ctesiphon
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
A student in UCD Dept of the History of Art did a dissertation on Daniel Robertson and Castleboro in 1998 or so- that might be a good place to start. The bibliography would probably include a book, the title of which escapes me, on the great houses of Co. Wexford. Wexford libraries would probably have this book too.
Contact the Dept., who may be able to help you.Maurice Craig has called it something like “…the greatest ruin in Ireland”, which is saying something.
To check their ‘listing’, the Record of Protected Structures in the local development plan would be the best place to start. But presume nothing in the world of Irish heritage…
Ballyfin House was included in the National Inventory of Architectural Heritage (NIAH) survey of Co. Laois, carried out by Duchas around 1999 and published subsequently. Most local libraries should have copies of the book, which comes with a cd of images. Otherwise it’s available in bookshops.
I think the images are on the NIAH website, which is at http://www.buildingsofireland.com (I think- maybe .ie?). If not, there should be a link from the DEHLG website, at http://www.environ.ieIf memory serves, one or both of the Morrisons had a hand in it, which means it’s probably included in the book on them published by the Irish Architectural Archive (and written by Edward McParland?).
Hope this helps.
The William H. Whyte book is presumably ‘City- Rediscovering the Center’ (Anchor Books, NY ?)- WHW got a National Geographic grant for this research, at the time the first ever NG grant for domestic (i.e. USA) research. If you thought the involvement of NG suggests an anthropological slant to the work, you’d be right. The cornerstone of the study is observation; hours and hours of it. Makes for a fascinating read, with some intuituve results, some counter-intuitive ones. His ‘Social Life of small urban spaces’ is apparently also excellent.
My own thesis is on ‘Urban design, visual clutter and pedestrian navigability’ or something of that ilk- looking at the proliferation of junk in streets and the consequences of same. Then again, I’m not an architect (architectural historian, and planning student), so maybe your point about architects is valid? I do know that I’ve always had as a pet hate the way most architectural photography disregards the human element of buildings, i.e .treats the buildings as abstract compositions while treating people as intrusions into the purity. Perhaps it’s the same mentality? (A similar point about photos was made in another thread, re deBleacam & Meagher- was it by you, garethace? About how different are the experiences of buildings in print vs. in the flesh? It’s a good one.)
Re. the pub crowds- are you familiar with the economic concept of ‘The tragedy of the commons’? It states that individuals will exploit a ‘common pool’ resource (in the example given, it’s the grazing of animals on common land) to maximise their own ‘profit’, resulting eventually in damage to the resource, the suffering of the collective and thus of each individual? Think of city traffic, Ireland’s fisheries policy… Has been used as a justification for planning (i.e. govt intervention in the ‘free’ market for the ‘common good’).
On computers, calculations and behaviour, try Bill Hillier’s ‘Space Syntax’ work (The Social Logic of Space; Space is the Machine), in which formulae based on recorded behaviour are applied to future scenarios for analysis. Used in the redesign of Trafalgar Square. (Tungstentee introduced me to it- want to comment, Tungie? 🙂 )
Good luck with it- you’re opening a fascinating can of worms.
@sw101 wrote:
i would never give special dispensation for smokers. for one thing, it’s not a habit to be encouraged (smoker, so i’m not on my high horse), and second, i can see smoking being banned outright by 2012, so by the time anything most students design is actually built, it won’t be an issue.
Even if smoking is banned outright (highly unlikely, in my view- generates too much revenue. How else will the govt. pay for the servicing of all the one-off houses? 😮 ), the ban raises the issue of outdoor activity generally. So much guff is written about the ‘public realm’ in architecture, but our climate really isn’t cut out for all this continental-style lounging. Applying the logic of the ban to other activities, it seems there is still a need for well-designed outdoor areas that benefit from shelter from the elements. Ever noticed how the bandstand by the pond in Stephen’s Green attracts the daytime drinking fraternity when it’s raining?
“…not a habit to be encouraged”? The ban seems to me to be disincentive enough. And I’d argue that there are other habits that we should be discouraging- driving in city centres, building unsustainable one-off houses- that are far more injurious to the wider population than somebody nipping out for a fag.
