM building as an end product of Industrial Buildings: the First Grand Buildings of the Nineteenth Century 89 programmatic investigations. It is because of claims such as 'form is the end product of programmatic investigations' that the ideas of Modernism of the 1920s became equated with functionalism during the 1950s. Anderson recognized one of the most influential sources for equating modernism with functionalism in John Summerson's argument from 1957 that "functionalism, in the sense of faithfulness to programme, provided the unifying principle for modern architecture"67, although Summerson himself 67 Anderson 1987, 21 disavowed his hypothesis some years later. Following the built works of architecture in the immediate aftermath of World War Two based on the CIAM principles for town planning, pre-war rationalization and standardization schemes for housing, and additionally with the emergence of Post-Modern architecture, the Modernism=functionalism equation received negative connotations which persist to date. In the wake of the Post-Modern condemnation of Modernism on functional grounds, Anderson tried to remind architects and historians of the role that 'function' really played in the majority of Modernists' architectural works.68 Anderson argued that it was 68 Anderson 1987, 19-31 a fiction that function "provided a crucial line of demarcation within modern architecture."69 For Anderson, function is an 69 Anderson 1987, 21 intrinsic characteristic of architecture, but ultimately no study of function, no matter in what detail, can ever immediately translate into an architectural form. Therefore, every architect inevitably engages with a function but it is the how of that engagement that creates, today as well as it did throughout the centuries, the difference between the architects. It is since the 1920s that the "stories about function"70 [emphasis added, 70 Anderson 1987, 22 note the plural] were emphasised more than before. References to function, both direct and metaphorical, can be found in relation to a building's details, structure, windows and façade organization, iconographic meaning of doors and windows. But these references are only fragments of the story of function. Only when all these fragments are united in a story that explains architecture, and that story expresses an architect's "larger vision of his or her work"71, does function fulfil the role of fiction 71 Anderson 1987, 22 rather than "only the [description of] literal function of the work."72 In the remainder of his article Anderson reminded the 72 Anderson 1987, 22 reader of the 'higher vision' of 'making a world' that the majority of the 1920s Modernists shared through a brief description of how some of the most prominent architects of modernism, such as Loos, Le Corbusier, Kahn and Aalto, used function as fiction. Anderson claimed: "they [those architects] made places that "make a world" for those who inhabit them. […] Their buildings tell stories, but not just any story that is different or amusing or ironic or calculated to sell. Rightly or wrongly, not sombrely, but rather with ample recognition of the potentials and joys both of life and of architecture, they challenged themselves to find how 90 Chapter Three

architecture could serve the people of their cultures in their time [emphasis added]. To do what they did involved not function or fiction, but both and more.[…] In their works, the architects just 73 Anderson 1987, 29 evoked sought to make places that support modern fiction."73 The concluding paragraph of Anderson's article criticized post- modern architecture for its superficial dismissal of modernism on functional grounds and its focusing on the iconographic capacity of architecture, which excluded any discourse of what is communicated. He pleaded for an "integral understanding of architecture including function" where architecture is seen as a product of pertinent culture, a 'place' tied to its 'communal 74 Anderson 1987, 31 responsibilities and potentials'.74

3.3.3 Functionalism vs Organicism The above exposition on functionalism in architecture intended to sketch the genesis of the two most widespread ways of understanding functionalism in the twentieth century historiography of Modern architecture, that is, rationalism or functionalism of making a building and functionalism of a building's programmatic planning. Because of such an unclear definition of the term 'function', Scruton poses the question: "are we referring to the function of the building, or to the function 75 R. Scruton, The Aesthetics of of its parts? "75, Scruton maintains that it is problematic to use Architecture, (Princeton, New functionalism as an aesthetic notion to describe architecture at Jersey: Princeton University all. Press, 1980), 40 Throughout the twentieth century, historiographers could not agree on what functionalism as an aesthetic notion encompassed, or rather, why it could not combine both function and aesthetics at the same time. More importantly, during the course of the twentieth century both connotations of functionalism lost its 'symbolic' or 'fictional' background. It can be concluded that by losing its ‘symbolic’ connotation, functionalism lost its status of an aesthetic concept. It was reduced to its bare performative meaning easily and readily expressed in numbers and scientific formulas without any relation to the more complex aspects of the world making. Functionalism, as embedded in the literature by now, lost its qualitative element of a building's unity, that is, its rhetorical aspect. Therefore, it cannot be used as a strategy to explain why a building's elements are put together in the way they are. Now, van Eck finishes her study by proposing that in the course of the second half of the nineteenth century organicism was losing its philosophical notion and replacing it with that 76 C. van Eck, Organicism of the Darwinian notion of functioning and performativity.76 in the Nineteenth Century Consequently, she proposes to further investigate the possible Architecture, (Amsterdam: rhetorical character of functionalism. In this respect, if we Architectura&Natura Press, 1994) accept functionalism as an aesthetic notion, functionalism could only follow organicism. Thus, most of the nineteenth century architectural works can only be an expression of organicism Industrial Buildings: the First Grand Buildings of the Nineteenth Century 91 rather than functionalism. Industrial buildings, the object of this study, built from the beginning of the century, could therefore only be an embodiment of organicism. Only the industrial buildings from the end of that century could be examined as an embodiment of functionalism if revisited in rhetorical terms. Therefore, let us then proceed with the investigation into the extent to which the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings could be described PICTURE 28: CHORLTON NEW MILL, MANCHESTER, 1814 by reference to organicism.

3.4 Industrial Buildings and Organicism Throughout the nineteenth century industrial buildings were the main typology used for architectural experimentations. It was in such buildings that structural innovations were tested, and where formal outcomes took on a new shape for the ﬁrst time in history as a result of these structural experimentations. One of their most recognizable formal characteristics, either disputed or loved, is their hall-like organization of internal spaces (picture 28), achieved through the exposed slender steel, and later concrete, columns. Other formal features include numerous and large window openings, unprecedented in terms of ordering and largeness as compared to other contemporary types of building (picture 29).

PICTURE 29: MCCONNEL AND KENNEDY'S EARLY MILLS, BUILT BETWEEN 1798 AND 1820 92 Chapter Three

All historiographers of modernism in architecture agree that these structural experimentations, as well as the described formal ones, were driven solely by the desire to improve the functioning of a building in terms of structural behaviour and working conditions for the users of the building, hence, industrial buildings equals functional buildings. The fact that larger window apertures were needed in order to improve the working conditions of the users expressed the designer’s or owner’s interest in the well-being of workers. It was, therefore, well before the Modernists that the engineers or architects of industrial buildings had to take into their design considerations the light, heating as well as the dining and socializing needs 77 For the summary on this of workers.77 By doing so, the designers of industrial buildings aspect see M. Stratton and conveyed through the building's form what Anderson named the B. Trinder, Industrial England, 'fictional' aspect of their design considerations. The well-being of (London: English Heritage, 1997) workers was the strategy governing their design. These designers thus created their designs by following the idea of 'making 78 Here again Pevsner’s entry the world' in social terms as well as in structural.78 Therefore, on factories comes to mind the design intentions of engineer-architects of the nineteenth as one of the first accounts century were not driven exclusively by the idea of structural and on the factory owners as well as designers considerations functional performance, but also by the strategy concerned with of social and health aspect of ‘making the world’ of their time. workers’ life. As shown in the previous chapter, organicism was identified as that rhetorical design strategy which best described the aesthetic interest of architects and engineers in understanding the making of the world. It was the architects-engineers who engaged in ‘making the world’, in terms of its physical as well as social structure, through their process-oriented method of designing in several layers; structural as well as spatial. Both the nineteenth and twentieth century historiographers agree that industrial buildings are where the making of the world, as shown through the building's structure, first manifested itself in the eyes of people in a novel way. It is proposed here that, in addition to structural considerations, another formal novelty of these buildings was their spatial organisation which became prototypical. These structural and spatial formal characteristics together engender a new building form, that of the industrial building. It is a result of the nineteenth century aesthetic interest in understanding unity in the world by unfolding the way this unity is achieved, both in technological and social terms. Organicism as a rhetorical notion which describes the design strategy and summarizes the nineteenth century aesthetic notion of unity can be used as a notion which reveals and conceptually describes how industrial buildings were designed with an aesthetic consideration in mind. Since industrial buildings were the first buildings of the nineteenth century where this conceptual idea can be found, it is proposed here that the industrial buildings are the first grand buildings of the nineteenth century. Organicism is thus the rhetorical strategy which best Industrial Buildings: the First Grand Buildings of the Nineteenth Century 93 describes the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of a nineteenth century industrial building in qualitative terms. As we saw in the previous chapter, during the 1990s, studies began to appear which re-evaluated the theoretical grounds of the nineteenth century architectural debate. At the same time, a set of studies began to appear also offering a re-evaluation of nineteenth century architecture but primarily in architectural terms. This was achieved by using analytical approaches to the works of architecture different from the traditional stylistic art historical ones. A brief review of these studies follows in order to examine to what extent these types of analysis can be used in order to describe the formal totality of the industrial buildings in quantitative terms.

3.5 Industrial Buildings Architecturally Revaluated During the 1990s several studies appeared in which the architectural value of the nineteenth century architecture was re-examined either within the parameters of the nineteenth century stylistic debate or within the theoretical framework of the twentieth century studies on the social understanding of space. From the 1960s onwards, particularly influenced by Lefevre’s The Production of Space79, architectural space has been 79 H. Lefebvre, The Production of extensively discussed in social terms. Understanding the social Space (Oxford, UK&Cambridge, structure of a particular function was and still is considered USA: Blackwell, 1999), trans. by D.Nicholson-Smith the most fashionable way of understanding architectural space within architectural discourses. It took a hundred years before Bötticher’s observation became a viable direction within architectural discourse. It then took another thirty before studies began to appear in the 1990s where nineteenth century architecture began to be re-evaluated by taking into account the advancement of these socially-oriented studies. As will be shown below, these studies focused on defining different formal analytical frameworks within which nineteenth century buildings could be evaluated. Some of these frameworks were used as a descriptive tool on a small sample of the most prominent nineteenth century buildings which always fulfilled a cultural or educational purpose, whereas others included 'utilitarian buildings' too. It is the final aim of this chapter to propose a framework for discussing the architectural value of industrial buildings within the same set of rules used for discussing Architecture of the equivalent time.

3.5.1 Tectonic approach Frampton's 1996 Studies in Tectonic Culture is possibly the only study evaluating nineteenth century architecture in terms of theoretical parameters pertinent to its time, where the attention is spread over the whole century and around Europe rather than focusing on one architect of the time only, as was the case in the studies Frampton drew upon from German speaking areas mainly 94 Chapter Three

dating from the 1970s and 1980s. By using Semper's evaluation criteria for nineteenth century architecture, which he considered comparable to those of Viollet- 80 Frampton 1995, 51 le-Duc80, Frampton recognized a number of truly new buildings of the nineteenth century. According to his evaluation, Viollet- le-Duc's "famous 3000-seat hall, roofed by an iron armature, having a 140-foot clear span and asset within a load-bearing neo-Romanesque masonry case […] demonstrates for the first 81 Frampton 1995, 51 time the principles of structural rationalism".81 Unfortunately, the building was never executed. In German countries Frampton found genuinely novel work of the nineteenth century only in the work of Schinkel and primarily in two buildings: the Neuer Packhof warehouse and Bauakademie in Berlin, both built 82 Frampton 1995, 70-71 between 1829 and 1832.82 As Frampton noticed, the Bauakademie was stylistically indebted "to British industrial mill construction of the last 83 Frampton 1995, 67 quarter of the eighteenth century.”83 This is the only reference to industrial architecture or any other 'engineering structures' in Frampton's study. He refers to the works of nineteenth century 84 Frampton 1995, 55 engineers, such as, Hennebique and Conttancin,84 to the extent that their structural inventions were used in designing the truly new pieces of nineteenth century Architecture. It seems that for Frampton, just like for Collins and Giedion before him, nineteenth century Architecture is only that which is designed by architects, possibly in collaboration with engineers, yet not by engineers alone. This criterion for distinguishing architectural from engineering works leads to a particular functional type of buildings designed by architects, those of ecclesiastical and cultural uses. Thus, according to Frampton, the nineteenth century did not produce many buildings which could be seen as an embodiment of a new form measured by the nineteenth century theoretical standards. Frampton in fact dwells for the most part on the theoretical works of Schinkel, Bötticher and particularly Semper and Viollet-le-Duc. It is the work of the latter, entitled Entireties, that Frampton sees as "a more prospective study, above all for the way in which it exploited the cultural history of construction as a means for adducing an appropriate mode for emerging 85 Frampton 1995, 54 present."85 It can be concluded that, according to Frampton, the importance of the nineteenth century lies in its theoretical advancement of the architectural discourse focused on the paths from which new form could possibly emerge, rather than in the actual buildings produced in that century. Both Frampton and Collins agreed that the nineteenth century architects and theorists were not concerned with the spatial arrangements of buildings in the sculptural, twentieth century, Modernist and post-Modernist way. They suggest that the nineteenth century architects and theorists explored a building's tectonics, rather than a building’s spatial arrangement, Industrial Buildings: the First Grand Buildings of the Nineteenth Century 95 as the main means of arriving at new forms. Even Durand’s study, which focuses exclusively on the spatial arrangements of buildings, was only intended and used as a tool for helping architects and engineers to logically arrange complex functions. Yet, unlike Collins, Frampton finds a way to deal with space in relation to the tectonic and to thus make spatial experience important for identifying and describing nineteenth century architectural novelties. Frampton uses Heidegger's opposition between concepts of 'space' and 'place' in order to explain how tectonics play the main role in defining architecture. For Heidegger, "the boundary is that from which something begins its presencing …Space is in essence that from which room has been made, that which is let into its bounds. That for which room is made is always granted and hence is joined, that is, gathered, by virtue of a location…. Accordingly spaces receive their being from locations and not from "space"."86 Frampton therefore concludes that space 86 Frampton 1995, 22 matters in the creation and experience of architecture to the extent of "how something is realized as on an overt manifestation of form. This is not to deny spatial ingenuity but rather to heighten its character through its precise realization."87 Hence, 87 Frampton 1995, 26 space manifests itself through precise tectonic articulations. As we had occasion to see, tectonic articulation is achieved at two levels: one; spatial organisation as taught by Durand, and two; at the level of structural and construction detailing, that is, joints as taught by Viollet-le-Duc and Semper. Frampton used the thus-defined theoretical framework for analysing examples of nineteenth century architecture where the tectonic approach in designing clearly produced an architectural novelty. In the Bibliotheque Ste. Genevieve (1838-1850) and subsequent Bibliotheque Nationale (1854-1875), H. Labrouste combined Durand's typological rigour based on orthogonal type forms or matrices "with tectonic invention and symbolization that went well beyond the abstractions of Durand."88 This is how 88 Frampton 1995, 41 Frampton describes the Ste. Genevieve (picture 23):

Labrouste demonstrated a model and a method […] namely the insertion of a prefabricated, ﬁreproof iron armature into a masonry shell tectonically prepared for its reception. In this instance, the iron framework comprised a double barrel-vaulted roof, made up of lightweight iron sheets, with its roof loads carried on a skeleton of fretted, openwork iron ribs. This assembly rested in part on a central line of cast-iron columns, and in part brackets corbelling out from the masonry perimeter. It is of the utmost importance, as Herman Hertzberger has remarked, that the articulated iron ribs go around the corner at the end of the long volume, thereby unifying the space and forestalling a reading of the library structure as two parallel lines of vaults. Not least among the expressive subtleties of this encased armature is the way its structural module is reﬂected on the exterior. 96 Chapter Three

Iron tie rods, connected to the foot of each iron rib, extend through the thick masonry walls to terminate in circular cast-iron anchor plates, visible on the façade. A similar permeation of the thick masonry case by a metallic tectonic can be found elsewhere in the fabric, above all in cast- iron beams that support the ﬂoor above the entry colonnade and the sundry rails, radiators, and light ﬁttings that furnish the reading room.89

Frampton ended the description of Labrouste's work by depicting the most PICTURE 30: LABROUSTE, BIBLIOTHEQUE NATIONALE, discussed element of the stylistic debate: PERSPECTIVE VIEW the decoration springing out from the process of construction (picture 30):

