Re: Re: Pastiche – The Final Solution?

Home Forums Ireland Pastiche – The Final Solution? Re: Re: Pastiche – The Final Solution?

#749062
GrahamH
Participant

Hello what?, haven’t seen you in a while 🙂

I agree that pastiche is more suited to other art forms than to architecture in that you can choose to disregard or simply ignore certain genres if you don’t like them, in a way one cannot with architecture. Whatever about one-off projects, building pastiche in urban areas can help define the nature of places, and if so-called ‘theme park’ building is not agreeable to you, and it is used in helping to shape a place you value, it can be hugely offensive, and there’s nothing you can do about it.

With regard to it simply not working as a form I’d have to disagree. The ‘mud-hut arguement’ always crops up, but that is not what is in question here – it is the strictly limited use of pastiche in areas where it may ‘generally’ be considered appropriate – or more to the point, where contemporary would not, in most cases, street terrace infill locations.
It is not about whether contemporary architecture can or cannot imaginatively adapt to a sensitive location, it is not about an apathy with contemporary design, it is not about being nostalgic. The use of pastiche as I see it, would be for the purpose of re-inforcing the character of specific locations (mostly streetscape in-fill) rather than just accepting via convention that an out of place contemporary design must be built.

I acknowledge that this is the key point – can you or can you not accept comtemporary architecture amongst older architecture, i.e do you think that modern design is ‘out of place’?
In most cases I totally agree with using contemporary architecture alongside older buildings; the contrast generated can be spectacular and very satisfying, and not just in the case of classical masterpieces etc.
But I think that the ‘pastiche issue’ mostly arises with streetscapes – if an overwhelming majority of an area is of a certain nature, I think this character should be reinforced – in most cases – every situation is different.

It really boils down to whether you think you are being patronised by replica buildings. I agree that large scale statements that are false are nothing but wallpaper and are totally unambitious. I can think of the perfect example in Dundalk, where it is still proposed to rebuild from scratch a large 18th/early 19th century Market House on the central square in the town that was demolished in about 1967. If rebuilt, it would involve demolishing the Arts Centre there, for people who know it, and the creation of a proper square to the front, no doubt with heritage lamposts and hanging baskets to match, while the building, complete with limestone arcades to the ground floor and brickwork above (similar to Dublin Castle) would straddle the whole west side of the square.
This is actually a serious proposal – it’s not gaining much momentum though, but not on the architectural merits, but on cost grounds.
This is a blatent example of what gives pastiche a bad name, and generates the apathy with contemporary design argument.

Latest News