I’ve been a ‘pink’ man since, oooh, 1993? When it was neither profitable nor popular…
And I’ve never worn black by choice- dress suit only. There’s enough of it in the world already.Architect? How dare you!! I’m a PLANNER! No polonecks and intelligent spectacles for me, mate. ‘Tis they who are on the receiving end of my ire, with their notions, and their concepts, and their visions 😉 (Not really, but we must perpetuate the stereotyped dichotomy between the two disciplines.)
Smoking:
A classmate of mine is doing a thesis on the urban design implications of the smoking ban- can’t wait to see his results. But yes, I think this will become an increasingly important area. From a planning point of view, outdoor cig bins all carry advertising- should this require planning permission? And canopies/awnings too? And what about the fixing of said cig bins to the walls of protected structures (which many pubs are)- does this compromise their heritage integrity?
There is evidence too that the lack of an enclosed yard (sorry, ‘beer garden’) with a pub has an effect on the value of the property- reducing it by as much as 20% (according to recent article in I.T. Commercial Property).
I think this will be a fascinating area to watch in the next while.Oh no- The Wall wasn’t my turf at all! I would have felt as intimidated as you.
But if you got me outside the library shop, well… watch out!!! Baaaaaaa Hickey! Nice shoes, nerd! Where’s your friends, nerd! Did mummy knit your jumper, nerd! Oh look, the nerd has dropped his books… etc. etc. :p(I fear we’ve gone off thread a bit- I hope it was entertaining. Lest I be misunderstood, I was categorically not one of those people. Don’t worry Graham, I’d never mock your shoes. 🙂 )
So- garethace. I’ve had a thought about Richview. Since the smoking ban, a table with two benches outside the canteen, from which every movement can be monitored across the square and into/out of the buildings, has become a key spot, even for non-smokers. We jokingly refer to it as the village pump- could be a candidate for a ‘ramp’ equivalent?
It’s to do with a perch, i.e. where a bird etc. might sit. Usually a slightly elevated and advantageous position, from which to observe. ‘The Wall’, when sat upon, placed the sitter’s head just above those of the general populace (subject to personal height attainment), and as it was at a strategic junction in the building, with views along two corridors and out through the (then) main Commerce entrance, was ideal for the noble profession of people watching. Alas, nobody has the time any more in this fast-paced, need-it-yesterday world of ours…(sob) 🙂
In the mid-1990s in UCD, ‘The Blob’ serves a similar function. It is a small marble sculpture on a plinth, about waist height, located in the Arts Block. ‘The Wall’- an interior wall on the concourse that allowed perching- was another location in the Arts Block, at the Commerce end, at which Commerce students would congregate. There was a definite allegiance among the students for one or the other, but rarely would anyone ‘belong’ to both. (In my time, my friends and I would gather at the 30p coffee machine outside the shop in the library basement- but we were a contrary bunch. 😉 )
I don’t know if this still holds since Commerce got its own building.
And I don’t know if there’s an equivalent in Richview (my current home)- maybe the steps of the canteen, or the canteen itself?A related point (though it probably doesn’t apply to the NY example) is the role of smoking in this.
Also, on crowds: have you tried Elias Canetti’s ‘Crowds and Power’? A somewhat different thrust from the Surowiecki book which, if the reviews I’ve read are anything to go by, argues that we should follow the lead of the majority.
So much for the majority- LONG LIVE THE SMOKERS!!! 😀 (“The word on the cancer ward is…”)
Phil-
Here (hopefully- it’s my first time attaching images!) are those images of the sculpture, and the building, showing it in context.
Apologies for the quality, but they’re digital photos of existing print photos. Still, it should give you what you want.Sorry phil, I’ve no idea. I know Frank McDonald has written about it before (Destruction of Dublin, maybe?)– though I’d like to point out that my opinion is entirely my own! 😀
I wish to disassociate myself from the above comments. Yes, I know who it was, and no, it won’t happen again. Sorry Paul and everyone else.
Doc and Tungsten- once more and I out you.
Phil- get back to work. 😉Your pal,
Ctesiphon (Robert).Cheers for that Phil. I do have a picture of it at home, but it’s a print only and scanner access is a problem. I’ll see what I can do.
It was in situ until the recent works were begun. I’m crossing my fingers that it’ll be replaced, though it can’t go back in its old location as that’s now a window.Does anybody know what happened to the sculpture that was affixed to the wall of No.1 College Green? It sat in one of the ground floor bays that has now been turned into a window. It was an abstract composition, green (possible marble?) and every time I pass the building I miss it.