89 Frampton 1995, 46 One may note, after Peter McCleary, how these two successive masterworks of Labrouste's career amount to a technological transition, as one passes from the craft empiricism of the cast-iron, pin-jointed, foliated arches of the Bibliotheque Ste.-Genevieve to the wrought-iron, riveted, trussed arches of the Bibliotheque Nationale. In both instances, Labrouste strove for a consistent tectonic expression, one in which the ornamentation would be derived directly 90 Frampton 1995, 48 from the process of construction.90

In the work of Schinkel, Frampton finds the most novel element in Schinkel's "drive toward expressive construction, irrespective 91 Frampton 1995, 71 of the status of the building"91, be it as monumental as a palace or church, or as civic as a warehouse or school. A slight difference in the treatment of buildings of different status, however, does appear in his drawing studies of the building structure and construction: whereas for all the buildings it is the structure or Core-Form that constitutes the essential element which articulates their architecture, in the monumental buildings representational elements or Art Form must be emphasised as 92 Frampton 1995, 71 well.92 According to Frampton, Schinkel's 'drive toward expressive construction' was initiated following his visit to Britain in 1826: "he was more interested in advanced iron technology and mill construction than in the civic aspects of contemporary English 93 Frampton 1995, 70 architecture"93 as his trip sketchbook shows. Frampton saw the translation of this "engineering technology" into architecture most clearly in the above-mentioned buildings. The influence is clearly visible in the decrease of the external load-bearing wall thickness as "the building raises upward and the cumulative 94 Frampton 1995, 81 load on the structure reduces."94 (picture 31) In the Packhof , "the round-arched window openings also diminish slightly in width as they move upward from floor to floor, inducing a kind of perspectival monumentality, while a line of semicircular Industrial Buildings: the First Grand Buildings of the Nineteenth Century 97 openings running above the first stringcourse indicates the presence and the status of undercroft."95 In the Bauakademie 95 Frampton 1995, 81 "the upward diminishment between the first- and second- floor studio windows is in both height and width, while the ground-floor fenestration and triadic basement and attic lights correspondingly suppressed, thereby indicating their inferior status. This differential is reinforced by further elaboration in the detailing of the first- and second-floor studio lights, framed by mullions and a transom in iron, covered by a flat brick arch and embellished with acroteria and decorative spandrel panels in terra-cotta."96 Spatially the two buildings are very different: 96 Frampton 1995, 81 Packhof is a combination of two Durand's types, the halle and maison commune resulting in long spaces organised around the central courtyard, internally divided by columns, whereas the interior of Bauakademie is systematically subdivided into rooms of varying sizes by load-bearing brick walls. In Bauakademie "these structural lines were expressed on the façade as vertical piers, thereby entailing a certain suppression of the stringcourses marking the floors."97 Although both can be marked as civic architecture, the level of decoration is still lower in the warehouse than in the school building. PICTURE 31: NEUER PACKHOF, WAREHOUSE, BERLIN These examples indicate that a search for the essence of architecture caused a change 97 Frampton 1995, 81 in the traditional notions of the external as well as internal building elements. In Laugier's terms, the structure was reduced to the column, as the essential structural element, which consequently meant that the wall ceased to be an essential architectural element in theoretical terms. During the nineteenth century, buildings were still built with thick load bearing walls. Yet, as the above examples show, these walls were usually retained only in the outer perimeter of the building. According to Viollet-le-Duc’s understanding of the role of masonry, but also Semper’s theory of architecture, it can be said that the load bearing walls were retained for their representational rather than structural purposes. Following this theory, as well as Frampton's proposal of reading the character of space in terms of the ways it is enclosed, it can be suggested that the wall plays the role of a communicator between two spaces, that of the building and that of the city. We saw that it was extremely important for the architects and theorists of the nineteenth century that the building expressed its essence internally as well 98 Chapter Three

PICTURE 32: COMPARISON BETWEEN BEEHIVE MILL, MANCHESTER(1824) AND LABROUSTE’S BIBLIOTHEQUE (1838)

as externally. Internally, walls began to disappear particularly in the building types that characterized the nineteenth century, such as, railway stations, industrial buildings, libraries, schools. The way to express the essence of the building externally was by placing the decoration on such places on the façade as would mimic the extension of the structural system outside the building's perimeter. In this way the wall became the Industrial Buildings: the First Grand Buildings of the Nineteenth Century 99 communicator of the building's character, its representational face. Therefore, symbolically, the wall was still needed as a canvas, a background for expressing the building's status through the decorative elaboration of places where the essence of the building revealed itself to the public. Let us now compare Labrouste’s Bibliotheque from 1838 and Beehive Mill in Manchester from 1824. (picture PICTURE 33: PLAN BRUNSWICK MILL, MANCHESTER, C.1840 32) The mill:

has a fireproof construction and includes unusual examples of the innovative use of case and wrought iron.98[It has] flag floors laid on a 98 M. Williams with D.A.Farnie grid of interlocking cast-iron beams. Its roof is a cast and wrought- Cotton Mills in Greater iron spaceframe structure.99 Manchester (Preston: Carnegie Publishing Ltd., 1992), 151

As we see on the picture, the iron structure is encased in a 99 M.Williams with D.A.Farnie thick perimeter wall. In terms of plan, the mill is comparable 1992, 152 to the 1840 Brunswick Mill in Manchester, only with just one row of columns. (picture 33) The main difference between the Bibliotheque and the mill lies in the character of their spaciousness achieved with different ﬂoor heights of each building. Had it been functionally possible to preserve the mill roof structure, the impressiveness of the spatial character of the mill would have been comparable to that of the Bibliotheque. (picture 34) The aim of this brief comparison was solely to illustrate how 100 T.A.Markus, Buildings industrial buildings, although fulﬁlling a utilitarian function, and Power: Freedom and Control when evaluated through a tectonic framework could rise up to in the Origin of Modern Building Types (London: Routledge, 1993) the occasion to be called ‘grand buildings ‘of the nineteenth century, next to more traditionally recognised buildings of 101 Markus 1993, xix culture.

3.5.2 Spatial Approach In his study entitled the Power and Buildings, Markus analysed and interpreted all those buildings such as hospitals, schools, and army barracks as well as factories, which began to appear as new functional types during the eighteenth century and which reached their full architectural development by 1850.100 His main thesis is that the buildings are "not primarily art, technical or investment objects, but social objects."101 He analysed the buildings in terms of form, function and space, as well PICTURE 34: BEEHIVE MILL, MANCHESTER,1824, ROOF STRUCTURE 100 Chapter Three

as written and graphical texts on these buildings, in order to investigate in which way these buildings and texts reflect the social relations characteristic for the society which built them. In doing so, he identified a set of social relations which can be used as an additional tool for typological classifications and analysis of buildings,102 thus contributing to the body of knowledge on architectural and urban typologies. What becomes crucial for this thesis is the analysis of the structure of space, both abstract -that of the social relations - and material, as defined by buildings' walls; a distinction explained by Lefebvre.103 Using Hillier and Hanson's spatial syntax approach for the analysis of the structure of space, he adopted the main premises of their study: first, the buildings' users are divided into inhabitants and visitors of which "the former have an investment of power PICTURE 35: STRUTT'S NORTH MILL, BELPER, 1803-4 and are the controllers; the latter enter or stay as subjects of system - the controlled -"104; second, that space and society share one thing 102 Markus 1993, 38 which describes them both - social relations; third, "social 103 Markus adopted this organisations are of two kinds: organic solidarity and mechanical division of space from H. solidarity. The former consists of mutually interdependent Lefebvre The Production of Space relations where everyone has a role. It is often highly structured published for the first time in 1974 and first published in and hierarchical and usually needs to be closely related in English in 1991 space.[…] The latter is the relation between people, often equal, 104 Markus 1993, 13 who share beliefs. […] It often has no programmed spatial 105 Markus 1993, 13 requirements - it is trans-spatial."105 The main architectural element that ties the abstract social relations with the built world is the number and nature of entrances. Markus used the above described premises and outcomes as a tool for the investigation of two kinds of social relations, 106 Markus 1993, xx, 21 i.e., power relations and bond relations106 in the institutions 107 These institutions are: developed in the eighteenth and nineteenth century.107 As far as prisons, hospitals, asylums and the factories are concerned, Markus argued that "all factories workhouses. have three structures - social, spatial and power transmission."108 108 Markus 1993, 264 He explained that the components of the social structure were 109 Markus 1993, 264 the owner of the mill, one supervisor on each floor and a worker at each machine. The spatial structure encompassed the space of the whole building "containing all its processes"109, the space of each floor, accommodating a single process, and the spaces occupied by each machine, dedicated to the fragment of the process. Technologically, there was one water wheel, Industrial Buildings: the First Grand Buildings of the Nineteenth Century 101 subsequently a steam engine, which drove one vertical shaft. The vertical shaft in turn drove the horizontal shafts at each floor to which individual machines were connected by belts.110 (picture 110 Markus 1993, 264 35) In textile mills these three structures became homologous for the first time in the history of factory buildings in the mid eighteenth century.111 (picture 36) He argued that the force that 111 Markus 1993, 264 made these three structures homologue was the technology of power transmission.112 112 Markus 1993, 264 Markus explained that the mill buildings were usually owned by one owner who, in many cases, sold or rented entire floors, on which those who rented them carried out their individual production.113 Markus argued that the new single vertical shaft 113 Markus 1993, 264 power transmission system allowed the owner to charge rent for the power. According to Markus, this "top-bottom" hierarchical structure of the technological system was mapped in the other two. As there existed mills in which the new centralised power transmission was found next to the old decentralised system,

PICTURE 36: HOMOLOGY OF MECHANICAL POWER, DISTRIBUTION, SOCIAL STRUCTURE AND SPATIAL STRUCTURE IN TEXTILE MILLS USING HILLIER AND HANSON'S SPATIAL SYNTAX APPROACH 102 Chapter Three

where one vertical shaft drove one horizontal shaft, Markus asked whether the use of technology of power systems and, thus, the spatial organisation of some parts of the building, was in fact dictated by the social relations characteristic to the particular 114 Markus 1993, 270 mill.114 Although the analogies that he made between the 115 Markus 1993, 267 three structures of a mill are plausible, his claim that it is 116 M. Stratton and B. Trinder, the technological logic that made a building homologue is Industrial England, (London: contradictory to the chronology of the introduction of the English Heritage, 1997), 56 three systems. He stated that the silk mill in Derby had the old decentralised power system at the same time that the social and spatial relations between the owner, supervisors and workers already had the centralised structure as described above. If the analogy of these two systems with that of the power transmission is accepted, then it means that the power system was adjusted to the existing social relations. This further means that the social relations are those which inﬂuence spatial as well as technological changes, yet on a case-by-case basis, rather than the other way around. He also conducted an extensive formal analysis of the mills where he related the changes of the structural systems and overall building form to the needs for accommodating advanced production technology, therefore, the industrial archaeological approach to the building analysis.115 However, the greatest shortcoming of Markus's study is his unwillingness or inability to relate the spatial syntax of the mills to their formal syntax. Despite the identiﬁed weakness of this study, it remains the only one which offers a both formal and social-spatial analysis of industrial buildings.

3.5.3 Stylistic Approach "Victorian industrial architecture was inﬂuenced by debates over choices of style and materials. Speciﬁc forms and styles were deemed appropriate for particular building types and locations."116 Just like in the rest of Europe, in England the architectural debate was focusing PICTURE 37: TOBACCO FACTORY MARSEILLE, FRANCE - THE on the same issues of essence and COMPLEX AND THE MAIN ENTRANCE representation in architecture during the Industrial Buildings: the First Grand Buildings of the Nineteenth Century 103

PICTURE 38: THE FLEX-SPINNING MILL, LEEDS, UK better part of the nineteenth century. In order to overcome the traditional architectural historical way of evaluating industrial buildings according to the style or architect, Stratton and Trinder proposed to classify the industrial buildings built between the mid eighteenth to the beginning of the twentieth century into three groups: sub-idiomatic structure, idiomatic structure and ﬂagship architecture.117 The sub-idiomatic are usually the 117 Stratton and Trinder 1997, 51 smallest in terms of scale and with hardly any decorations on the elevations. The idiomatic are bigger and carefully detailed structurally and decoratively in the architectural style of the day. Flagship buildings are the largest and most expensively decorated internally and externally. Stratton and Trinder put forward a proposition according to which "it would be easy to relate the scale to the hierarchy of designers involved"118 118 Stratton and Trinder 1997, 51 according to which the sub-idiomatic were possibly built 104 Chapter Three

by workers on the site, the idiomatic by local architects and engineers and the flagship by a "figurehead" local architect. 119 Stratton and Trinder 1997, 51 All building types "can be perceived in every period"119 and often all three types can be found within a single larger complex. In the cases where one finds all three types on a single site, the sub-idiomatic structures, usually used as secondary storages and auxiliary workshops, are "built from waste materials at the back of the site, carefully detailed idiomatic workshops in the middle, and a dramatic erecting shop or office block providing an 120 Stratton and Trinder 1997, 51 impressive frontage."120 (picture 37, 38) Stratton and Trinder found that it was in flagship buildings of all periods that the most advance production as well as building technologies were used: "Their architects and owners intended them to make statements about the place of manufacturing in society. They do not follow past fashions in industrial 121 Stratton and Trinder 1997, 58 architecture. They may dictate those of the future."121 During his visit to England, Schinkel asked to be taken into the flagship 122 Stratton and Trinder 1997, 59 buildings122 as well as the idiomatic ones The described division, as well as the knowledge that architects and engineers maintained that buildings of different status deserved different levels of decoration, allow us to propose the following. A single industrial complex with such a variety of building types constituted an example of the hierarchy- of-representation practice with relation to a building's basic use: the buildings of lesser importance for the overall production process, like sub-idiomatic structures, received the least architectural attention, the main workshops received much more, whereas the headquarters buildings and main production halls were considered the face of the company and thus received architectural attention equal to that of a church, bank or school. Stratton and Trinder conducted the architecturally-oriented study of industrial buildings by using the data collected during an industrial archaeological investigation of these buildings. Unsurprisingly, being industrial archaeologists and thus unequipped with the architectural theoretical discourse, these researchers did not propose a framework for architecturally 123 Stratton and Trinder 1997, 55 evaluating the buildings within each of the proposed types. 123. Following the working methods of the three chosen studies, a methodological framework is proposed here for an analysis of industrial buildings: first they are categorised according to Stratton's and Trinder's classification, and then discussed within a framework which focuses on the tectonic and socio-spatial characteristics of a building. In this way industrial buildings can be evaluated within their own type first, and then those of the idiomatic and flagship architectural quality can be compared with the rest of the nineteenth century architecture. Lets us now contextualise this proposal in relation to the objective of this thesis, that is, in what way the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of an industrial building can be described through Industrial Buildings: the First Grand Buildings of the Nineteenth Century 105 architectural historical means. Organicism defined in a rhetorical way is the plan or strategy that explains why – achieving of purposive unity - and how – by showing the methods of making buildings – the formal totality of a building is achieved. Now, it was explained in the previous chapter that unity has a qualitative and quantitative aspect. If organicism is accepted as its qualitative aspect, it is proposed here that the tectonic-spatio- stylistic character of a building's form is its quantitative aspect. It is furthermore proposed here that organicism describes the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings in conceptual terms, while the type of formal analysis used to describe it is that of analysing the tectonic-spatio-stylistic relationships of a building.

Conclusion Drawing upon nineteenth and twentieth century sources on the architectural discourse of the nineteenth century, this chapter has shown that industrial buildings featured in both these sources as a formal prototype of the nineteenth century building. However, both sources denied these buildings any architectural value. Because they housed a utilitarian rather than a cultural function, industrial buildings were presented primarily as a testing ﬁeld for structural technological innovation rather than for their own particular architectural quality. According to the reviewed sources, they lacked aesthetic quality because they were primarily the work of engineers. Chapter Two indicated that industrial buildings were the result of collaborations between engineer-architects and architects who were each responsible for different parts of the building design. Furthermore, it was shown that both professions shared similar educational curricula in both structural and design matters. Thus, based on these two facts, the criticism concerning a lack of aesthetic considerations in the design of industrial buildings is dismissed in this chapter. Consequently, it is proposed that the design of industrial buildings represents an aesthetic canon different from that which is recognised in the existing studies: while these studies tie nineteenth century industrial buildings to the notion of functionalism, it is proposed in this chapter that they represent the notion of nineteenth century organicism as explained in Chapter Two. In fact, this chapter proposes that the industrial buildings are the ﬁrst building types where this new canon became visible. Following a historical evaluation of industrial buildings, this chapter ends with the proposition that organicism is the aesthetic concept which describes the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the industrial buildings. As such, it has since that time been a qualitative tool guiding the conversion design of industrial buildings. To what extent the rhetorical character of organicism allows for both the preservation and change through reuse will be examined in Chapter Four through the above-proposed tectonic-spatio-stylistic analysis of several conversion designs of a single industrial building. 106 107

Chapter Four Preserving Through Change: an Evaluation

Introduction The aim of this chapter is to investigate the extent to which the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings, defined as a rhetorical notion (Chapter Two), can be used as a yardstick to measure the minimal intervention in formal terms (Chapter One). This investigation is conducted on the design proposals of the six finalists participating in the competition for the conversion of the Bankside Power Station to Tate Modern in London. Since the chosen building was not protected, the architects could propose any approach towards the old they maintained appropriate. Thus, as a secondary objective, this chapter will also examine the ways in which the leading architects of today approach the problem of the relationship between the old and the new in order to compare them with those maintained by the conservationists. Finally, the discussion will address the extent to which the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the old is preserved, and of the old and new is achieved, through such conversions in order to take a final standpoint in relation to the main proposition of this thesis, that is, the rhetorical rather than the stylistic interpretation of ‘aesthetic integrity’ for the purpose of measuring the minimality of the intervention in formal terms.

