Dimbleby on telly

[Nemesis]

Well I enjoyed it!

What did others think?

Possibly more 'worthy' than Mr Meades on Weds... who is quirky and fun as well as informative - but good to have a 'weighty' architecture series on, anything to remind people historic buildings matter and get them out to visit.

 

[Gervase]

I thought it was beautifully photographed and lush to look at - the helicopter bill must have been huge! Dimbleby irritated me, though; for me his script was a bit clunky and 'Janet and John'-ish and I could have done with the easy scholarship of a Dan Cruikshank or Simon Schama.

 

[arl]

yes really good!

anyone happen to know what the triangular building is in the opening credits?

 

[Gareth Hughes]

yes really good!

anyone happen to know what the triangular building is in the opening credits?

Rushton Triangular Lodge

http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/conProperty.70

 

[Nigel Watts]

I caught the end of it. It was enjoyable if a bit lightweight.

His analysis of Kings College Cambridge's chapel's structure was not quite right though. He implied that it represented the hight of structural sophistication. When I studied engineering at that University the professor of structural engineering took great delight in pointing out that the butresses of King's chapel were much larger than they needed to be, that perpendicular gothic was generally over-engineered, and that English gothic of the Decorated style was strcturally more efficient.

 

[Gareth Hughes]

I caught the end of it. It was enjoyable if a bit lightweight.

His analysis of Kings College Cambridge's chapel's structure was not quite right though. He implied that it represented the hight of structural sophistication. When I studied engineering at that University the professor of structural engineering took great delight in pointing out that the butresses of King's chapel were much larger than they needed to be, that perpendicular gothic was generally over-engineered, and that English gothic of the Decorated style was strcturally more efficient.

And his description of Ely cathedral implied that it was "still standing after 1000 years" and a piece of fantastic, solid Norman engineering, whereas the most impressive thing about Ely is the lantern which replaced the central Norman tower after the latter collapsed in 1322. Some of his other pronouncements were rather light on fact too.

 

[Nemesis]

Come back Sir Alec Clifton-Taylor...

It was all delivered in rather a portentious way too, but the fact we have a series about architecture on telly at prime time can't be bad.

The details I'm sure most folk won't know or care, it's just so much better (to me) than Big Brother!

It was a spot muddled - I think I spotted the Ancient House at Clare which it didn't mention where it was.

 

[Flyfisher]

I'm certainly no expert in architectural engineering matters, but it has always seemed to me that our stock of old buildings is a self-selecting sample. By definition, the design and building skills have created some structures that have survived for many hundreds or thousands of years, so they are clearly great achievements.

But that doesn't mean that such skills were widespread or better than today's workmanship. When we examine something as magnificent as Ely Cathedral we are viewing the pinnacle of what what was possible at the time, with money being no object.

There must have been millions of buildings that didn't survive 50 years never mind centuries.

As for 'engineering efficiency', I'm not surprised that many of these historic buildings are 'over-engineered' - the ones that weren't have probably fallen down by now. Building science and material characteristics and consistency were simply not developed enough to be able to create very 'refined' buildings, except by accident.

That's in no way to denigrate the magnificence of such structures, but we ought not to get too carried away with romantic notions of how our predecessors were so better at such things than we are today.

Incidentally, am I the only one to be amazed at how many of these magnificent old buildings are churches? Money no object indeed!

 

[Flyfisher]

The details I'm sure most folk won't know or care, it's just so much better (to me) than Big Brother!

Me too, but therein lies the dilemma - well for the TV stations anyway. I've no idea of the comparative viewing figures but I'd bet real money on BB getting more viewers than Dimbleby. It's easy to criticise but thank goodness for the BBC or we would have wall-to-wall BB clones across the schedules. It's enough to make a grown man cry.

 

[Mark]

IWhen we examine something as magnificent as Ely Cathedral we are viewing the pinnacle of what what was possible at the time, with money being no object.

Am I confused or is Ely the one that keeps sinking and has lots of remedial work to stop it falling down? Its about 20years since I visited so I could be wrong.

Agree with the main thrust of your argument though. How many church towers fell down either during or shortly after construction?

 

[piper]

Incidentally, am I the only one to be amazed at how many of these magnificent old buildings are churches? Money no object indeed!