There’s recent precedent in the UK stating that artwork designed for a building should remain with that building, rather than remain the property of the owners, even where the owners commissioned it for a specific building. I’m concerned about this item- perhaps they intend to re-hang it inside? I feel that exterior art belongs not just to the building but to the public realm also, and Dame St/College Green is the poorer for its absence.
Any info?
“It is th only Irish building which has a high international reputation”??? (I presume this is a quote from that link?)
By way of refutation, I mention the Parliament House in College Green by Edward Lovett Pearce (c.1729—) (see also my list, above). I have seen it included in exhibitions in three different non-Irish cities. It was the first purpose-built bicameral legislature in the world (i.e. two-chamber parliament), and is important for placing the House of Commons on the central axis with the House of Lords off to one side, i.e. for symbolically placing the ‘people’ above their masters.
For that, and the fact that it’s an astonishing building, it is certainly known more widely than these here shores.
The Casino may have the highest international profile, but not the only one.
The argument that one must drive into work because one needs a car for site visits is weak. As things currently stand, maybe not, but it shows a slight lack of imagination. Could companies not keep a car or two (or three…) expressly for this purpose, thus freeing us up to walk or cycle or Luas or bus for the home-to-work journey? Or what about renting a car when needed? Or public transport?
I don’t want to over-simplify the argument, but it is imperative that we attempt to apply some imagination to these problems, rather than just seeing the cards that we already hold in our hands.
I’m currently formulating a thesis topic on this very subject- I hope to post here soon re same, and all opinions would be welcome, especially those of motorists (I can’t drive, and I cycle everywhere, so I have an inherent bias that must be countered 🙂 ). I’ll be in touch.I’ll defer to your local knowledge, Graham, on the principal elevation, while pointing out that the right-hand elevation seems to be the one housing the doorway, i.e. would be considered to be the ‘entrance front’. And ‘larger’ doesn’t always mean more important. In fact, the NLI (Lawrence?) pic shows what appears to be a subsidiary structure abutting the main building to the left (rere/side?), which was partly what suggested my reading of the hierarchy.
Could we both be right? How tragic would that be…? 🙂
@DublinLimerick wrote:
Aren’t the Irish Independent Property Supplement a disgrace?
You appear to lack grammatical knowledge.
DL-
The thread title might lack grammatical correctness, but it is logically fallacious to state that its author lacks grammatical knowledge. How can you tell? Maybe (s)he chose not to use it? Maybe (s)he chose the deliberate mistake? (As seems to have been the case.)You want to get nit-picky? We can get nit-picky. I’d rather stick to the point of the thread. 😉
The picture also shows that the principal front of the original was to the right (sorry, don’t know the area so don’t know the orientation or street names), whereas following the extension the impression now given is that the old front has become the side elevation. I know the Georgian tradition of planarity and the hierarchical arrangement of streets had waned significantly by the time this bank was built, but vestiges of it remained as the picture shows. These vestiges have now been destroyed, reinforcing the point made earlier that the issue of pastiche is often related to the wider context rather than simply to the individual structure and the merits of pastiche extension.
On a related point earlier in this thread, someone (phil? Graham?) asked about modern buildings being replicated- the only case I can think of is the cheap knock off of the Lisney building on SSGreen. I wouldn’t be a huge fan of the STW original, but the derivative sister is a sham.
“…within reasonable reach of Dublin…”
How does one define ‘reasonable’? “Honey, I’m just popping into Dublin city centre for a pint of milk- I should be back in three to four hours, depending on the traffic. Actually, y’know what? I think I’ll take the bike…”
Sue- it is not snobbery to question the truth of such statements as the above (whatever about the debate on the style). Far from snobbery, such questioning derives ultimately from a (I should say ‘my’, as I don’t necessarily speak for all) …from MY belief that such developments undermine the common good of the nation, i.e. by encouraging car dependency, promoting social segregation (if there are gate lodges, are there gates too?), etc.
But then again, Laois doesn’t exactly have a good reputation in planning recently- wholesale rezoning of village peripheries (counter to the NSS, all perceptions of good planning practice…) for the (alleged) benefit of a select few landowners, anyone?This thread has concentrated on the stylistic side of Devin’s original post, but he made similar points about density in it too.
PS For the record, I think they’re horrible. A recent thread asked about regional architectural styles- these would be an example of the polar opposite. (Where’s the smiley for throwing up?)