4.1 Giles G. Scott and Nineteenth Century Organicism Giles G. Scott is the third generation of the architectural family of the Scotts, which began with his grandfather George (1811- 1 http://www.britannica.com/ 1878), continued with his father George G. Scott Jr. (1839 – 1897) EBchecked/topic/529593/Sir- and uncle John Oldrid Scott (1841-1913) as well as himself and Giles-Gilbert-Scott his brother Adrian Gilbert Scott (1882 – 1963).1 Educated in the 2 Stamp, G. ‘Giles Gilbert Scott ofﬁce of Temple Lushington Moore from 1899 until 1902, who and Bankside Power Station’, was an apprentice of Giles’s father George Jr.,2 Giles continued Building Tate Modern, edited by 3 Moore, R. and. Ryan, R. (London: the Gothic Revival approach to architecture, which his Tate Gallery Publishing, 2000): grandfather had initially promoted mainly through his restoration (176-190),178 work on cathedrals around England during the nineteenth 3 Stamp, 178 century.4 4 Pevsner 108 Chapter Four

Stamp argued that Giles found his own architectural expression in combining his traditionalist architectural upbringing with the emerging early twentieth century Modernist 5 Stamp, 179 tendencies.5 “Despite his training as a Goth, Scott was wholly 6 Stamp, 179 undoctrinaire about style”,6 concluded Stamp after listing a number of various neo-styles in which Giles built different 7 Stamp, 179 functional types of buildings.7 Giles himself stated that “it seems to me idle to compare styles and say that one is better 8 Giles G. Scott, Journal of the than another,”8 but he did maintain that “we have to consider RIBA, 11 Nov 1933, pp.5-14, in the purpose of the building. It is obvious that a factory, for Stamp, 179 instance, requires a different treatment to a cathedral or town hall as regards decoration inside and out, though this modernist movement largely disregards this and prescribes the same 9 Giles G. Scott, notebook austerity and bleak absence of ornament for all buildings.”9 He no.16 [British Architectural expressed this formally by choosing, as a rule, the somewhat Library ScGG/1/15], punctuation more austere Art Deco or Expressionist approach to decoration introduced , reprinted in Stamp, p.183 for his industrial opus, saving the other more decorated traditional styles for civic and ecclesiastical buildings. The four Doric columns/chimneys of the Battersea Power Station, worked out in concrete, combined with the Expressionist treatment of the rest of the building’s exterior, are nothing but a proof of his 10 Stamp, 179 ‘more intuitive than intellectual’10 approach to decoration and design. It seems that his ‘intuitive’ approach to design was materialized only with the choice of decoration. As Stamp showed, Giles worked very comfortably with engineers on projects with a complex technological and functional brief, as was the case of rebuilding the House of Commons after its partial demolition during Second World War actions in 1941, and particularly on industrial buildings. For the sake of argument in the making here, it is worth quoting at some length G.G.Scott on the matter of collaboration with engineers for the new power station at Rye House on the River Lea.

I confine my work entirely to matters of appearance and as this is largely influenced by the plan and the location of the main units in relation to each other, it is essential that I come in early. Having arrived at a satisfactory grouping, I prepare elevations, and when 11 Scott to Howard Robertson, these are approved I do scale details and full-sizes, select the 17 October 1947 [British materials, visit the job occasionally to see that these materials are architectural Library], quoted in used in the right way, and inspect sample walling, etc. but I do not Stamp, 181 superintend the erection, nor transact the business side. All this is 12 Stamp; The Tate Archive done by the promoters’ architectural staff, or another architect, who file numbered TG 12/7/2/2, also prepare the necessary working drawings embodying, of course, ‘Introduction and Architectural my details in them.11 Notes by G. Stamp’ and ‘K. Powell, ‘The Twentieth Century Society Report on The Bankside Electric Power Station is G.G. Scott's masterpiece the Architectural Value of the among the industrial buildings and structures of his overall Bankside’ architectural opus.12 However, the Battersea Power Station as Preserving Through Change: an Evaluation 109 well as Waterloo Bridge are better known pieces of work by the same architect, although Scott only finalised the existing design of the former, originally made by the firm Halliday & Agate13, by 13 Stamp, 180 remodelling the exterior. Stamp argued:

Bankside is our swan–song.[…] Sir Giles Gilbert Scott produced his final essay in power station design and […] was able both to arrange the masses and to redefine his style to create a piece of Architecture which was an original and pure monumental expression of industrial and electric power – which is also urbane and elegant. Battersea was 14 TG 12/7/2/2, ‘ Introduction a compromise, Rye House was never finished; Bankside is a complete and Architectural Notes by G. masterpiece.14 Stamp’

Although built in 1953, the architecture of the Bankside power station resembles the works of Dutch Expressionism, especially the work of W.M. Dudok, with whose work Scott was particularly impressed.15 (picture 39). Stamp argued that G.G. Scott’s entire work opus was also influenced by that of “Wright and other architects of his generation [who shared ] an interest in the sublime grandeur of the monuments of the ancient world whose geometrical purity made them somewhat resonant with the modern industrial age”16. Most importantly, G.G. Scott maintained that even an PICTURE 39: W.M. DUDOK, JOHANNES CALVIJNSCHOOL, HILVERSUM industrial building can be a fine building just like a church: “Why power stations should be considered as 15 Stamp, 185 ‘untouchables’, I cannot say. […] It is an opinion formed, I feel, 16 Stamp, 185-186 by past experiences. Power stations can be fine buildings, but it must be demonstrated.”17 And he did demonstrate it with the 17 Stamp. 182 Bankside Power Station. In short, it can be proposed that G.G. Scott’s work, particularly the industrial buildings, was guided by the main aesthetic notions developed in the nineteenth century, particularly by the line of thought claiming that a new style would emerge from creative use of new materials: structural expressiveness, decorations resulting from the use of a particular building material, rationalisation in the spatial planning of a building, close working relationship with engineers, recognition of industrial buildings as a type of building worthy of architectural consideration (Chapter Two). In this respect, it can be proposed that his work embodies an aesthetical notion of the nineteenth century - that of organicism. Consequently, this notion can be used in order to describe the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of his industrial buildings. 110 Chapter Four

4.2 Bankside Power Station

4.2.1 Bankside’s tectonic-spatio-stylistic analysis The Bankside Power Station was designed by Sir Giles Gilbert Scott in 1947 and was built in two stages. By 1953 the western half of the building and the chimney were put into use, while the other half of the building was officially opened in 1963.18 It is located on the south bank of the river Thames, opposite to St. Paul's Cathedral, which became the main reference point for Scott's design of the Bankside. On the one hand, he wanted to show how a power station could be just as fine a building as a church.19 On the other hand, the cathedral influenced the main decisions governing design on the Bankside simply through its spatial proximity. Seen from the south bank of the Thames, the composition of St. Paul's masses and PICTURE 40: G.G.SCOTT, INITIAL DESIGN the position of the entrance to the building in relation WITH TWO CHIMNEYS to the surrounding cityscape imply a symmetrically organised building, facing the river. By its position, the transept which contains the side entrances breaks up St. Paul's longitudinality almost exactly in the middle of the longitudinal mass. The dome marks the crossing of the naval part and the transept. In order to match up to St. Paul’s, Scott reduces the number of verticals of the new power station from the two initially designed to one (Picture 40), and he frees up the chimney by placing it in the middle of the elevation parallel to the river (Picture 41). The power station's ‘bell tower’ chimney became the dome’s counterpart on the other side of the river (Picture

PICTURE 41: G.G. SCOTT, FINAL DESIGN PICTURE 42: ST. PAUL AND BANKSIDE, AERIAL VIEW Preserving Through Change: an Evaluation 111

PICTURE 43: TURBINE HALL PICTURE 44: BOILER HOUSE PICTURE 45: STRUCTURAL SYSTEM

42). The symmetrical division of the Bankside was further 18 These chronological facts emphasised by setting back the middle part of the building as a are taken from A. Hardwicke separate cube-like mass in front of which the chimney stands, ‘Chronology’, Building Tate Modern, (London: Tate Gallery while the left and right parts stretched from it like side wings. Publishing, 2000),191 With the three decisions mentioned above, Scott managed to equalize the view from the north bank to the south: both sides of 19 Stamp, 182 the river have large symmetrically organised buildings facing one another, conversing with each other primarily with the position of their main vertical mass. Just like in the case of St. Paul’s, the Bankside does not have symmetrically organised spaces inside. Instead, it is divided into three main longitudinal spaces, each originally housing a separate part of the electricity transformation process: boiler house, turbine hall and switch house. The space of the first two creates one building mass, while that of the third, a separate mass lower and shorter than the former. Every space was filled with the appropriate machinery. The turbine hall was filled with machines only at basement level and ground floor (Picture 43), while the whole height of the boiler house was filled with machines (Picture 44). In order to allow the accessibility of all parts of the machines in the boiler house, a number of staircases and bridges were introduced, which stretched along the turbine hall as viewing galleries. While physical and visual connection existed between these two spaces, the switch house was treated as a separate space, divided from the other two by a wall. The two parts of the bigger space had the same architectural characteristics: same size (length, width, height), same structural characteristics – steel frame supporting steel roof trusses, same kind of roof light positioned in the middle of the space. (Picture 45). The only difference between the two spaces was in the number and position of windows. These differences simply spring from the position of the spaces in the building: while 112 Chapter Four

the centrally positioned turbine hall had only one group of five vertically positioned strip windows at each end, the boiler house, one of the laterally positioned spaces, was naturally lit through additional six groups of the same window composition placed on the longitudinal north elevation. The switch house is a space with only one horizontal strip of windows at the very top of this 20 The section of this part building mass.20 of the building could not be A steel frame structure supports the outside walls made in located. exposed red brick from both sides. The red brick has acquired a patina over time, turning the building's exterior dark brown. Plasticity and the appearance of the mass play on all elevations are achieved by a layering of bold planes of brickwork. Designed in the late 1940s, the Bankside is a living testimony 21 Stamp, 179-180: Scott’s to Scott's 'middle line' approach to design, a line between traditional, 19th century, eclectic "extreme diehard Traditionalist [and] extreme Modernist" approach to architectural design defined in his own words as "the best ideas of modernism been is evident in his opus of Neo- 21 Gothic cathedrals built around grafted upon the best traditions of the past". In the manner of Britain (Liverpool cathedral is what Stamp evaluates as masterly use of Expressionism, Scott among the most known of his succeeded in his intention to show that an industrial building can church works). be an architecturally fine building too.

4.2.2 Bankside’s organic Let us now define the of Bankside as an embodiment of organicism, meaning that the viewer has to understand how the building looks like it does. The original function needed a hall-like space, not necessarily divided in three and not necessarily longitudinal in character. The longitudinal tripartite spatial character of the interior is the result of a design decision sprung out from the shape of the site, from the design consideration of the skyline of that part of London (picture 40) and the used type of building structure. It is the spatial division that allows for the understanding of how and why the building was made and used, that is to say, its ‘aesthetic integrity’. Windows were not needed for the original function. In fact, one of Scott’s preliminary sketches presented closed volumes, without any windows, whereas PICTURE 46: STUDY FOR THE ELEVATION DESIGN another showed a study of the division of the elevation in reference to the elevations of the neighbouring buildings, which were originally warehouses. (picture 46). Accordingly, the Preserving Through Change: an Evaluation 113 introduction of windows was a design decision based on a formal relationship with the surroundings rather than on the functional need of the use to be housed there. The same can be said of the overall shape, that is, the of the building - the rather closed longitudinal box the length of which is broken by the central position of the chimney. When observed within its wider physical context, it can be seen how the of the Bankside exterior came to life. The volume of the building, as well as the design of the elevations, do not have a bearing on the spatial or structural character of the interior. Is this the case of two kind of ‘aesthetic integrity’, one internal and one external, two hows of the building's making? I would suggest: no. If the shape and size of the site and skyline considerations influenced the overall shape of the building from the outside, then the choice of structure and the spatial division are a result of the interaction between the spatial needs of the use housed there and design consideration of the building’s volume. Therefore, it is proposed here that the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the building is made of two interrelated hows: one refers to the material creation and the other to the formal creation. A piece of Architecture which achieved a unity in itself always has both. 22 R. Moore and R. Ryan, 4.3 Bankside: G.G. Scott's unprotected masterpiece Building Tate Modern, (London: Bankside was first to cease generating electricity in 1980 and Tate Gallery Publishing, 2000), 22 191;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Battersea followed in 1983. Battersea was given statutory Battersea_Power_Station protection in 1980 as a Grade II listed building, meaning that the building could not be destroyed and that a permission should be 23 See respectively: TG issued from the pertinent planning office for any alteration to it. 12/1/1/7, ‘Save Britain’s Heritage That same year, the SAVE Britain's Heritage group wrote a report report’; TG 12/7/2/2, ‘The Twentieth Century Society on the possibilities of Bankside's conversion and The Twentieth Report’ Century Society reported on its architectural importance following an architectural evaluation of the building by Stamp.23 24 R. Moore and R. Ryan, 2000, Although it is not clear from the available archive material (nor 191. In fact, English Heritage it is relevant for this thesis) who lobbied for listing the Bankside proposed it for listing as a Grade II* “which would have placed and when, it is clear that in February 1993 the Department of it within the 6% of buildings National Heritage declared "that the power station does not of “special architectural and merit listing, in spite of representations of English Heritage"24. historic interest”, see TG Furthermore, the same department issued immunity to listing 12/4/2/3, ‘English Heritage’s the building until 1998.25 Thus, Battersea, "an architectural letter of complain to the Tate’. compromise", is a listed building while Bankside, ‘an architectural 25 TG 12/4/2/6, ‘Tate Gallery masterpiece’, is not. And yet, the unprotected Bankside was of Modern Art: Background given a successful new life in 2000 through its conversion into Information’ Tate Modern, while the conversion of the protected Battersea 26 For a detailed Battersea has been an ongoing process for the last 30 years, the politics of conversion process see http:// which caused the decay of this protected building.26 www.thepowerstation.co.uk/ sales%5Fand%5Fleasing/, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Battersea_Power_Station 114 Chapter Four

27 Unless noted otherwise all 4.4 Bankside and Tate's Architectural Vision of It 27 information and quotations in The Tate Gallery bought the Bankside in 1993. Although the this section refer to TG 12/4/2/6, generating parts of the station had been out of use for 13 years ‘Competition Brief’, pp. 2,9,15 and 30 at the time of purchase, the building's overall condition was good because the switching station was still in use (it closed down in 2005) and therefore requiring maintenance of the entire building. In summer 1994 the Tate held an architectural competition for the conversion of the Bankside. The winner was announced in February 1995. The works on the building began in 1997. Tate Modern was opened in 2000 as one of the millennium projects of London, in addition to the Dome, Millennium Bridge and London Eye. Tate’s preference for locating a museum of modern art in a converted industrial building, rather than in a newly built one, stemmed from an extensive inquiry of artists about the kind of space where they would like to work and exhibit their work. These spaces are described as naturally lit, preferably converted, where "architectural intervention was minimal". Tate presented their preference for a conversion rather than a new building as a desire to create "a new urban model" for the museum of modern art as an alternative to the existing urban models, such as the MOMA in New York and the Centre Georges Pompidou in Paris. Tate's public releases explained the choice of an old redundant industrial building for accommodating the gallery of modern art as primarily based on two arguments. First, the gallery would contribute to the regeneration of Southwark, the part of London 28 TG 12/1/1/7, ‘SAVE’s report’ where even taxi drivers refused to go to in 1980.28 Second, the project was a regeneration scheme of architectural heritage. Drafts of the Competition Brief were sent for consultation to several third parties, including Richard Burdett, Director of the Architectural Foundation in London who was also the chairman of the advisory panel of the competition. Among other things, he suggested that a more extensive explanation of the architectural potential of the building needed to be included. He wrote, "explore the architectural potential of the building, 29 TG 12/4/2/3 can knock floors and walls out. (emphasis added)"29 Conversely, English Heritage, the other consulted party, was quite surprised that the building was not listed despite their suggestions to give 30 TG 12/4/2/3 ‘letter from it Grade II* status30. They wanted their view of the recognised English Heritage to Stuart architectural and historic interest of the building to be included Lipton’ in the Competition Brief. Moreover, English Heritage objected to "the open invitation to remove windows. Some modifications will certainly be necessary, but why not leave that for the 31 TG 12/4/2/3 ‘letter from competitors?"31 English Heritage to Stuart In the official version of the Competition Brief, the above Lipton’ suggestions were translated as follows: "To give it [Bankside] a public and civic sense it will need to be opened up, with large scale interventions within and through the structure […] This requires boldness tempered by a respect for symmetry and Preserving Through Change: an Evaluation 115 power of Giles Scott's massive brickwork and windows." Since the Tate saw the Bankside as "an austere building, designed by the distinguished architect Sir Giles Gilbert Scott", they recommended that the "following areas may be changed […] removal of the existing windows and brick mullions on the west, north and east [are allowed]". Finally, they encourage the architects to have a "clear vision, a bold strategy and the courage to add to Giles Scott's impressive statement."

