conflict + architecture
- This topic has 29 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
Anyway it’s nonsense to suggest that the types who would knock a terrace of ‘British’ Georgian houses have this wonderful mystical appreciation of the Wicklow mountains: they’re precisely the types who’d quite happily build one-off bungalows all over them.
notjim-
I presume you’re referring to the destruction of the hutongs / siheyuans? I have a great quote at home somewhere from a former Mayor of Beijing about cultural destruction that I must dig out- pretty relevant to this debate.
Also, what’s the Hancock book? I started with Garth Cartwright’s Princes Amongst Men– interesting, if a lottle ‘blokey’ in writing style, and more concerned with Gypsy musicians than the broader social and cultural issues. Hancock gets plenty of mentions in the Fonseca book, but I’d appreciate a tip on where to start with Ian Hancock.
Apologise for the off-topic post.
Ian Hancock: We are the Romani people
It is a guide to Rromani culture and history written for teachers and social workers who have contact with the Rromani, as a consequence it is quite light and quite polemical, it doesn’t take long to read, but I found it interesting. I bought it out of interest after hearing a song by Esme Redzepova which I found really beautiful. I haven’t read the other books you mentioned, they are on a list.
Ian Hancock himself is interesting, he is a British Rromani who worked as a spray painter, he roomed with some people from Sierra Leone and picked up their language, as a consequence he got some work as a research assistant to a linguist at UCL and ended up doing a PhD in linguistic even though he had no primary degree. He is now a leading linguist and rights-activist.
Perhaps a good example of what your talking about would be the destruction of Nelson’s Pillar in Dublin in 1966 by the IRA. The Pillar woul have been quite an imposing symbol of english rule as you can see in the attached pictures. No official attempt was made to reconstruct the pillar, in fact,the army was called in to remove what remained of the pillar by way of a “controlled” explosion, which caused far more damage to the surrounding buildings than that of the IRA.
One of the (unselected) entries in the Berlin Holocaust memorial competition proposed the destruction Brandenburg Gate.
@notjim wrote:
Apologise for the off-topic post.
Ian Hancock: We are the Romani people
And I apologise for asking. 😉
Thanks for the info.
whoops: apologise -> apologies.
FIN – read the Destruction of Dublin – covers the Hume street saga appropriately
@Hiivaladan wrote:
….and you put 2 and 2 together and come up with 5.
to you maybe but to me i got 4.
@Hiivaladan wrote:
His actions were disgraceful because there was no thought,sense or rationale behind them, just an inchoate bitterness and spite against a whole culture which he then expressed against harmless buildings in a way totally unworthy of a minister, or even a cultured man.
he probably did have thought and rationale behind his decision. well for him anyway. sense is the difficult one. it may have made sense at the time just as it might not make sense now. your assination of the character of the man is based solely on your rationale which is as flawed as his because you put up no argument as to why these building should have remained. i don’t know the area in question- were they particularily beautiful specimens of what period they were from or are you just angry that they were torn down? i think it’s time you started backing your chest thumping with some facts rather than trying to shout down anyone. if you presented a valid argument as to why he shouldn’t have demolished then then that’s one thing.
@Hiivaladan wrote:
Not that his kind needed the excuse of a so-called “British” building to wreck things.
there is no doubt they are ‘British’ styles and so i think, can be called ‘british’. have you another name for them?
and what exactly are his kind?@Hiivaladan wrote:
They’d have demolished a round-tower quick enough if enough moola was involved, despite all their bleatings and lip-service about out glorious past.
this i am in agreement with you. look at what is happening in Meath for instance.
@Hiivaladan wrote:
And you’re right ,we were at war then. The real Ireland was at war against a bunch of fanatics who arrogated to themselves the right to call themselves the Government of Ireland and to wage “war” on Irelands behalf.
that’s exactly what the brits said in 1916. you are now living in and enjoying the freedom of the result of that. only very recently did we give up our claim to the rest of the island.
@Hiivaladan wrote:
As for the last line, you know exactly what I mean.
Showing my age, Eh? Excuse me while I get the zimmer frame.afraid not. i can’t remember it now to be perfectly honest. and i was calling you young not old.
Well, I hadn’t thought of assinating his character, but since he made an ASS (sorry for raising my voice, but I’m already guilty of shouting you down apparently) of himself then, and later in many other ways, I don’t need to do so now.
I wasn’t aware of the controversy at the time…I was too young,. but I know this:if you want to make an argument about demolishing anything or making any drastic alteration to an urban environnment, it’s up to you to make a reasoned case for it, to justify yourself, If your so-called case is based on spite,ignorance of the past, contempt for, and misrepresentation of, whole sections of the population and so forth, your case is shaky to begin with. I may not agree with, say, Summerson in FitzWilliam Street but at least he made a case based on his belief in the low quality of the buildings .Bolands raving about “belted Earls” was nothing more than off-the cuff prejudice of the most moronic kind and belongs in the long tradition of Irish populist political tomfoolery,playing to the most base instincts of certain bigoted sections of the populace…like, for instance, some Kerry politicians we know today who shall remain nameless.
To talk about “British” architecture is beside the point. As I said above, the architectural culture of both islands were similiar and even if Ireland had been independent that wouldn’t have changed much. Even before the Normans came we were building in Romanesque and the coming of the Normans merely intensified trends that had already begun. In the late medieval period there was little difference-if any-between religious architecture in the Pale,in the Anglo-Irish realms and in native Irish lordships. We are not dealing with some irruption of alien architecture into another culture like the Moguls into India, the Ottomans into Byzantium or the Spanish into Mexico. The USA after independence continued building in the same manner as before.Most buildings was designed by Irish people, and in fact one could say that the fine qualities,human scale and magnificent plasterwork (such as michael Stapleton’s) was a specifically Irish contribution to a common architectural lingua franca-and one that we should have been proud of instead of having contempt for. And, as I also said before, the said Minister continued to work happily in Leinster House which goes to show his grievance was thoughtless and opportunistic.
“and what exactly are his kind” Well, since you asked…I think “half-witted,ignoramuses fighting yesterdays battles” says it nicely.
What the “Brits” ( that phrase says it all ) said in 1916 is irrelevant.The people of Ireland passed judgement on these “gentlemen ” long ago. They gave them the finger. Even in this recent election.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