Of course - think yourself into the mediaeval mind-set. Saving your soul, and the souls of the nation, for all eternity was THE most important thing to spend money on.

 

[alice]

That's in no way to denigrate the magnificence of such structures, but we ought not to get too carried away with romantic notions of how our predecessors were so better at such things than we are today.

Very good post, Flyfisher! What survives intact is not always representative of the average architecture of the day.

As far as the comment on churches and money is no object..... doesn't every era build monumments to what it considers important? Tombs in ancient Egypt, churches in the middle ages, financial institutions in the 19th century, etc. I think it's interesting that today's biggest, costliest structures are entertainment complexes, like arenas, exhibition halls and museums. Our legacy to the ages will be theme parks and football stadia.

alice

 

[Nemesis]

Well, Morecombe's Frontierland is no more, Pleasureland is being demolished, the Scenic Railway is about all that's left of Dreamland, and Wembley Stadium has already gone.

 

[Flyfisher]

Oh dear - religion is such a difficult issue and perhaps best avoided but here goes anyway.

I entirely agree with piper's comment about the medieval mindset and how important it was to 'save your soul' etc etc. I can understand how people living a subsistence lifestyle could feel pressured into giving vast proportions of their meagre income to the church, resulting in even more hardship for themselves. What I find hard to believe is that the church would happily conspire to take their money and use it to build huge and magnificent buildings when it could have been much better used to alleviate the suffering of people struggling to live day to day.

Even today, the church seems quite prepared to bankrupt people in order to maintain their precious churches, as evidenced by the chancel liability scandal. I simply can't understand the moral position of anyone, or body, who thinks such behaviour can be acceptable.

I also agree, mainly, with Alice's comments about building monuments, except that I would argue that the pyramids were probably only considered important by the royals and their close circle and perhaps not by the slaves who actually built them. As for today's "monuments", I think it will be surprising if any modern designs actually last long enough to provide a legacy. The original wembley stadium didn't last very long, why should the new one fare any better?

Commercial pressures combined with very well developed design and engineering practices almost certainly means there is very little over-engineering in modern buildings. Much of the sixties building boom (for example) has already been expressly pulled down through a combination of poor design or sheer embarrassment that it might become our legacy.

A future historian might conclude that the 20th century was pretty much a complete disaster, architecturally, although, I've heard that Liverpool Cathdral is quite magnificent (money no object again of course), which I suppose proves that we can build equivalent buildings today if we want to. Perhaps it will last even longer than Ely Cathedral - I'd forgotten about its structural problems so I had a brief bout of revision here. £8m to repair and £500k a year to maintain for the future. Phew, money no object indeed!

 

[Penners]

You could level all kinds of little criticisms at the programme, but in the end it was a visual feast for any lover of fine buildings.

I thought it was very perceptive of the programme makers to get viewers hooked by starting the series in the most beautiful part of Britain.




OK chaps - tin hats on. Stand by for bombardment.

 

[Nemesis]

But - people put up with the suffering (and the paying of dosh) in the belief it would smooth their way in the afterlife.

Purgatory and all that.

 

[Penners]

But - people put up with the suffering in the belief it would smooth their way in the afterlife.

A bit like me, really. I suffer endlessly - but I never talk about it.

 

[Flyfisher]

But - people put up with the suffering (and the paying of dosh) in the belief it would smooth their way in the afterlife.

Purgatory and all that.

Quite so. The best con tricks are never discovered by the victims.

 

[arl]

yes really good!

anyone happen to know what the triangular building is in the opening credits?

Rushton Triangular Lodge

http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/conProperty.70

thanks
fascinating building - and i thought i was peculiar, seems i am nothing compared to Sir Tresham

 

[alice]

So many '60's buildings used (NEW!!! Improved!!! Space-AGE!!!) experimental materials and methods which have deteriorated so badly that unless you're of a certain age, like me, it's hard to imagine that the buildings ever looked decent. I've just become aware that what I have been calling Nasty Modern Crap is now refered to as "Mid-Century" and souless boxes with picture windows and shag carpet are now being admired as retro.

Every era will leave a legacy whether we want it to or not.

Also, I wasn't even thinking of Wembley when I mentioned arenas, I was thinking of the London Dome and all the sports stadia built in the States.

alice