4.5 The Benefit of the Hidden Paradox The above quotes would suggest that the Tate conveyed a clear message to the competing architects regarding their relationship to the old. Their position could be summarised as follows: we give you an unprotected old industrial building, still in good physical condition, which we want you to open up to civic life by destroying its austerity. In order to achieve this you can treat the existing building to your liking. However, it was exactly the opposite preference that led Tate to a conversion rather than a new building: the artists' preference for converted spaces with minimal architectural intervention. The Competition Brief contained both messages. It was obvious that architects had to make up their minds as to the one to follow. And it was also obvious that such opposed facts did not convey a clear message to competitors regarding Tate's preferences as to the treatment of the building, leaving the Tate with much room for manoeuvre in deciding on the winning scheme. Or should one say ‘architectural firm’ rather than ‘scheme’, since the Competition Brief clearly stated that the winner would not be chosen on the basis of the best scheme but rather on the basis of the best performing firm.32 32 TG 12/4/2/6, ‘Competition In order to ensure their eligibility based on this last criterion, Brief’, 4 all competitors needed to send in a portfolio of their projects relevant to the theme of the competition already at the first stage 33 TG 12/4/6/1, ‘Minutes of the competition. Members of the jury looked at the majority of from Assessors’ meeting on the relevant projects of these six firms and visited their offices 14&15 November 1994, 12th presentation – Rem Koolhaas prior to making a final decision about the winner. Following the – Office for Metropolitan visits to OMA offices, the firm was evaluated as "surrounded by Architecture’, 9 chaos and exhaustion".33 The minutes from the jury meetings of the six finalists reveal that architectural considerations, such 34 TG 12/4/6/1, ‘Minutes from as circulations of different users and relationships with the Assessors’ meeting on 14&15 surrounding neighbourhood area, played an equally important November 1994’ role in deciding on the winning project as did the firms' operation 35 TG 12/4/7/4/1, and organisation.34 ‘Correspondence’. It is However, the relationship with the old does not feature in the interesting to note that this archive file does not contain minutes as one of the jury's prominent evaluation criteria. And Koolhaas’s letter but only the yet, in the letter of consolidation written to Koolhaas in response jury’s letters to Koolhaas. It to his previous complaint about the jury results,35 Sir Simon remains unclear exactly which Hornby, chairman of the assessors panel, explained that the jury points of the jury process finally chose Herzog & de Meuron's scheme "because it took the Koolhaas complained about. 116 Chapter Four

36 TG 12/4/7/4/1, ‘letter to old more into account and altered it less [than OMA's scheme]."36 Koolhaas ref. no. TGMA 8/2/1995’ In Tate's main publication on the transformation of the Bankside, Ryan wrote: "Why did the Swiss team win? Paradoxically, because they proposed the least drastic changes to the Bankside. […] Londoners will still be able to recognise Giles Scott's power 37 R. Ryan, ‘Transformation’, in station."37 This means that for the public, the old played an Building Tate Modern, (London: important role, while, in fact, behind jury doors, other motives Tate Gallery Publishing, 2000), 19 ruled. Exclusion from listing assured uncontrolled changes to the Bankside building during the conversion process, even allowing demolition as an extreme case. The Tate let the architects decide which way they wanted to approach the building, that is to say, which parts of the building they wanted to preserve or alter. However, it seems that the Tate did have a standpoint in relation to the old: the only architectural consideration that really mattered to the Tate was the convincingly enough unaltered appearance of the old building. The Tate played a double game at two crucial stages of the conversion process. They bought an empty building aware of its architectural importance, yet managed to secure its exclusion from listing for a period of time. At the same time, they portrayed their conversion option to the public as care for an abandoned, yet architecturally desirable, space for conversion. Then, they offered an unprotected building to the architects and, in doing so, gave them a free hand in their choice of approach to the conversion. Yet, the project that was chosen was the one which altered the appearance of the old the least. In their game, the old benefited the most: it was given a new life through a new use in a short period of time without major alterations. Sir G.G. Scott's masterpiece was saved through an intervention which only lightly touches the old building. Or at least that is what the Tate wants us to see. Tate's successful effort to exclude the Bankside from listing enabled it to bypass the conservationists' guide through a process of conversion and made architects the sole interpreters of the given architectural condition. The Tate created a situation in which it was possible to compare works and standpoints toward the old of the most well-known architects of today without the influence of conservationists. In analysing the competition entries of the six finalists of the Bankside conversion, the following issues will be addressed: how do the architects treat the old conceptually? In which way do they translate their conceptual positions into the reality of the intervention? Which architectural elements of the old building are respected through the conversion and are still recognisable in the new design? First, the Bankside is described in terms of Sir Scott’s design intentions, building's relationship to the city and its overall architectural characteristics. Preserving Through Change: an Evaluation 117

4.6 Coexistence, Imposition, Fusion: Three Approaches to the Interpretation of the Old

"Perhaps the aesthetic model to adopt is that of the Persian carpet, clearly patched and mended over time, in which areas of formal perfection can coexist comfortably with the threadbare. In this way, part of the building could be brought up to the most modern technological levels of finish and polish, while others would be left exactly as they are."38. 38 TG 12/4/6/2, ‘Chipperfield - David Chipperfield Submission for Stage 1’, 1a

Any intervention outside will look ridiculous in terms of scale39 39 TG 12/4/7/5/1, ‘Renzo … industrial buildings [have] raw, sincere, unpretentious spaces Piano Workshop Wednesday 30 which cannot easily be intimidated by art.40 November 1994 13:00-17:00’ Renzo Piano 40 TG 12/4/7/9, ‘Minutes of Assessors’ Meeting on 16 Interventions in existing contexts leave two choices: infiltration and 17 January 1995 Stage 2 Presentations, 2nd session – or imposition. To succeed, the first needs subtlety, the second, Renzo Piano Workshop’, 29 power. In this case, our interventions in the wider urban context can only be suggestive; "power" is limited to the interior of an existing building. This dualism has inspired the project.41 41 TG 12/4/6/5, ‘OMA - OMA Submission for Stage 1: Urbanism, point 1’ "Our strategy was to accept the physical power of Bankside's massive, mountain-like brick building and to even enhance it rather than breaking it up or trying to diminish it."42 “[They were 42 Herzog&deMeuron, ‘Tate discovering] step by step where we should hold back and where Modern’, in Quaderns no. 230, should be more pushy, more aggressive. That had nothing to do July 2001, (62-71), 65 with more or less respect for the existing building but only what will be the final result. We treated the Scott building like part of our own structure, not something which is worse or different."43 43 J. Herzog, N. Serota and R. Herzog&deMeuron Moore, ‘Conversation’, Building Tate Modern, (London: Tate Gallery Publishing, 2000), 45 The Basic Concept: Architectural Fusion [encompasses the following intentions:] reactivating a sense of historicity and at the same time transforming the site into a stage for new creative energy. We intend to create a space for the future that is formed by the clash between elements from different ages, each expressing itself without losing its own singularity.44Hence the 44 TG 12/4/6/8, ‘T. Ando - intense collision between different spaces produced by the three Submission for Stage 1’, 1 materials [brick, glass and concrete] becomes 'a space for the 21st century made of 20th century materials.45 45 TG 12/4/6/8, ‘T. Ando - Tadao Ando Submission for Stage 1’ 2

The acceptance of the intrinsic economic value of the Bankside Power Station means that this proposal will maintain as much as possible of the existing fabric without altering its iconographic impact on the Thames embankment.46 46 TG 12/4/6/14, ‘J.R. Moneo Jose Rafael Moneo - Submission for Stage 1’ 118 Chapter Four

TABLE 1: ARCHITECTS’ RHETORIC ON INTERVENTION

Coexistence, imposition, fusion: three terms, three conceptually different approaches to intervening with the old can be extrapolated from the statements of the six architects shortlisted for the second stage of the competition. Chipperfield defines coexistence as comfortable existence of formal perfection created by clearly distinguishable old and new threadbare. OMA defines imposition as the opposite of infiltration achieved through power and subtlety, respectively. Ando defines architectural fusion as a result of material and spatial collision whereas for Herzog & de Meuron, fusion is the result of the enhancement of the existing (old). Moneo wants to leave unchanged the symbolic power of the existing and therefore opts for fusion. Piano does not define his approach conceptually, but following the above definitions, his intervention could be primarily defined as coexistence of the old and new in terms of materiality. The main difference between these definitions lies in their level of abstractness: whereas the definitions of OMA and H&dM are exclusively conceptual, those of the others, in addition to the level of abstractness, also refer to spatial compositions and building materiality, a fact which in that sense makes them concretely architectural. Regardless of their level of abstractness, each of these concepts was used by the architects as a tool to explain the proposed concrete architectural intervention to the old. This means that each intervention is analysed here in terms of the translation of PICTURE 47: CHIPPERFIELD’S SCHEME, SECTION these concepts into architecture, Preserving Through Change: an Evaluation 119 that is, into material and spatial formal compositions.

Coexistence Chipperfield47 (Picture 47) recognised two material elements i.e. 47 Chipperfield’s design the brick skin and the steel cage structure, and the following proposal is analysed on the spatial elements of the old, i.e. the composition of windows, basis of material deposited in TG 12/4/6/2, ‘Submission for volume of the chimney and the raw space of the Bankside Stage 1’ and TG 12/4/7/3/2, as referential elements for his intervention. All the elements ‘Submission for Stage 2’. First except 'raw space' need to stay present and dominant in the four quotations are taken from intervention. The "sheer power of [Bankside's] raw space", Stage 1 pp.2b,2a,3b,4b while according to Chipperfield, the most powerful but also the most the last one on this page is from Stage 2 p.3 superficial aesthetic remnant of the original industrial character of the old, should be erased. Guided by the Modernist moralising concept of 'honesty' in both formal and material terms, for the lack of which Chipperfield criticised G.G. Scott's design approach, he proposed an intervention labelled as a "building within a building". The brick wall shows its own 'skin' character by not going all the way to the ground, but stopping just below the lower edge of the windows. In this way, the steel structure, which carries it, is revealed at ground level. Honesty is at work here: the apparently massive brick walls do not carry the building, as Scott's building treatment suggests. It is the steel structure that does the work. The internal "giant single space" is filled with "a sequence of interlocking abstract spaces", or simply boxes, which would contain gallery suites. "We imagine this sequence manipulating a series of open and closed spaces, spaces of contemplation, spaces of movement and spaces of orientation, sitting within but opening out into the ‘public space’ of the interior." The sequence of boxes, proposed to be made in concrete, stacked in the once giant single space, break its continuity and overpowering raw industrial character. The only other volume of power of the old building, the chimney, proposed to be maintained and rebuilt in glass for Stage 1 of the competition, was destroyed in Stage 2: "Its role as a marker must be challenged by the potential given to the building by its removal." In the middle of the building, once marked by the chimney, Chipperfield found a place where, finally, the composition of interlocking volumes of the building's interior could also be perceived in the building's exterior. An honest image of the spatial composition of the building's internal space can be appreciated from the outside as well. Chipperfield achieves the coexistence of the old and new in terms of materials through a consistent application of his concept of honesty: he places old materials next to the new ones, rather than interweaving them, and reveals the structural and environmental nature of each of them. Moreover, formal honesty is achieved by rendering the spatial logic of the interior visible on the building's exterior. However, it is exactly the spatial composition of the old and 120 Chapter Four

new spaces inside the building that contradicts Chipperﬁeld's interpretation of coexistence: by ﬁlling the whole "giant single space" with a sequence of smaller abstract spaces, the single space is broken up and, thus, the old and new spaces do not coexist anymore; the old cannot be recognised any more and so it is transformed.

PICTURE 48: PAINO’S SCHEME, SECTION

Chipperfield's metaphor of the Persian carpet contains a reference not only to its materiality, but also to its form and aesthetical consideration. He strives towards the 'formal perfection' of the Persian carpet, yet he does not cite or define the rules that lead to it. Formally, Persian carpets are composed of individual shapes that are parts of a bigger formal unit and, through it, of the composition of the carpet as a whole. Therefore, there is a compositional logic of the whole that guides the arrangements of the individual pieces. In his intervention Chipperfield introduced individual spaces arranged by a spatial logic of which he speaks only in terms of their uses and the amount of public space. Let us consider them spatially. The newly introduced spatial logic of the building's interior communicates with the building's exterior through one element: a large cube- like volume positioned behind the place where the chimney once stood. Scott arranged his Bankside's volumes by following the rules of symmetry: two equally long wings connected in the middle by a drawn-back cube with the chimney in front, positioned exactly in the middle of the longitudinal side of the building. Chipperfield removed Scott's chimney and central cube in the place of which he placed his cube. As opposed to Scott's cube, his is extruded from the building's mass. And yet, by its dimensions and position, Chipperfield's intervention follows the logic of the symmetrical volumetric organisation introduced by Preserving Through Change: an Evaluation 121

Scott. Aesthetically, the "formal perfection" of the carpet rules, achieved by the coexistence of new and old volumes. Another scheme of coexistence is that of Piano. (Picture 48)48 Piano positioned all the gallery spaces in the boiler house, 48 Design proposal is analysed while the turbine hall remained empty. He proposed a new roof on the basis of material structure, the technical performance of which would allow the submitted in TG 12/4/6/6, ‘R. Piano - Submission for Stage 1’ old columns to be replaced with new roof beams. However, the drawings show that Piano intended to keep the old steel columns, deprived of their structural role. The gallery spaces would not be naturally lit in order to prevent glare. For that reason Piano moves the gallery block away from the elevation, creating an effect of a building inside the building. The elements of the old that influenced Piano's intervention are the scale and volumetric composition of the old building and industrial character of the interior defined by the materials, such as the steel columns and brick walls, and the tripartite spatial division of the old. They remained present in his scheme. Piano clearly distinguishes the new from the old by a very simple act of structurally detaching them one from the other. The external brick walls are detached from the newly designed block inside and turned into an envelope. Steel columns are reduced to a mere decoration, obviously kept only to fulfil the 'industrial image' of the building. If, for example, all elements retained were to be removed, the new would still continue to function properly - but not the other way around. The old is a setting, maintained as an image. The old and new materials simply coexist parallel to each other. In spatial and formal terms, the old and new coexist inside the building as well. By positioning all the gallery spaces in the boiler house, Piano retained the original tripartite division of space. The space that was originally filled was filled again, while the empty turbine hall remained empty. There is no need for Piano to interfere with the original shape of the building from the outside. Scott's volume composition guided by symmetry remained the ruling force. From the outside, the old overpowers the new rather than coexist with it.

