Another 'Restoration' programme

[Alex]

Tuesday evening on BBC2 at 8pm, Restoration Home. Apparently it is a series of 6 programmes about restoring listed buildings. I know you will all be upset to hear, that I don't think Sarah is in this one, so no drama but I'm sure that we will all find something to moan about.

 

[jocelyn plummer]

I think that it will be quite interesting, less of the actual restoration trials and tribulations, more of the research into the history of the house, revealed by the improvements.

 

[Penners]

I admire your optimism, Joss.

Following owners of crumbling historic buildings as they save them from ruin by restoring them into 21st-century dream houses

Somebody's bound to cry....

:roll:

 

[robgil]

I will , I'm going to cry like a girl.

 

[Penners]

Now, Rob - I've told you repeatedly about the very simple solution to this problem.

 

[jocelyn plummer]

I admire your optimism, Joss.

Following owners of crumbling historic buildings as they save them from ruin by restoring them into 21st-century dream houses

Somebody's bound to cry....

:roll:

After the trailer I saw tonight it looks to me as though there will be a bit of painful wincing at the 21st c updates, but nevertheless I sgall focus on the historic fact finding bit.!!

 

[JoceAndChris]

Ooh! Looking forward. I love nothing more than a big glass of wine and hurling abuse at the screen.

 

[Penners]

I usually hurl more than one.

 

[Moo]

I usually hurl more than one.

Surely it depends on how awful the programme is. I've seldom seen anything on television that merits more than one (large) buse.

 

[Penners]

I've seldom seen anything on television that merits more than one (large) buse.

In which case you must be extremely sparing in your TV-watching. How admirable!

I have a substantial supply of buses (not to be confused with the large red things: hold-very-tight-please-ding-ding), all of which are very chipped and dented from their repeated hurlings.

 

[MatthewC]

I have a substantial supply of buses (not to be confused with the large red things: hold-very-tight-please-ding-ding), all of which are very chipped and dented from their repeated hurlings.

Presumably you keep them in the same place as your circular tuits? :lol:

 

[LadyArowana]

Just in case anyone runs out I have found a rather nice pattern, shouldn't be too difficult to find someone to cast a few spares...

 

[Penners]

Just in case anyone runs out I have found a rather nice pattern, shouldn't be too difficult to find someone to cast a few spares...

...always assuming that I find time to get around to it.

 

[LadyArowana]

Just in case anyone runs out I have found a rather nice pattern, shouldn't be too difficult to find someone to cast a few spares...

...always assuming that I find time to get around to it.

Plus there's always the problem of sourcing the "scratch". It has foiled my attempts at cooking many times.

 

[Feltwell]

Bumped back to the top to remind everyone it's on tonight.

Presented by Caroline Quentin - that well known expert on historic buildings :?

 

[Penners]

Oh, all right - I'll watch it.

But if anyone cries.... :evil:

 

[vicky whitworth]

I thought it was dreadful. Even the history bits were too sensationalist for my taste. I don't like conversations of buildings intended for other uses. I know old churches need 'saving' but I hate seeing full length windows cut across by floors. After half an hour I found that button that Penners recommends and went and talked to the chickens, who always have an opinion on everything!
What did everyone else think?

 

[Penners]

It wasn't nearly as bad as I'd anticipated. Nobody cried, and even the one moment of disagreement between the young couple was handled with fairly good humour. I like the chap's agreement slightly to modify his arch design, in order to achieve "a restoration of conjugal rights"!

As for the pros and cons of converting a disused church into a residence, that's an argument that has and will run and run. But the bottom line is always the same - if a building is no longer required for its originally intended use, then the stark choice is that it must be converted into something else or crumble to dust. I'm in favour of the former.

When I heard that this was the young couple's first-ever conservation project, my heart sank. I expected a real bodge. But that young man was a real craftsman, and I found myself greatly admiring what he's done.

We don't know whether he used modern or traditional materials, because the programme-makers didn't cover this point. There was precious little in the way of a detailed examination of the work done, but I suppose the Man On The Clapham Omnibus won't really be interested in that aspect. However I thought the broad sweep of what the couple had achieved was very beautiful (except for the gothic arch stair balusters - they were too much for me).

The over-made-up historian - Kate Auburn-Tresses or whatever her name was - was extremely irritating. But despite her, I shall probably watch the next thrilling episode.

 

[Flyfisher]

I started watching it but my internal "Penners Button" activated itself after about 20 minutes and I fell asleep - my mistake, perhaps, for lying rather than sitting on the sofa.

I agree about the 'stark choice' when dealing with such buildings. It may be preferable for the building to remain as a church but that's hardly the fault of the couple concerned. 'Use it or lose it' applies to all old properties.

 

[skier-hughes]

I couldn't stand her voice tone, so next time I might press the mute button and just watch her, far better probably.

It was a tv show, best I can say about it.

It did inspire me slightly to maybe have more of a go at putting things back, as my invovlement is mainly taking things out, he was quite a gifted fellow.