The Abbey Theatre – should it stay or should it go
- This topic has 53 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 23 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
Why retain the facade of the Carlton at all? Surely It would be better to start from scratch. On a site that big with such an extensive street frontage on the main street of Dublin you could make an enormous impact. The Abbey should go for something very distinctive and create a landmark for Upper O’Connell St. in the same way that the GPO or Clearys are landmark buildings for the lower part of the street. Nice and all as the Carlton is it’s a little anonymous. We should be able to include our National Theatre on the same list of civic buildings as the Custom House, the Bank of Ireland, Trinity College etc.
I wonder how wise it would be to have such an elongated facade on O Connell St.I do not believe it would help the scale of the street.
The street frontage of the adjoining site is long enough, to create a building of drama, even if it only is a shopping centre.
I also believe there is a certain irony in seeing drama, in such an undramatic, and as JOF put it, anonymous building. I do not really belive there is anything wrong with it. It could not possibly be any more ‘ananymous’ than the Abbey’s current premises.
If the facade was stripped of all the ‘gunk’ (signs windows, canopy etc.) and was treated as a ‘blank’ canvas, I belive the building could really shine.
re: art deco decorative panels
Were they original DC3?Yes.
You can see what they looked like in the Irish Arts Review 1998 p173.
This is an article by E Mc Aulay.I believe they are still there but have no recent information.
So the Abbey Theatre is to be rebuilt. E100 million is to be spend on it’s reconstruction which will be up to 11 storeys high. (I can see the objections already, the Green Party are no doubt preparing a dossier.)
Let’s hope they get a big international name in to do the job; Norman Foster, Frank Ghery, Daniel Leibeskind or whoever….but I hope they just don’t settle for Scott Tallon Walker & Co.
Was’nt that 60’s featureless pile really atrocious by Scott and his associates…..the portico that was added in the 80’s however gave it some redemption, but I’m glad to see it go. Hopefully the new design will address the street better and will lead to the rejuvenation of this part of the city which is filled with nothing but tawdry looking establishments and winos. A few good auld pubs in the area however.this wont happen….
THE Cabinet yesterday approved a multi-million euro re-development of the Abbey Theatre to be funded through public/private partnership.
The proposal, brought by Arts, Sport and Tourism Minister John O’Donoghue, recommendeds the national theatre remains on its present site, in the Taoiseach’s constituency, on the north side of Dublin.
However this would mean buying the buildings surrounding the theatre which would involve negotiating with more than 20 land-owners.
The re-development will cost an estimated €200m, excluding the millions involved in the possible acquisitions.
If developing on the current site proves impossible other options, such as developing the Carlton cinema site, will be pushed.
The Government is to invite expressions of interest from the private sector for the “capital re-development” of the theatre “in and/or around the vicinity of the site of the existing theatre”.
An expert group concluded the redevelopment required an appropriate civic setting, and needed to form part of the overall urban regeneration programme covering that city centre area.
Two design options have been selected which would provide the required accommodation.
“I am pleased that it will now be possible to move forward to the next stage of this development,” said Mr O’Donoghue yesterday. “I look forward to the creation in due course of a new home for a National Theatre that reflects its important place in the cultural life of the nation and as the cradle of dramatic genius.”
A recent report examined whether the theatre should be developed upwards on its existing site on Lower Abbey St, extended down to the River Liffey or moved to a different site in the area.
It is the view of the expert group that for the national theatre to function properly the stages and ancillary services of the Abbey and Peacock must be located at ground level.
They would need 4,500 sq metres of space compared to the current 1,500 sq metres.
What wont happen – the redevelopment itself or SWT getting their mitts on it?
I must admit I am a bit sceptical of any prestige public projects going throug under the present regime in light of Bertie Bowl and Metro.The government could get Kellogs to sponsor STW for one of their cereal boxes…
public-private partnership in action!
“Let’s hope they get a big international name in to do the job; Norman Foster, Frank Ghery, Daniel Leibeskind or whoever….but I hope they just don’t settle for Scott Tallon Walker & Co. “
This thread should read “Save the City”, and perhaps we might avoid the disasterous move to elect to chose an architect via reputation rather than the response. This is why architectural competition is so important. Instead of inflated egotistic creations we might actually recieve quality architecture and perhaps surprising architecture. How will be engender an architectural culture here if we automaticaly believe that only an international signature architect will do.
Similarily limited competitions are equally problematic since it tends towards the same problem indicated above, slightly wider pool.
Obviously this does not mitigate against the problems of a poor or uninformed jury.
The reason i raise the probelm of the thread title relates to the possibility of retainign the existing site.
Both the choice of an architectural response as well as site should be thought of in relation to the city as a whole. Where should the abbey be and how it relates to the matrix of urban spaces around it is vitally important. The axis along the liffey where a series of cultural artifacts are linked is perhaps the best solution for the whole city, but to decide upon the issue soley from a property perspective will be damaging ot the potential of the national theatre.
I would be all on for extending to the waterfront too, as opposed to the Carlton, just to spread the developments around a bit.
If they did the right job, they could substantially narrow Eden Quay, which I think they should do anyway, and put in more plazas-pedestrian stuff, and have a fantastic riverside main front to the building.
I would actually have double main entrances to attract people from both sides. There is no reason why it couldn’t be some sort of world class theatre/workshop/drama museum/living -space complex that is another must-see part of coming to or living in dublin…
My sugestion is sell off the Abbey brick by brick, like London Bridge, to somewhere in America, like Las Vegas or Atlantic City. Move the Abbey Company over there too, save the Americans the trouble of trying to squeeze into Lr Abbey Street. Free up the site for another new bridge across the Liffey.
Start with a new theatre on a greenfield site, without the intellectual baggage and faded reputation of the Abbey. Indeed a good ready cash bid might get the RSC to take on a residency.
So dc3 abandon the heritage of the National Theatre – explain to me why this is a good idea? I assume once again this is a piss-take
Why are the usual (foster, leibeskind, Gerhy et al) trotted out as lets have one of their signiture buildings? Could we have something new, not just something from the cv of the global architectural royalty?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