Imposition The absence of any kind of analysis of the existing building characterises the 'power' approach by OMA.49 (Picture 49) The 49 OMA’s design proposal is building is seen and treated as a "brick box"50 with a tripartite analysed on the basis of material spatial division of the interior. The old spatial division is rendered deposited in TG 12/4/6/5, ‘OMA - Submission for Stage 1: Site, visible by retaining the cage steel structure of the turbine hall Building, Display’ in its entirety. The part of the old frame that supported the elevation was retained in residues on the north side, only in 50 TG 12/4/6/5, ‘OMA - the central part of the building. It is in that self same part that Submission for Stage 1: Building the old elevation is replaced with a glass 'window', high as the - point 2 and Display - point 3’ building itself and only slightly wider than Scott's central part of the building. The rest of the elevation remained untouched in 122 Chapter Four

terms of materials and composition. Old materials, the 'brick box' and steel cage, remained present in the new and retained their formal presence in total, while structural and environmental considerations only partially remained. In spatial and formal terms, the intervention is composed of three 'blocks' inserted into the building and one added in front of the eastern part of the northern elevation. Three blocks consist of six levels of which four are placed in the area of the former boiler house, while the topmost two stretch across the area of the former turbine hall, over approximately one PICTURE 49: OMA SCHEME, third of the building’s length. No single level TRANSVERSAL AND stretches along the entire length of the building. Just as once the LONGITUDINAL SECTIONS boiler house was stuffed with operating boxes, now it is stuffed with galleries. The turbine hall remains hollow so that it can visually 'serve' all the new galleries, while its hollowness in the past assured the free movement of the crane and the serving of machines. The only new architectural element introduced to the 51 TG 12/4/6/5, ‘OMA - former turbine hall, which OMA call "the path of the crane",51 is Submission for Stage 1: Building the large staircase that covers the whole width of the turbine hall - point 2’ connected to the entrance areas placed on the northern side of the building. Therefore, the placement of new volumes repeats the spatial division as well as the organisation of the old on the inside. From the outside, the symmetry of Scott's volumes was not only broken with the placement of a window, but also with the position of the sixth level above the west wing of the building. The volume of the chimney remained present, yet chimney itself was stripped of its brick skin revealing its structural skeleton and Preserving Through Change: an Evaluation 123 emphasising the new asymmetrical composition of the building. Inside, it is the spatial organisation of the old building and the total character, its spatiality and materiality, ('the path of the crane') which remained unchanged. The new is executed in different materials than the old. However, the structurally new and old are interwoven, rather than performing as separate structural units. From the outside, it is the old window composition that engages in a dialogue with the new, while the old volumetric symmetry is replaced with an asymmetrical volumetric composition. Koolhaas stated that the new imposed itself on the old by means of 'power' in the interior of the building. 52 When not indicated Retaining the old spatial organisation, as well as the overall otherwise, Herzog & de Meuron’s architectural character of the existing internal space, the new is design proposal is analysed on the basis of material submitted more inﬁltrated into, than imposed on, the old. It is only on the in TG 12/4/6/13 ‘H&dM - outside that the new overpowers the old by breaking the original Submission for Stage 1’ symmetrical volumetric composition with an asymmetrical one.

PICTURE 50: HERZOG & DE MEURON SCHEME SECTION

Fusion Herzog & de Meuron52 (Picture 50) recognised the physical power of the Bankside. Their way to the fusion of the old and new is led 53 J. Herzog, N. Serota and R. by the recognition of the elements of the old, where this power Moore, ‘Conversation’, Building is accumulated, and then used to the advantage of the new. Tate Modern, (London: Tate Gallery Publishing, 2000), 41 According to them, this physical power comes from the building's overall concept, that is, from "the symmetry of Scott's building"53 54 Herzog & de Meuron, ‘Tate expressed in the play of the building's masses. Moreover, they Modern’, in Quaderns no. 230, found it in the building's internal tripartite spatial division54 and July 2001, (62-71), 65 in the individual elements, such as, in the mass of the chimney,55 55 J. Herzog, N. Serota and R. the space of the turbine hall56 and dimensions and architectural Moore, 2000, 52 characteristics of the windows on the northern elevation: "Those 56 J. Herzog, N. Serota and R. cathedral windows are the best kinds of windows to have. You get Moore, 2000, 45 light from the side which goes from the ﬂoor to the ceiling […] Any 57 J. Herzog, N. Serota and R. other opening to the façade would have been stupid."57 These are Moore, 2000, 41, 47 124 Chapter Four

the aspects of the old upon which H&dM built up the new. By placing the galleries of different spatial qualities in each longitudinal space, H&dM’s intervention respects the tripartite 58 TG 12/4/6/14, ‘J.R. Moneo spatial division of the existing building.58 The only physical - Submission for Stage 1: connection between the two lateral spaces is the viewing/ Drawings’ entrance platform that crosses the turbine hall at the ground floor level. These three spaces are further visually connected by two long and two short translucent glass boxes which, apparently hanging from the old main steel structure, overlook the turbine hall from the corridors of the galleries positioned in the boiler house. These boxes are vertically and horizontally aligned creating a static symmetrical composition of masses placed on the old structural grid. Both lateral spaces, the boiler house and switch house (under construction at the moment of writing), are vertically subdivided into a number of floors. It is only the turbine hall that remained empty in the full building's height. Their intervention to the interior protrudes on the outside in a form of a 'light beam', a building’s volume made in glass which, at the roof level, stretches along the whole length of the building. H&dM see the beam primarily as a horizontal counterpoint to the verticality of the chimney, which they freed from its surrounding extension done by Scott's office, re-establishing in this way its originally conceived formal and mass independence. The light beam is also a way of breaking with Scott's mass symmetry since the beam does not run through the entire length of the building but rather stops a few meters short of the east elevation. At ground level, the symmetry of the northern elevation is broken up by the introduction of a glass box in the brick body of the north western corner of the building. The glass box counterbalance of the eastern side of the building is positioned below and along the full width of one set of original cathedral-like windows. The transparent and translucent glass boxes that appear both within and without the building are the trademark of the intervention. The rest of the intervention, that is, gallery spaces, are executed in yet another 'new' material, namely, concrete. This means that all the newly introduced architectural elements are made in a material clearly distinguishable from the old. Structurally, the new and the old work together and, as such, depend on each other. Consequently, in material terms, this intervention can be labelled a symbiotic fusion. Spatially, the old and the new are not fused but rather the new is submitted to the old again. In terms of the outside form there is an interesting strategy at play. If one wants to use somebody else's power for one's own purpose, then that can be done by accentuating the power of the other, as H&dM did in the interior of the building, or by confronting it, like OMA did with a clear asymmetrical approach to the volume's composition. With the asymmetrical position of the light beam, H&dM also intended to apply the confrontation strategy. As opposed to the Preserving Through Change: an Evaluation 125

OMA's shouting asymmetry, H&dM’s movement is so small that it can be visible from only one pedestrian approach to the building: the bridge connecting Tate Modern with St. Paul’s. T. Ando59 (Picture 51) refers to the old building as "this sleeping mass of brick" and "old brick structure." He is not interested in any other kind of understanding of the old building beyond its materiality. In fact, he sees the whole building as "a 'wall' that separates the Southwark district from the river and the 'city' to the north." Ando sees the clash between ages materialised in the representative power of the materials: brick "symbolises the human act of production and the epoch of materiality" and consequently he keeps the brick skin. Ando does not recognise the steel structural cage as a carrier of any meaning for PICTURE 51: TADAO ANDO,SECTION AND LONGITUDINAL ELEVATION the past or present. However, the steel columns are retained on the southern wall of the turbine 59 Design proposal is analysed hall. Glass expresses abstractness and "symbolises the post- on the basis of material material epoch dominated by image" and therefore the part of his deposited in TG 12/4/6/8, ‘T. Ando - Submission for Stage 1’ intervention visible from the outside is executed in this material. Finally, "concrete which mediates the two by its neutrality" is placed inside the building where the two are supposedly fused by it. The spatial concept of his intervention and the formal embodiment seem to stem from these materiality-oriented considerations. In order to connect the Southwark and the City, he proposes to break 'the wall', that is, the building, by protruding it at two points with two glazed shafts housing a "geometric exhibition space". The clash between the brick and glass, and thus between the past and present, would occur on the northern and southern elevations. Yet, Ando strives for fusion rather than collision, which he achieves in the building's interior by introducing a third horizontal volume stretching behind the northern elevation, along its entire length. This is a concrete volume, which structurally supports the newly introduced glass shafts as well as the old brick skin. Each element, all the horizontal shafts and the old brick case, kept their singularity visually, yet structurally they are fused, the stability of each one depending on the other two. By repeating in size and placement of the concrete block 126 Chapter Four

the dimensions and position of the boiler house, Ando kept the original spatial division of the building's interior. In this intervention the former turbine hall is also left unﬁlled, but only crossed at two points. On the outside, not only did Ando retain Scott's symmetrical volumetric composition but he in fact let his own intervention be governed by it, which is visible in the symmetrical position of the glass shafts in relation to the northern elevation. As with the interventions of Piano and OMA, the old spatial logic of the interior guided the spatial logic of the new, once more the old is imposed onto the new. On the outside, just like in Chipperﬁeld's intervention, symmetry ruled the volumetric composition. While it can be said that architectural fusion is achieved in material terms, because of the structural

PICTURE 52: R. MONEO SCHEME, SECTION

interdependence of all materials and parts of the building, the interpretation is not so straightforward in spatial and formal terms. In terms of the spatial and compositional logic of the old building's interior and exterior, it is the old logic that governs while the new simply follows that logic. The material fusion described above can be called a symbiotic fusion, whereas the formal fusion is rather a submissive fusion. It seems that the ''sleeping mass of brick" is not sleeping after all; it rules subversively. 60 Design proposal is analysed J.R. Moneo60 (Picture 52) recognises the iconographic impact on the basis of material of the old building on the cityscape of London and consequently deposited in TG 12/4/6/14, ‘J.R. proposes alterations to the building's exterior, new roof light, Moneo - Submission for Stage 1’ which would have minimal visual impact on the building. The rhythm of the windows is so imposing that no alteration is needed for the elevations. However, the shape of his newly opened entrance to the building on the riverside testiﬁes to a Preserving Through Change: an Evaluation 127 different approach: three spread-out fan boxes emerging from inside the building at the chimney's bottom have a presence of their own and are visually competing with the old. In the building's interior, Moneo is again minimal in terms of changes introduced to the spatial organisation of the old. He retains the tripartite division of the old, places the galleries in the boiler house and the main entrance/ticket area to the retained hollow of the turbine hall. Moneo addresses the issues of materiality very brieﬂy. Most likely a new structure would need to be introduced, as well as a roof, while the building's interior would not be lavish but rather only have washed walls. The iconographic status of the old expressed in the overall building's volume composition, as well as the elevation composition, and the spatial division of internal spaces as well as their usage character, are elements of the old that direct Moneo's design. The new structure would keep the old spatial division of the interior and support the old elevation. The old and new would therefore fuse by working together. However, the form of the new entrance is the only element that contradicts this fusion at work. Its irregular shape and the very regular orthogonal form of the old belong to different geometries. Moneo does not try to fuse but rather leaves them to coexist next to each other.

4.7 Subversiveness of the Aesthetics of the Old Three conceptual approaches - coexistence, imposition, fusion - have more in common once translated into materials and spatial compositions than they have when presented in words. In terms of materiality, all the six interventions proposed to be executed in a combination of materials different from the old ones. If one accepts the above-mentioned definition of coexistence as parallel existence of the old and new, then all the interventions adopted this approach in material terms. However, the interventions differ in the level of rendering visible the coexistence of old and new materials. With their interventions called a 'building within the building’, Chipperfield and Piano render fully transparent the way in which old and new materials coexist by detaching one from the other in terms of materials' structural and environmental behaviour. As we saw, Chipperfield was more consisten tin following this treatment of materials than Piano was. In the remaining four interventions of OMA, Ando H&dM and Moneo, there is no clear cut in terms of structural and environmental behaviour of the old and new materials; they do not have divided roles. Rather, they play together the role of the building's tectonics. If fusion means a total impossibility of recognising the parts which got together though this act, then intentionally blurring the way to a coexistence of old and new materials by fusing them in 128 Chapter Four

PICTURE 53: COMPARISON terms of their structural and environmental behaviour leads BETWEEN SCHEMES’SPATIAL- us to an approach to the intervention to the old which can be FORMAL COMPOSITION OF THE called a tectonic fusion. Chipperfield’s and Piano’s approach INTERIOR can consequently be called tectonic coexistence. Therefore, in material terms, two approaches to the intervention to the old can be defined as follows: tectonic coexistence and tectonic fusion of the old and new. The interventions can further be categorised in terms of their treatment of the old and new spatial-formal composition of the interior and exterior (picture 53). In the five interventions, the Preserving Through Change: an Evaluation 129 existing tripartite spatial division of the building's interior was retained, whereas in only one intervention transformation was proposed. In terms of the spatial composition of the old and new, once again the coexistence of the two is at play. In fact, we can go a step further and analyse the following situation. The nave of the boiler house was always stacked with machines meaning that this was the space originally subdivided into smaller units. The space of the former turbine hall was originally empty for the full height. Not only did the five schemes retain the tripartite division of the interior, but they also retained the spatial composition of each individual nave: the subdivided boiler house and hall-like turbine hall. Their spatial compositions can even be recognised in their names: the subdivided house and hall-like hall. If one accepts this interpretation of the spatial composition of the building's interior, one can propose to call the approach of the five interventions as spatial compositional conservation, whereas that of the sixth one as spatial compositional transformation of the building's interior. All the interventions follow the same approach to the treatment of the building's composition of the elevations: they all retained the original window composition. Yet, they do differ in the treatment of the building's volume composition. Whereas OMA and H&dM propose the breaking of Scott's symmetrical composition, the other four not only respect it but even allow their responses to be led by it, and so again one can talk of spatial compositional transformation and spatial compositional conservation, respectively, of the building's exterior. The six short-listed interventions can be divided in two groups according to their way of treating the old and new in terms of structural and environmental behaviour of the materials. They can also be divided into two according to their treatment of the spatial organisation of the old and new inside and outside the building. Chipperfield's scheme follows the tectonic coexistence and spatial compositional conservation of the building's exterior and the spatial compositional transformation of the building's interior. Piano goes for the tectonic coexistence and spatial compositional conservation of the building's interior and exterior. OMA prefers tectonic fusion, spatial compositional conservation of the building's interior and the spatial compositional transformation of the building's exterior. Surprisingly enough, considering their opposite conceptual stands, H&dM follows the same combination of the above-mentioned approaches. Ando also goes for tectonic fusion, but then he adopts the spatial compositional conservation of both the building's interior and exterior. Moneo proposes exactly the same approach as Ando. The variety of identified approach combinations shows that it is not possible to extrapolate the most common combination and thus the most common approach. However, one statistical result does come up: tectonic fusion outnumbered coexistence, the 130 Chapter Four

TABLE 2: FORMAL APPROACHES TO THE OLD:

spatial compositional conservation of the exterior outnumbered the transformation, which became extremely visible in the treatment of the building's interior. Although the architects were invited to compete with, diminish, break and even destroy the old, it seems that the old prevailed. Subversively, because it was not protected, the old turned the architects' rhetoric on the intervention into pure decoration.

