Re: Re: Pastiche – The Final Solution?
Here you go – not the best in showing its context but anyway:
Thanks everyone for your responses, lots of interesting points.
I thought I’d raise Bachelors Walk specifically simply because it’s been annoying me – the fact that there’s a lot of sneering and scoffing at pastiche, particularly Bachelors Walk – not necessarily here, but in the media, by commentators and in other circles – yet I constantly detect an underlying current of not just acceptance, but actual liking for the type of architecture chosen for this site.
I think this development broadly goes to show that pastiche can actually work (the principle, not the buildings extant!)
I agree there are many interpretations of pastiche, but broadly there are two decent types, in line with the definition of pastiche for other art forms – one that faithfully uses a style of architecture to create a building that looks of its era – not necessarily for the purpose of making it look 150 years old or whatever, but the end result is generally the same.
The second type is that of using various architectural elements to create a pastiche of styles, such as the Irish Permament on O’Cll St, which varies from colonial to baronial, to neo-classical.
The difficulty with using pastiche in locations (the first kind) is that every case is different. But there are still some ground rules that should be adhered to in all cases – rules that actually should restrict the use of pastiche.
At the end of the day what makes our older buildings special to us now (aside form their age) is the fact that they’re not modern, i.e the contrast generated by later building styles. If we do not continue to build in a contemporary fashion, whatever about the impact on that architecture, the buildings of old will suffer in our estimation.
I think some of the points you raise Diaspora are those very rules – once you go beyond a certain point in facade scale, proportionate to the location, you have to put your hands up and say contemporary is the only mode.
Likewise, where there is such a jumble in styles of building, contemporary is generally more acceptable.
Fundamentally you must be honest to the location – perhaps ‘true’ is a better word as by definition replica or original pastiche is not honest!
I think the perfect case in point is O’Connell St (now there’s a surprise), where in the morning if possible, I’d knock Penneys and pop in a 20s neo-classical. Likewise with Schuh, some decent granite dressed brick facades, are being cried out for I think.
In these cases I think you are being true to the location, you are consolidaing the character, reinforcing the style of the area. Interestingly as was discussed on the O’Cll St thread, all re-builds on the street are themselves a charade, concrete units dressed up in classical finery.
On Upper O’Cll St you have to accept the nature of the damage done, the facades are too large (Fingal & derelict site 10 bays alone, RDH 6 if not 8 bays) to credibly and confidently use pastiche. The huge mixture of styles is such as to further advocate the use of contemporary. I know that’s a departure from what I said before but really, when you get to know the place and appreciate the impact such development would have in what is a location so varied in nature, it would be a wasted opportunity. You would not be ‘true’ to the location, if that’s the word. The contrast between the needs of Upper & Lower O’Cll St I think broadly encapsulates the pastiche ‘issue’.
Devin, those PVCs have been in that corner building for quite a few years. There’s so much irony there it hurts to think about it 😀
Everytime I see that building I think of the RTE drama from 4 years ago ‘Rebel Heart’ set in 1916. One of the opening scenes was the central character running into shot and racing over a deserted Ha’penny Bridge. The corner ‘house’ and terrace were in shot and there was computer generated smoke pouring out of the chimney pots! Another reason to justify the development perhaps? 🙂
The bachelors Walk scheme is interesting on so many levels, not least the ‘cliff-like’ nature of it. It is the Georgian architecture of squares and thoroughfares, not Dublin’s Quays. Not that that’s necessarily a bad thing – one could interpret it as the development the WSC never got round to 🙂
Often wondered why this quay wasn’t properly developed; I presume the set-back from the quay at the O’Cll St corner is an indication of what was planned for here.