Conclusion: Organic Aesthetic Integrity of Old and New Let us now discuss the extent to which the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the old Bankside, described through organicism, is preserved through these interventions. For that purpose, the approaches to interventions will be reviewed in terms of the design guidelines given in the charters (Chapter One). The charters require that the new should be similar to the old in terms of the material used, its colours and forms, but that it should still bear the contemporary stamp and have the architectural quality of its own. Architects discussed here who proposed coexistence and imposition thus have the same idea as conservationists, that is, that the new must be distinguished from the old. To this end, they use materials different from the old ones. On the other side there are the architects who advocate the fusion approach. In their eyes not only is it unnecessary for the old and new to be clearly distinguished, but the new and old should fuse, that is, act as parts of one building. It can be proposed then that the new and old should create a new unity Preserving Through Change: an Evaluation 131 of the building, or one can even go as far as to propose that they want to retain the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the old in such a way that this integrity guides their design. When translated into the materials used, these architects use materials different from those used in the old building. Thus, whichever approach the architects advocate, they always use new materials or, to put it in terms of the charters, the materials reflecting their own time. The matter is somewhat different when discussing the form of the interventions achieved with these new materials. The coexistence and imposition architects, with the exception of Chipperfield, create forms of the interior similar to the old, the same as the fusion architects do, while some of both these groups transform that of the exterior (OMA and H&dM). In this respect the architects and conservationists share the same position, that is, the forms of the old and new share the same formal logic. On the basis of the above, it can be concluded that conservationists’ ethical position that the old and new forms must be similar but different can be achieved by using the new – different – materials and old – similar - formal compositions. What are the consequences of these approaches for the preservation of the aesthetic integrity of the old? Above we proposed that the how of the making of the old Bankside building, or its ‘aesthetic integrity,’ is made visible to the viewer through the spatial composition of the interior and building’s overall external shape. Since the majority of the schemes preserve the building’s original internal spatial composition as well as its external shape, it can be said that the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the old is still comprehensible and thus minimally changed though these interventions. Thus, although the new materials used are neither similar to nor the same as the old ones, the interventions can be called minimal because the old of the building can still be read through the conversion. Not only that. The majority of the conversions (except Chipperfields’ and OMA’s) provide the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the old and new together because the new is guided by the formal logic of the old. Furthermore, if we evaluate the interventions in terms of the existing fabric of the building then we can conclude that the intervention which would cause the biggest loss would be the one which transforms the building's. In our case it is that of OMA and Chipperfield. Therefore, it is not important in which way architects formulate their approach to the old in words or which materials they use. What is important is to understand their formal analysis of the old. For the world of conservationists the above investigation shows that an intervention guided by a clearly defined ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the old will secure minimal loss of both the fabric of a building and its overall form. 132 133

Conclusion

C.1 Exposition We now come to the end of our journey into the search for the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of nineteenth century industrial buildings in order to see if it can be verifiably judged whether an intervention in this kind of building can be defined as minimal in formal terms. The journey began with the conservationist dilemma particular to nineteenth century industrial buildings as being representative of ‘low culture’. On the one hand, these buildings are protected not because of their historical architectural importance, but rather as symbols of the historic importance of an particular industry. On the other, their conversion, like the conversion of any other protected building, according to conservation guidelines should be guided by an aesthetic requirement, that is, the protection of their ‘aesthetic integrity’. This dilemma takes an important position in the newly promoted approach to conservation, according to which two sides of the overall conservation process of a building—evaluation and management—should inform each other. It has been shown in this thesis that by bridging the gap between these two parts of the conservation process, two traditionally opposed professions—conservationists and architects—could finally truly collaborate. What the tools are to bridge this gap between evaluation and management becomes a pertinent question for the conservation field. The conservation charters require that the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the old is minimally changed. According to the conservation charters, the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of any building can be described in formal terms in a way which equates ‘aesthetic integrity’ with ‘unity of style’. Since architectural historians maintain that nineteenth century industrial buildings cannot be described in traditional stylistic terms, and yet the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of these buildings has to be preserved through conversion, it was proposed that two main points should be investigated. Firstly, in which ways, other than stylistic, can the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of a symbol—in our case a nineteenth 134 Conclusion

century industrial building—be understood; and secondly, what would be the tool to describe it. The charters prescribe that the intervention to the old must be minimal. It was demonstrated here that minimal has in practice mainly been interpreted in quantitative terms, that is, the amount of a building's fabric changed through conversion. It was then ﬁrst proposed that, because a building is protected as a symbol, the symbolic value of an industrial building in embodied in its overall form rather than any architectural element in particular. In such cases where the overall form is the bearer of the recognized value without which the form in itself has no value, one can talk about the need to simply preserve the ‘formal integrity’ rather than the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of these buildings. It then follows that a simple formal description of these buildings is sufﬁcient to describe their integrity, and thus the most important aspect that needs to be preserved through conversion. My main conclusion is that the formal analysis of an industrial building is a tool that allows communication between the two sides of the overall conservation process, that is, the evaluation and architectural design of conversion schemes as a part of management. Thus, conservationists, as evaluators, and architects, as one of the managers, should use the same type of formal analysis in order to ensure the operative usage of the evaluation results in the designing of the conversion.

C.2 Rising action An analysis of the industrial archaeological way of interpreting industrial buildings shows that industrial archaeologists do exactly what seems to be the simplest and most straightforward answer to the conservationists requirements: to describe the formal characteristics of industrial buildings without evaluating them in any way. What they do in addition to the simple formal descriptions of the building is to give an explanation of how and why the formal elements create a building's unity or integral whole. So although these buildings supposedly do not have architectural value as such, they are an intentionally created architectural unity. This implies that industrial buildings, aside from being described in formal terms, can be analyzed in terms of the reasons or laws that explain how and why these formal elements create a unit, or whole. Thus, industrial archaeologists in fact do have a tool to describe the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of an industrial building. What then are we looking for? We are looking for a definition of the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of nineteenth century industrial buildings which can be used as the main guideline for the design of a conversion. Therefore the testing of the industrial archaeological way of defining ‘aesthetic integrity’ as a design guideline was conducted in this thesis by drawing upon an example of a conversion of an industrial Conclusion 135 building protected as a symbol. It showed that the archaeological interpretation of integrity secures the minimal loss of a building's fabric, but incurs maximum loss of a building’s overall form. It is argued here that symbolic value is embodied in the overall form, rather than the fabric of a building alone. Consequently, it is concluded that the industrial archaeological methods of investigation are appropriate for identifying the historic value of industrial buildings and thus securing their protection as symbols. However, their methods prove inadequate for guiding the design of the conversion of such a symbol. A new search outside the field of industrial archaeology must be conducted in order to find another way of interpreting the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings so that their symbolic value is preserved through their conversion. If the gap between the evaluation and management is to be bridged, it cannot be achieved by the means of an appropriate type of formal analysis of industrial buildings alone. It needs to be complemented with a conceptual explanation of why the overall form of an industrial building is at it is, termed by conservationists as its ‘aesthetic integrity’. The conceptual explanation of ‘aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings, developed by industrial archaeologists, proves inadequate for bridging the gap between evaluation and management. While the explanation proposed by industrial archaeologists ensures plausible evaluation results – recognition of the historic importance of this type of building- it does not inform management in a way acceptable for conservationists, since the archaeological interpretation of integrity secures minimal loss of a building's fabric but incurs maximmum loss of a building’s overall form.

C.3 Climax Our journey continued through the ﬁeld of architectural history. Twentieth century architectural historians regarded nineteenth century industrial buildings as a work of low culture because of their lack of stylistic or overall architectural quality. In fact, throughout the course of the twentieth century architectural historians questioned the contribution of all nineteenth century architecture to the history of architecture. During the last couple of decades of the twentieth century, however, nineteenth century architecture, as well as its architectural discourse on the issue of style, received additional attention, which created the theoretical basis for its historical revaluation. Among them, van Eck’s study on the rhetorical character of the nineteenth century organicism proves to be most useful for the purposes of this thesis. Discussing the characteristics of the aesthetic category of unity in architecture, van Eck proposes that unity has a quantitative and qualitative aspect. According to van Eck, unity in architecture is achieved only when both aspects are at work 136 Conclusion

in a building. Van Eck argues that if one talks about unity only in terms of methods of design, one addresses only its quantitative aspect and describes how the formal elements of a building are connected into a whole. But the ‘hows’ are always guided by the ‘whys’, she argues, by means of a certain strategy or a plan which gives a reason to the character of the whole. It is thus the qualitative aspect of unity, the main goal of which is to persuade the viewer of the message that the building as a whole wants to convey. Since architecture conveys a message through its overall form, van Eck proposes that a building’s formal unity is primarily rhetorical. Van Eck proposes that the message nineteenth century architecture conveys is that of an organic making of the world and consequently of architecture. Van Eck showed that, for the nineteenth century architectural theorists, ‘organic’ meant understanding the methods of Nature’s way of making the world regardless of whether Nature was equated with God or understood in scientific terms. Organicism is thus the strategy which explains the reasons behind a building's unity in nineteenth century architecture. Armed with organicism as a rhetorical strategy for explaining the formal totality of nineteenth century architecture, the journey of this thesis continued with an exploration of the extent to which organicism can be used as a strategy for defining the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of nineteenth century industrial buildings in particular. The review of the nineteenth century discourse on architecture showed the century’s preoccupation with the making of architecture. It was shown that this preoccupation was not only theoretical, but that these theoretical positions were tested in practice, in particular in the experimentation with new materials used for building purposes. Here, the nineteenth century industrial building came to the fore. It was industrial buildings that were used as a testing field for all manner of structural and spatial-planning innovations, rather than any other type of building. New structural innovations and new spatial organisations were used in libraries, theatres, and blocks of flats only after they were first tested on industrial buildings. Furthermore, as a result of the curricula of the newly formed polytechnic schools across Europe at the beginning of the nineteenth century, the engineers and engineer-architects who were usually in charge of designing these buildings, alone or in collaboration with an architect, worked on these structural and spatial innovations armed not only with a technical, but also an aesthetic knowledge of construction. Therefore it is argued in this thesis that the nineteenth century industrial buildings were the first innovative overall building forms in which the making of the building, in structural and spatial terms, first revealed itself to the viewer as an intentional act of designing. Organicism as the rhetorical strategy Conclusion 137 that guided the making of nineteenth century buildings can be used as a concept that describes the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of nineteenth century industrial buildings.

C.4 Falling action Once organicism, as the qualitative aspect of the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of nineteenth century industrial buildings, was defined in rhetorical terms as a strategy of architectural design, what remained to be investigated was the extent to which it could be used as a design guideline of a conversion. The rhetorical strategic character of organicism means that it does not have fixed, unchangeable rules which lead to unity. Rather, in the art of persuasion or rhetorics, rules do exist. The more skilfully they are interpreted the more persuasively the message comes across. Organicism describes the method of a building's making. Unity of the finished building, achieved by following this method, is considered as something inherent to the act of making. We saw that the overall form of nineteenth century industrial buildings reveals the methods of a building's making. When organicism is used as the rule guiding the design of a conversion of an industrial building, it means that the making of the old building in structural and spatial terms or simply overall formal terms must stay visible throughout the conversion. Not only that; since organicism guides the design of the new intervention as well, the new must convey the same message of the building's making. But as required by the charters, the new must formally be distinguished from the old. Ultimately, the old and new must, together as one, convey the same ‘old’ message of the way the building is made, only in a ‘new’ way. When this is achieved, it can be said that the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the old is minimally changed in formal terms. Only then can it be said that the past lives on into the present in a converted building. This proposition was evaluated in the example of several design schemes for the conversion of the Bankside Power Station in London, originally designed by Sir Giles G.Scott and built between 1953 aand 1963. This building was chosen as an example for several reasons: first, it was a masterpiece in architectural historical terms, yet not protected; second, because it was not protected, it opened up the possibility to identify architects’ individual approaches to the conversion of the old building; third, an architectural competition was conducted for the conversion design that enabled the evaluation and subsequent comparison of different architectural approaches to dealing with the old industrial buildings. The tectonic-spatio- social analysis of the Bankside showed that the formal totality of the building was a result of the structural and spatial design considerations on the part of its architect. In Scott’s building the interaction of structural and spatial design considerations came to the fore through the building's internal spatial organisation. 138 Conclusion

The conversion schemes were next analysed in terms of the amount of change they caused to the old individual architectural elements, namely structure, internal spatial organisation and external mass organisation, in terms of the type of materials proposed for executing the new and additionally in terms of change of the building’s ’aesthetic integrity’ as deﬁned through organicism. Furthermore, the architects’ design strategy was analysed as well. Only two architects verbally opted for a fusion of the old and new, two were in favour of coexistence and two were for imposition or transformation. The results were interesting, to say the least. Out of six schemes, four could be called minimal in formal terms since the old ‘aesthetic integrity’ could still clearly be recognised, whereby the new and old together revealed the same ‘old’ message but in a new formal way. This was achieved by repeating the forms of the old but executing them in new materials, different from the old ones. The remaining two schemes changed the old either internally or externally to such an extent that the old could not be recognised any more. In these cases the old was formally transformed. Formally, four of the schemes proposed the conservation of the old and two proposed its transformation. Since the four schemes were clearly distinct in the proposed formal character of the new, yet in all four the formal character of the old remained clearly and distinctly recognisable, it can be concluded that organicism, as a rhetorical strategy, does secure the preservation of the old ’aesthetic integrity’, or in other words, it does secure the minimal change of the old in formal terms. A tectonic-spatio-stylistic type of analysis is proposed here as that which would allow the best understanding of the architectural character of nineteenth century buildings, since the architectural elements of the making of the building are the objects of analysis. Furthermore, since this type of formal analysis focuses on methods of building, and organicism denotes the methods of a building’s making, this type of analysis is proposed to be a tool for describing the quantitative aspect of the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings, while organicism describes its qualitative side. Organicism and tectonic- spatio-stylistic analysis are conceptual and operative aspects, respectively, of the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings. As such they can be used as both evaluative tools as well as tools that inform the design and thus the management of the building in question. Evaluation as part of the conservation process can thus adequately inform the management aspect concerning the design of the conversion.

C.5 Dénouement or Catastrophe or Resolution In the end, what have we learnt? When the unity of an industrial building is described in both formal quantitative and Conclusion 139 rhetorical qualitative terms, and such a description is used as a guideline for designing a conversion, it becomes possible to accommodate change while still preserving the old unity. Not only that; the dual understanding of unity, and particularly the recognition of organicism as the rhetorical strategy of nineteenth century architecture, creates the basis for the argument of the architectural historical importance of nineteenth century industrial buildings as being the first type of building where this design strategy became embodied in form. As such, nineteenth century industrial buildings can be seen as the new building form the nineteenth century architects sought for. It is possible to achieve both change and preservation of the old at the same time only when the strategic character of the old is used as guidance for the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the new as well. The quantitative aspect of the new, particularly the choice of materials, can be totally different from the old. But as long as the strategy for their making is the same as that of the old, a fusion of both old and new can be achieved in such a way that both the old and new can retain their quantitative individuality while qualitatively creating a new whole, based on the rules of the old. Thus, an old industrial building will be changed minimally in formal qualitative terms when the design of its conversion is guided by the notion of ‘aesthetic integrity’, as defined also in rhetorical and strategic, rather than in stylistic terms only. Armed with organicism as a theoretical framework for defining the leading concept, i.e. ’aesthetic integrity’, that guides the conversion of industrial buildings, further research can be done into defining ‘good practice’ in the conversion of industrial buildings. The main subjects of that study would be the numerous conversions of these buildings executed during last fifty years. The results of the investigation conducted in this thesis showed that the gap can be bridged between the evaluation and management, as far as design of conversion is concerned, in the case of industrial buildings. Before asserting the universality of the proposal to understand ‘aesthetic integrity’ in rhetorical, rather than purely stylistic terms, further investigation needs to be conducted into the identification of aesthetic concepts that led the design of buildings in periods other than the nineteenth century, as well as into the possibility of describing the unity of different kinds of nineteenth century buildings with reference to organicism. Consequently, the conservation charters should be revisited in order that they can more closely specify the relationship between the quantitative and qualitative aspects of the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of a building. 140 141

Appendix 1 142 Appendix 1

Primary sources Protection of Folk Architecture 1971 The Burra Charter (1979; 1999), http://www. List of conservation charters, resolutions, icomos.org/australia/burra.html recommendations The Florence Charter (1982)(Historic gardens and landscapes); Venice Charter (1964) http://www.international. icomos.org/charters/venice_e.htm Athens Charter (1931) http://www.international.icomos.org/centre_ The Council of Europe documentation/chartes_eng.htm "About Conventions and Agreements in the The Council of Europe Treaty Series (CETS)", UNESCO http://conventions.coe.int/general/ Recommendations Concerning the Safeguarding v3IntroConvENG.asp of the Beauty and Character of Landscapes "Cultural policy and cultural diversity" and Sites (1962) http://gillonj.tripod.com/ (2001-2003), http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/ culturalheritagechartersandstandards/ cultureheritage/Completed/Diversity/ default_en.asp#TopOfPage Recommendations Concerning the Protection at "European Charter for Architectural Heritage", 7 National Level of the Cultural and Natural (1975) http://www.coe.int/T/E/Cultural_Co- Heritage (1972) http://gillonj.tripod.com/ operation/Heritage/Resources/Amsterdam_ culturalheritagechartersandstandards/ declaration.asp#TopOfPage "National cultural policy review programme" ICOMOS (1986) http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/ (CIAV-ICOMOS) Thessaloniki Charter on cultureheritage/Policies/Reviews/default_ vernacular architecture 1986 en.asp#TopOfPage Charter on the Conservation of Historic Towns "Recommendations (89)6E on the protection and Urban Areas and enhancement of the rural architectural Hague Convention 1899 http://www.yale.edu/ heritage", (1989) https://wcd.coe.int/ lawweb/avalon/lawofwar/lawwar.htm ViewDoc.jsp?id=711549 http://www.international.icomos.org/centre_ "Reference texts, Cultural Heritage" http://www. documentation/chartes_eng.htm coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/Resources/ Plovdiv Symposium Recommendations on Texts/Heritage_en.asp#P116_6002 Vernacular Architecture and its adoption to "Statute of The Council of Europe" (1949), ETS the Needs of Modern Life, 1975 no. 001, http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/ Srbska Pleso-Brno Symposium Resolutions the en/Treaties/html/001.htm Appendix 1 143

"The Compendium, Contents and features" TG 12/4/6/2, 'Chipperfield - Submission for http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/ Stage 1' Policies/The The Compendium/contents_ TG 12/4/6/5, 'OMA - Submission for Stage 1: en.asp#TopOfPage Urbanism, point 1' "The European Heritage Network" TG 12/4/6/5, 'OMA - Submission for Stage 1: http://www.european-heritage.net/sdx/herein/ Site, Building, Display' european_heritage_program/showcontent. TG 12/4/6/5, 'OMA - Submission for Stage 1: xsp?id=2 Building - point 2 and Display - point 3' European Landscape Convention (2000) TG 12/4/6/5, 'OMA - Submission for Stage 1: http://www.coe.int/T/DG4/CultureHeritage/ Building - point 2' Default_en.asp TG 12/4/6/6, 'R. Piano - Submission for Stage 1' Recommandation (95) 3 (1995) TG 12/4/6/8, 'T. Ando - Submission for Stage 1', http://cm.coe.int/ta/rec/1995/95r3.htm 1 Recommendation No (89) 6 on the protection TG 12/4/6/8, 'T. Ando - Submission for Stage 1' and enhancement of the rural architectural 2 heritage (1989) TG 12/4/6/13 'H&dM - Submission for Stage 1' Recommendation No R (90) 20 on the protection TG 12/4/6/14, 'J.R. Moneo - Submission for and conservation of the industrial, technical Stage 1' and civil engineering heritage in Europe TG 12/4/6/14, 'J.R. Moneo - Submission for (1990) Stage 1: Drawings' TG 12/4/7/3/2, ''Chipperfield - Submission for Stage 2' Archive material TG 12/4/7/4/1, 'letter to Koolhaas ref. no. TGMA 8/2/1995' Tate Gallery TG 12/4/7/4/1, 'Correspondence' TG 12/1/1/7, 'Save Britain's Heritage report' TG 12/4/7/5/1, 'Renzo Piano Workshop TG 12/4/2/3 'letter from English Heritage to Wednesday 30 November 1994 13:00-17:00' Stuart Lipton' TG 12/4/7/9, 'Minutes of Assessors' Meeting TG 12/4/2/6, 'Tate Gallery of Modern Art: on 16 and 17 January 1995 Stage 2 Background Information' Presentations, 2nd session – Renzo Piano TG 12/4/2/6, 'Competition Brief', 4 Workshop', 29 TG 12/4/6/1, 'Minutes from Assessors' meeting TG 12/7/2/2, ' Introduction and Architectural on 14&15 November 1994, 12th presentation Notes by G. Stamp' – Rem Koolhaas – Office for Metropolitan TG 12/7/2/2, 'The Twentieth Century Society Architecture', 9 Report' 144 145

Appendix 2 146 Appendix 2

Another way to the compare situation regarding same issues in different countries is through The European Heritage Network. The Network was established in 1999 as a "co-operation between the Council of Europe 1 The Council of Europe, "The and the European Union, through the “HEREIN” projects"1 for promoting European Heritage Network" the built heritage care projects, exclusively, at European level. The Hhttp://www.european-heritage. reports of the national reviews regarding the implementation of policies net/sdx/herein/european_ on care of built heritage, made available to the Network2, witness that heritage_program/showcontent. xsp?id=2H even countries with the longest tradition of protection legislation as well as trend setters in the approaches to repair of the protected buildings in 2 "The European", Hhttp:// Europe such as United Kingdom or Germany, set their national policies european-heritage.coe.int/sdx/ according to the ratiﬁed documents.3 herein/H

3 "The European", Hhttp:// TABLE 1: www.european-heritage.net/ THE GRANADA CONVENTION (EUROPEAN TREATY SERIES NO.121) – ADOPTION OF sdx/herein/european_heritage_ PROVISIONS BY MEMBER STATES UNDER THE STUDY BY R. PICKARD program/showcontent.xsp?id=2 DATE OF DATE OF DATE OF ENTRY MEMBER STATE SIGNATURE RATIFICATION INTO FORCE

Belgium + + + Czech Republic + Denmark + + + France + + + Georgia + Germany + + + 4 The Council of Europe, Ireland + + + Architectural Heritage: Inventory Italy + + + and Documentation Methods Latvia in Europe: proceedings, Malta + + + Architectural heritage, reports and studies 28 (Strasbourg: The The Netherlands + + + Council of Europe Press, 1993) Spain + + + United Kingdom + + + 5 J. Bold, "The documentation of the architectural heritage Some concrete examples can support this statement further. In in Europe: A progress report" 1993, following the Council of Europe initiative, conservationists from in Architectural Heritage: twenty four countries4 gathered in order to discuss the methods for Inventory and Documentation Methods in Europe: proceedings, recording of architectural heritage. The aim of the conference was the Architectural heritage, reports establishment of the Core Data Index (CDI), that is, the minimal amount and studies 28 (Strasbourg: The of data needed for a building record on the basis of which the building's Council of Europe 1993): 11-15 ‘artistic and historic interest’ can consequently be identiﬁed.5 It was explained that such an index was needed in order to unify national Appendix 2 147

buildings’ data bases at the European level.6 The CDI proposed at this 6 The Council of Europe, colloquy was accepted as the European standard for uniﬁed recording Recommendation (95) 3 Hhttp:// and indexing of architectural heritage.7 Recommendation 95 states: cm.coe.int/ta/rec/1995/95r3. htm

This common minimum index [CDI] should facilitate the exchange of 7 Recommendation (95) information between countries and organisations engaged in the task 3, Hhttp://cm.coe.int/ta/ of understanding, conserving and protecting historic buildings and in rec/1995/95r3.htm fulfilling the needs of the public information on historic buildings and 8 Recommendation (95) monuments.8 3, Hhttp://cm.coe.int/ta/ rec/1995/95r3.htm The comparison of the Compendium entries on the subcategory "4.2 Recent policy issues and debate, 4.2.9 Heritage issues and policies" show that all countries emphasised informing the public on built heritage matters as the main heritage management policy. Digitalisation of the date bases, related to the built environment, structured according to the CDI requirements, became an imperative for carrying out this initiative.9 9 "The Compendium" Hhttp:// The comparison of the entries under the same subcategory reveal www.culturalpolicies.net/ that the built heritage is not perceived as an separated aspect of the web/profiles-structure. phpH, Following this national national culture but rather directly related to either tourism issues (for initiatives, in 2001 The Council of example, Ukraine, Sweden, Greece, Latvia) or overall spatial planning of Europe issued the Guidance on a country (for example, UK, the Netherlands). inventory and documentation of The universal validity of the conservation concepts was questioned the cultural heritage (Strasburg: on the grounds of reflecting only Western philosophical approach The Council of Europe Publishing 2001) towards time and space already in 1979 during the conference that led towards drafting of Burra Charter. As a consequence, Burra Charter was defined in a way which allows the heritage of the groups of people outside the Western tradition to be considered worthy of protection 10 Peter Marquis-Kyle, and safeguarding.10 However, in 2006 the group of scholars using the Meredith Walker, The Illustrated critical discourse analysis technique for analysing the text of the Charter Burra Charter (Sydney: ICOMOS, Australia, 1992) showed that "although laudable and sincere attempts have been made to incorporate a greater sense of social inclusion and participation in 11 E. Waterton, Laurajane Charter's revision, the discursive construction of the Burra Charter Smith& Gary Campbell, "The effectively undermines these innovations."11 The authors left open Unitility of Discourse Analysis to Heriatge Studies: The Burra the question regarding the intentionality of the actually non changed Charter and Social Inclusion", discourse, concluding that conservation discourse that shaped Burra International Journal of Heritage Charter is "deeply naturalized, self referential" and accepted as "part of Studies, vol.12, (4) July 2006 the common sense of conservation and heritage ethos".12 As such, they (339-355) 351 see this discourse quite resistant to change. 12 E. Waterton,et al 2006, 351

148 149

Bibliography 150 Bibliography

Alberti, L.B., De re aediﬁcatoria [On the Art of Cherry, M. ’Protecting Industrial Buildings: the Building in Ten Books], trans. by J.Rykwert, role of Listing’, Managing the Industrial N.Leach, R.Tavernor, (Cambridge, MA, Heritage, conference proceedings, ed. M. London, England: The MIT Press, 1996) Palmer and P. Neaverson, (1994) (119-124) Anderson, S. Peter Behrens and a New Clark, K. ed. Conservation Plans in Action: Architecture for the Twentieth Century Proceedings of the Oxford Conference (Cambridge MA, London, UK: MIT Press, (London: English Heritage, 1999) 2000) Clark, K. Informed conservation: Understanding Anderson, S., ‘The Fiction of Function’, in historic buildings and their landscapes for assemblage 2, (1987), 19-57 conservation (London: English Heritage, Athens Charter http://www.international. 2001) icomos.org/centre_documentation/chartes_ Clark, K. 'Ticking boxes or telling stories? The eng.htm Archaeology of the Industrial Landscape' Banham, R., A Concrete Atlantis: U.S. Industrial in Proceedings Managing the Industrial Buildings and European Modern Architecture Heritage, ed. M. Palmer and P. Neaverson, 1900-1925, (Cambridge, MA, London: MIT Leicester Archaeological Monographs No. Press, 1986) 2 (Leicester: University of Leicester, 1995): Banham, R., Theory and design in the First 45-48 Machine Age, (London: The Architectural Clark, K. 'Trouble at t'mill: Industrial Press, 1960) Archaeology in the 1980s', Antiquity, 61, Bell, D.Guide to International Conservation (1987): 169-79 Charters, (Edinburgh: The Historic Scotland, Clark, V. ‘A Struggle for Existence: The 1997) Professionalization of German Architects’, Bötticher, C.G.W. (1846) 'The Principles of the German Professions 1800-1950, ed. by G. B. Hellenic and Germanic Ways of Building Cocks and K.H. Jarausch (New York, Oxford: with Regard to Their Application to Our Oxford University Press,1990): 143-160 Present Way of Building', In What Style Colin Rowe, The Mathematics of the Ideal Villa Should We Build?: The German Debate on and Other Essays (Cambridge, MA, London: Architectural Style, intro. and trans. from MIT Press, 1976) German by W. Herrmann (Santa Monica, CA: Collins, P. Concrete the Vision of A New The Getty Centre for the History of Art and Architecture: A Study of Auguste Perret and Humanities, 1992): 147-168 his precursors, (London: Faber and Faber, Brown, G. Baldwin The Care of Ancient 1959) Monuments and Account of the Legislative Collins, P. Changing Ideals in Modern and Other Measures Adopted in European Architecture 1750-1950, (Kingston and Countries (Cambridge: Cambridge University Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, Press, 1905) 1967) Buchel, P. Hogervorst, B. The turning tide : Cossons, N. The PB Book of Industrial the user's role in the redevelopment of Archaeology, (Newton Abbot: David and harbour buildings in North-West Europe Charles, 1975) = Het kerend tij: de rol van de gebruiker Crook, J. M., The Dilemma of Style. Architectural bij de herontwikkeling van havenpanden Ideals from the Picturesque to the Post- in Noord-West Europa trans Annie Wright Modern (London: Murray, 1987) (Amsterdam: De Appelbloesem Pers, 1997) Denslagen, W. Architectural restoration in Cherry, M. ‘Listing: Current Developments’, Western Europe: controversy and continuity Context, 51 (1996): 16-17 (Amsterdam: Architectura&Natura Press, Bibliography 151

1994) (1964), edited by D.Farrell Krell, (London: Durand, J-N-L,.Precis des lecons d’architecture Routledge, 2000) donne a l’Ecole Polytechnique (1802-1805; Herrmann, W., Gottfried Semper: in search 1821), Precis of the lectures on architecture; for architecture, (London, Cambridge, with Graphic portion of the lectures on Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1984) architecture, trans. by D.Britt, intro. by A. Herzog&deMeuron, 'Tate Modern', in Quaderns Picon (Los Angeles, Ca: The Getty Research no. 230, July 2001, (62-71) Institute, 2000) Hübsch, H. (1828), 'In What Style Should We Empathy, Form and Space: Problems in German Build?', In What Style Should We Build?: The Aesthetics 1873-1893, intro. and trasl. German Debate on Architectural Style, intro. by H.F.Mallgrave and E.Ikonomou (Santa and trans. from German by W. Herrmann Monica, CA: The Getty Centre for the History (Santa Monica, CA: The Getty Centre for the of Art and Humanities, 1994) History of Art and Humanities, 1992): 63-102 Falconer, K. "Not a Bad Record?- Changing Hübsch, H. (1847) ‘The Differing Views of perspectives in recording", Perspectives Architectural Style in Relation to the in Industrial Archaeology, ed. Neil Cossons Present Time’, In What Style Should We (London: Science Museum, 2000): 57-85 Build?: The German Debate on Architectural Fernie, E., Art History and Its Methods: A Critical Style, intro. and trans. from German by Anthology, (London: Phaidon Press, 1995) W. Herrmann (Santa Monica, CA: The Frampton, K., Modern Architecture: A Critical Getty Centre for the History of Art and History (London: Thames and Hudson Ltd, Humanities, 1992):169-177 1980) Hudson, K. World Industrial Archaeology, Frampton, K., Studies in Tectonic Culture: The (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Poetics of Construction in Nineteenth and 1979) Twentieth Century Architecture (Cambridge, ICOMOS Australia, The Burra Charter, http:// MA, London: MIT Press, 1995) www.icomos.org/australia/burra.html Giedion, S. (1928), Building In France, Building in ICOMOS Charter on the Conservation of Historic Iron, Building in Ferro-Concrete, intro. by S. Towns and Urban Areas Georgiadis, trans. by J.Duncan Berry (Santa ICOMOS http://www.international.icomos.org/ Monica, CA: The Getty Centre for the History centre_documentation/chartes_eng.htm of Art and Humanities, 1995) ICOMOS http://www.international.icomos. Giedion, S. Space, Time and Architecture: the org/charters.htm Srbska Pleso-Brno Growth of a New Tradition (Cambridge, Ma: Symposium Resolutions the Protection of Harvard University Press, 1947) Folk Architecture 1971; Plovdiv Symposium Gordon, B. Malone, P. The Texture of Industry: An Recommendations on Vernacular Archaeological View of the Industrialisation Architecture and its adoption to the Needs of North America (Oxford: Oxford University of Modern Life, 1975; (CIAV-ICOMOS) Press, 1994) Thessaloniki Charter on vernacular Gullen, M. F. The Taylorized Beauty of the architecture 1986 Mechanical: Scientiﬁc management and the ICOMOS The Florence Charter (Historic gardens Rise of Modernist Architecture (Princeton: and landscapes); In What Style Should We Princeton University Press, 2006) Build?: The German Debate on Architectural Hague Convention 1899 http://www.yale.edu/ Style, intro. and trans. from German by lawweb/avalon/lawofwar/lawwar.htm W. Herrmann (Santa Monica, CA: The Heidegger, M., Basic Writings: from Being Getty Centre for the History of Art and and Time (1927) to The Task of Thinking Humanities, 1992) 152 Bibliography

Jokilehto, J. 'International Standards, Principles Monuments and Memory, Made and and Charters of Conservation', in Conserving Unmade,edited by Nelson, R.S. and Olin, Buildings: Studies in Honor of Sir Bernard M. (Chicago and London: The University of Feilden, ed. S.Marks (Butterworth- Chicago Press, 2003) Heinemann: 1996): 55-81 Morris, William The Society for the Protection of Jokilehto, J. A History of Architectural Ancient Buildings (SPAB) Manifesto http:// Conservation (Oxford, Burlington MA: www.igreens.org.uk/spab_manifesto.htm Lesevier Butterworth-Heinemann, 1999) Myerscough, John et al. National cultural Kerr, J.S. The Conservation Plan: a guide to the institutions in transition: 'desétatisation' preparation of Conservation Plan for places and privatisation (Strasbourg: The Council of of European cultural signiﬁcance (Sydney: Europe, 2001) CC-CULT(2001)10 The National Trust of Australia) Neumeyer, F., The Artless Word: Mies van Kostof, S., A History of Architecture: Settings and der Rohe on the Building of Art trans. by Rituals, (New York, Oxford: Oxford University M.Jarzombek (Cambridge, MA, London, Press, 1995) England: The MIT Press, 1991) Le Corbusier, (1931) Towards a New Architecture, Nisser, M. 'Aspects of International Co- trans. from French by F. Etchells (New York: operation' in Proceedings The Industrial Dover Publications, Inc., 1986) Heritage: What Policies?, Architectural Lebherz, H. ‘Schinkel and Industrial Heritage Reports and Studies, no.6 Architecture’, Architectural Review, (8/1988): (Strasbourg: The Council of Europe, 1987): 41-46 21-27 Lefebvre, H. The Production of Space (Oxford, OASE 73 Gentriﬁcation, editorial Pnina Avidar, UK&Cambridge, USA: Blackwell, 1999), Klaske Havik en Bart Wigger trans. by D.Nicholson-Smith Ordonez A.F. 'The Industrial and Technical Built Lowenthal, D. The Heritage Crusade and the Heritage in Southern States of Europe', Spoils of History (London: Pinguin Books Situation of the Technical and Industrial Ltd., 1996) Built Heritage in Europe, Architectural Lowenthal, D. The Past is a Foreign Country Heritage: Reports and Studies (The Council (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University of Europe: Strasbourg 1985) Press, 1985) Padovan, R., Proportion: Science, Philosophy, Markus, T.A. Buildings and Power: Freedom and Architecture (London and New York: SPON Control in the Origin of Modern Building PRESS, 1999) Types (London: Routledge, 1993) Palmer, M. and Neaverson, P. Industrial Marquis-Kyle, P., Walker,M. The Illustrated Burra Archaeology: Principles and Practice Charter (Sydney: ICOMOS, Australia, 1992) (London: Routledge, 1998) Mayer, H. City and Port (Utrecht: International Palmer, M. and Neaverson, P. Industry in the Books, 1999) Landscape 1700-1900 (London: Routledge, Middleton,R. and Watkin, D.J., Neoclassical 1994) and 19th Century Architecture, (New York: Panofsky, E., ' The First Page of Giorgio Vasari's Abrams, 1980) "Libro": A Study on the Gothic Style in the Mies van der Rohe, ‘Architecture and Technology’ Judgement of the Italian Renaissance Arts and Architecture, 67, no.10 (1950), 30 With an Excursus on Two Façade Design Mies van der Rohe, ‘Building’, G, no.2 (September by Domenico Beccafumi',in Meaning in the 1923) Visual Arts, (Doubleday Anchor Books: New Mies van der Rohe, ‘Industrial Building’, G, no.3 York, 1955) pp.169-235 (June 1924), 8-13 Parissien, S. Station to Station (London: Phaidon Bibliography 153

Press Ltd. 1997) Press, 1980) Pevsner, N. (1936) Pioneers of Modern Design: Stamp, G. 'Giles Gilbert Scott and Bankside From William Morris to Walter Gropius Power Station', Building Tate Modern, edited (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1966) by Moore, R. and. Ryan, R. (London: Tate Pevsner, N., (1968) The Sources of Modern Gallery Publishing, 2000) (176-190); Architecture and Design (London: Thames Stratton, M. and Trinder, B. Industrial England, and Hudson world of art, 2002) (London: English Heritage, 1997) Pevsner, N., (1976) A History of Building Types The Beaux-Arts and 19th Century French (Princeton, New Jersey; Princeton University Architecture, ed. by Robin Middleton Press, 1997) (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1982) Pfammatter, U., The Making of the Modern The Council of Europe Recommendation No R Architect and Engineer, trans. from (90) 20 on the protection and conservation German by Madelinde Ferretti-Theilig of the industrial, technical and civil (Basel,Boston,Berlin: Birkhäuser, 2000) engineering heritage in Europe Pickard, R. Conservation in the Built The Council of Europe "Cultural policy and Environment, (Essex: Addison Wesley cultural diversity", http://www.coe.int/t/ Longman Limited, 1996) dg4/cultureheritage/Completed/Diversity/ Pickard, R. Policy and Law in Heritage default_en.asp#TopOfPage Conservation, (London, Yew York: SPON The Council of Europe "Statute of The Council PRESS, 2001) of Europe", ETS no. 001, http://conventions. Pragnell, H. Industrial Britain: An Architectural coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/001.htm History (London:…Ellipsis, 2000) The Council of Europe European Landscape Quitzsch, H., G.Semper, Praktische Aesthetiek Convention und politischer Kampf, (Braunschweig, The Council of Europe http://www.coe.int/T/ 1981), series: Bauwerk Fundamente DG4/CultureHeritage/Default_en.asp Raistrick, A. Industrial Archaeology: An Historical The Council of Europe Recommendation No (89) Survey, (London: Eyre Methuen, 1972) 6 on the protection and enhancement of the Richards, J.M., The Functional Tradition in rural architectural heritage Early Industrial Buildings (London: The The Council of Europe, "About Conventions and Architectural Press, 1958) Agreements in the The Council of Europe Rosenthal, C. A. (1844) 'In What Style Treaty Series (CETS)", http://conventions. Should We Build? A Question Addressed coe.int/general/v3IntroConvENG.asp to the Members of the Deutsche The Council of Europe, "European Charter for Architektenverein', In What Style Should We Architectural Heritage", 7 http://www.coe. Build?: The German Debate on Architectural int/T/E/Cultural_Co-operation/Heritage/ Style, intro. and trans. from German by Resources/Amsterdam_declaration. W. Herrmann (Santa Monica, CA: The asp#TopOfPage Getty Centre for the History of Art and The Council of Europe, "National cultural policy Humanities, 1992): 113-124 review programme", http://www.coe.int/t/ Ruskin, J. Seven Lamps of Architecture (London: dg4/cultureheritage/Policies/Reviews/ Dent, 1969) default_en.asp#TopOfPage Saint, A. Architect and Engineer: A Study in The Council of Europe, "Recommendations Sibling Rivalry (New Haven and London: Yale (89)6E on the protection and enhancement University Press, 2007) of the rural architectural heritage", https:// Scruton, R. The Aesthetics of Architecture, wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=711549 (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University The Council of Europe, "Reference texts, 154 Bibliography

Cultural Heritage" http://www.coe.int/t/ (Strasburg: The Council of Europe Publishing dg4/cultureheritage/Resources/Texts/ 2001) Heritage_en.asp#P116_6002 The Council of Europe, Recommendation (95) 3 The Council of Europe, "The Compendium, http://cm.coe.int/ta/rec/1995/95r3.htm Contents and features" http://www.coe. Understanding listing: Manchester Mills int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/Policies/The The (London: English Heritage, 1995) Compendium/contents_en.asp#TopOfPage UNESCO http://whc.unesco.org/ The Council of Europe, "The Council of Europe's UNESCO Recommendations Concerning cultural heritage Conventions: Europe’s the Protection at National Level of heritage – a shared asset" (Strasbourg: The the Cultural and Natural Heritage Council of Europe Publishing, 2007) (1972) http://gillonj.tripod.com/ The Council of Europe, "The European Heritage culturalheritagechartersandstandards/ Network" http://www.european-heritage. UNESCO Recommendations Concerning net/sdx/herein/european_heritage_ the Safeguarding of the Beauty and program/showcontent.xsp?id=2 Character of Landscapes and Sites The Council of Europe, Architectural heritage, (1962) http://gillonj.tripod.com/ new technologies in documentation, Report culturalheritagechartersandstandards/ The Council of Europe, Architectural Heritage: Van Duin, L., ‘Functionalism’, A Hundred Years Inventory and Documentation Methods in of Dutch Architecture 1901-2000: Trends, Europe: proceedings, Architectural heritage, Highlights, (Amsterdam: Uitgeverij SUN, reports and studies 28 (Strasbourg: The 2003) (41-49) Council of Europe Press, 1993) Van Eck, C., Organicism in the Nineteenth The Council of Europe, Guidance on inventory Century Architecture, (Amsterdam: and documentation of the cultural heritage Architectura&Natura Press, 1994) Bibliography 155

van Maanen, W. 'Kathedralen van arbeid', in De Wehdorn, M., Georgeacopol-Winischhofer, U. Groene Amsterdammer, (6/10/2006): 32-33 und Roth, P.W., Baudenkmaler der Rechnik Venice Charter http://www.international.icomos. und Indsutrie in Osterreich, Band 2, (Wein: org/charters/venice_e.htm Bohlau, 1991) Villari, S. Durand (1769-1834): Art and Science Wehler, H-U. Deutsche Gesellschaftsgeschichte, of Architecture, (New York: Rizzoli Bd.3 (1845-1914) (München: Beck, 1995) International Publications, Inc., 1990) Weston, R. Modernism, (London: Phaidon Press Vitruvius, De architectura libri decem, ed. Limited, 1996) and transl. by F.Granger (Cambridge, MA, Wiegmann, R. (1829), 'Remarks on the Treatise In London, England: Harvard University Press, What Style Should We Build', In What Style 1931,1995) Should We Build?: The German Debate on Waterton, E., Smith, L. & Campbell, G. "The Architectural Style, intro. and trans. from Unitility of Discourse Analysis to Heriatge German by W. Herrmann (Santa Monica, CA: Studies: The Burra Charter and Social The Getty Centre for the History of Art and Inclusion", International Journal of Heritage Humanities, 1992): 103-112 Studies, vol.12, (4) July 2006 (339-355) 351 Williams M. and Farnie, D. A. Cotton Mills in Watkin, D., The Rise of Architectural History Greater Manchester (Preston: Carnegie (London: Architectural Press, 1980) Publishing Ltd., 1992) Wehdorn, M. 'The Industrial and Technical Built Wittkower, R., (1949) Architectural Principles Heritage in Northern States of Europe', in the Age of Humanism (London: Academy Situation of the Technical and Industrial Editions,1988) Built Heritage in Europe, Architectural Wright, Frank Lloyd Wright: Writings and Heritage: Reports and Studies (The Council Buildings, ed. by E.Kaufman and B.Raeburn of Europe: Strasbourg 1985) (New York: Horizon Press, 1960) 156 157

Summary

This thesis deals with design guidelines, as defined in the field of architectural conservation, by focusing on the problem of the conversion of industrial buildings. It is generally agreed that the best way to secure the future life of industrial heritage is through their adaptive reuse. The former function of ‘production’ for these buildings has to be replaced by contemporary, sustainable programmes. In most cases this reprogramming requires extensive conversion of the buildings’ fabric and layout. Conservationists generally prescribe design guidelines for conversion schemes in formal terms, requiring that past and present exist in a formal unity. According to the conservation charters, this ethical position can be achieved if the ‘aesthetic integrity’ of the protected building is altered as little as possible. However, in the mid 1980s, when conversions of industrial buildings became more widespread, industrial buildings were thought of as not possessing any architectural value because of the assumed deficiency of their stylistic character. Conversely, these buildings gained historic importance as a result of industrial archaeological research, and they were consequently protected as a symbol expressing the historic value of our industrial culture. Industrial buildings are therefore protected not because of their architectural value, but because of their archaeological and historic interest. It then becomes questionable how guidelines reflecting the importance of building’s aesthetics can guide the conversion of a building that is considered to be without aesthetic value in the first place. The main aim of this thesis is therefore to resolve this apparent dichotomy. The first step of this study is to investigate how the concept of ‘aesthetic integrity’, as defined in the conservation charters, can be interpreted in relation to industrial buildings in order for it to serve as a design guideline for the conversion of this type of building. Drawing upon recent architectural historical research of the nineteenth century, this thesis proposes that industrial buildings from the eighteenth century onwards were designed with aesthetic considerations in mind that were pertinent to that time. Therefore, to interpret the notion of ‘aesthetic integrity’ in relation to the industrial buildings, we need to go into the theoretical assumptions of the architectural debate of that period. For that purpose, this thesis draws upon the concept of ‘organicism’, interpreted by Van Eck as being a rhetorical strategy that led both design and interpretation of nineteenth century architecture in general. Following this interpretation of ‘aesthetic integrity’ , the stylistic character of buildings thus becomes of secondary importance. An evaluation of this theoretical proposal shows that this non-stylistic understanding of nineteenth century organicism opens up a way to define the notion of ‘aesthetic integrity’ of industrial buildings in terms other than that of style. Consequently, this study proposes that it is this definition of ‘aesthetic integrity’ that helps establish guiding principles for the conversion of industrial buildings. The study thus concludes that, when ‘organicism’ is used as a design guideline for the conversion of nineteenth century industrial buildings, past and present can exist in formal unity. 158 159

Samenvatting

Dit proefschrift gaat over ontwerprichtlijnen zoals die in het veld van monumentenzorg gedefinieerd worden met een focus op het vraagstuk van de verbouwing van industriële gebouwen. Het is algemeen erkend dat de beste manier om het toekomstige leven van industrieel erfgoed veilig te stellen het hergebruik ervan is. De voormalige productiefunctie van deze gebouwen moet vervangen worden door hedendaagse, toekomstbestendige programma’s. In de meeste gevallen vergt deze herprogrammering rigoureuze aanpassing van materiaal en indeling van het gebouw. Monumentenzorgers schrijven ontwerprichtlijnen voor verbouwingsplannen in formele termen die eisen dat verleden en heden in formele eenheid samen leven. Volgens de monumentenzorg handvesten kan deze esthetische positie bereikt worden als de ‘esthetische integriteit’ van het beschermde gebouw zo minimaal mogelijk veranderd wordt. Toen in de midden jaren tachtig de verbouwing van industriële gebouwen actueel werd, werd aan industriële gebouwen echter geen enkele architectonische waarde toegekend vanwege een verondersteld gebrek aan stilistisch kenmerken. Hun historisch belang was vooral het resultaat van industrieel archeologisch onderzoek waardoor ze werden beschermd als symbolen die de historische waarde van onze industriële cultuur uitdrukken. Industriële gebouwen werden dus beschermd vanwege hun algemene, archeologisch historische betekenis, en niet vanwege hun architectonische waarde. Daarmee wordt het zeer de vraag hoe een richtlijn die het belang van de esthetiek van een gebouw tot uitdrukking brengt richting kan geven aan de verbouwing van een gebouw waar helemaal geen esthetische waarde aan wordt toegekend. Het centrale doel van dit proefschrift is daarom het oplossen van deze veronderstelde tegenstelling. De eerste stap van deze studie is te onderzoeken hoe het concept van ‘esthetische integriteit’ zoals gedefinieerd in de monumentenzorg handvesten, geïnterpreteerd kan worden in relatie tot industriële gebouwen zodat deze kan dienen als ontwerprichtlijn voor dit type gebouwen. Gebruik makend van recent architectuur historisch onderzoek over de negentiende eeuw stelt dit proefschrift dat industriële gebouwen sinds de negentiende eeuw ontworpen zijn met een esthetische intentie die eigen was aan die tijd. Om dus de notie van ‘esthetische integriteit’ te interpreteren in relatie tot industriële gebouwen moeten we ingaan op de theoretische veronderstellingen van het architectuurdebat van die periode. Hiertoe maakt dit proefschrift gebruik van het concept van ‘organicisme’, zoals dat door van Eck geduid is als een retorische strategie die zowel het ontwerp als de interpretatie van negentiende-eeuwse architectuur in het algemeen richting gaf. Met deze interpretatie van ‘esthetische integriteit’ wordt het stilistische karakter van gebouwen van secundair belang. Een evaluatie van het theoretische voorstel toont aan dat dit niet-stilistische begrip van het negentiende-eeuws organicisme een weg opent om de notie van ‘esthetische integriteit’ van industriële gebouwen te definiëren in termen anders dan stijl. In het verlengde hiervan stelt deze studie dat het deze definitie van ‘esthetische integriteit’ is die helpt richtlijnen te ontwikkelen voor verbouwingsontwerpen van industriële gebouwen. De studie concludeert daarom dat wanneer ‘organicisme’ gebruikt wordt als ontwerprichtlijn voor de verbouwing van industriële gebouwen, heden en verleden in formele eenheid kunnen leven. 160