In Defense of Plastere

[JohnB]

A stone example which was patched in brick before being rendered (as its neighbour still is) - when I worked in Lincoln there was an application to replace the brick patching with stone because it looked "messy" - which it does, because although it may have started life as bare stone about 1500, it had always been rendered after the current window arrangement was inserted about 1800, until someone came along in the 1970s to "reveal the natural beauty of the building" (a phrase that was used to support a fortunately unsuccessful application to pick the render off the house next door)

You should see (or maybe you shouldn't!) the patching that's been done to my house, that I'm currently uncovering. I've been asked if I'm going to leave the stone bare, but only by people who haven't inspected it closely! I wouldn't mind neat brick patches like that if I was leaving it bare, but it will be going back to its original limewash finish to hide the rough bits.

 

[JoceAndChris]

I'm sure Mr P can't object to a bit of olde-worlde spellynge, and the title is a parody of Sir Philip Sydney's "Defense of Poesie", which I sincerely hope nobody else living but me has ever had to get through.

Touché.
Once again you have exposed my literary ignorance when I thought it was just a bit of American spelling and a typo. :lol:
I really should have known better than to doubt you. :wink:

Really not my intention - and I'd swap my brain for yours any day!

 

[JoceAndChris]

As for why use wattle & daub, if the frame was covered over, wouldn't that be for insulation? I don't know, but it's an interesting point and our timber frame has some wattle & daub, so perhaps it was built with exposed timbers and covered later. Parts of the frame are filled with brick though, and not particularly decorative-looking brick, so perhaps these were repairs when some wattle & daub panels decayed and then everything was rendered over to hide the mess? Certainly, when the frame was disrupted to install the sash windows, all the surrounding voids were filled with brick.

All interesting stuff.

Indeed, and the problems start when someone starts picking off the most recent surface finish and then gets into an aesthetic mess by believing that what's currently visible underneath was always meant to be on show, at the expense of architectural sense.

Two examples:
NorwichView attachment 1
The dormers are typical of Norwich in that they ignore the layout of the facade anyway, but below that the (heavily restored) timber framing shouts down the attempt at classical order and regularity that the 18th century window openings and doorcase would have if the building had been left in its last rendered state.

Lincoln
A stone example which was patched in brick before being rendered (as its neighbour still is) - when I worked in Lincoln there was an application to replace the brick patching with stone because it looked "messy" - which it does, because although it may have started life as bare stone about 1500, it had always been rendered after the current window arrangement was inserted about 1800, until someone came along in the 1970s to "reveal the natural beauty of the building" (a phrase that was used to support a fortunately unsuccessful application to pick the render off the house next door)

Very helpful examples. "The natural beauty of the building" :lol: Yet most laymen would look at those and think "ooh, pretty old buildings", and yes, I'd rather have that as my view than a shedscape or a Barratt row, but still, there ought to be more education about, and communal awareness of architectural styles and periods, less dumbing down and generalising, which is what is going on in these renovations. It's like being deprived of the history of the ships in the BBC's coverage of the Diamond Jubilee all over again!

Here's John Prizeman again - flowery - but he is writing in 1975, so perhaps should be forgiven.

"The face of a house is the face of the man it was built for: it shows his character, tastes, interests, wealth, fears and aspirations more clearly than anything he may say about himself. The face of the house also reflects the climate, geology, craftsmanship, materials, fashions and building laws current when it was built, the face of history, easily examined without the use of the time machine."

If you agree with that, then a house is a pretty precious document. There are lots of new buildings that express our times and fashions, our interest in exposed stone and timber and brick - why impose that on an old building that was never designed to bear it? It doesn't make sense. People should have more pride in restoring the past, not changing it to the bizarre mish mash of oddments that they think constitutes a period property in the 21st century.

 

[Penners]

The odd thing is that, in our case, the gable end with the poncy jetty faces away from the road!

As I understand it, the prime intention of jettying was not in any sense poncey or showy-offy (do tell me if my architectural terminology is too technical for you).

It was a technique used for stiffening the flooring structure of houses, before somebody twigged (remarkably late in the architectural calendar) that a floor joist laid on its short edge will be stiffer than one laid on its long face.

The weight of the wall that rested on the jettying had the effect of counterbalancing the spring in the joists, on the other side of the bearing plate.

 

[Keith Bowman]

The odd thing is that, in our case, the gable end with the poncy jetty faces away from the road!

As I understand it, the prime intention of jettying was not in any sense poncey or showy-offy (do tell me if my architectural terminology is too technical for you).

It was a technique used for stiffening the flooring structure of houses, before somebody twigged (remarkably late in the architectural calendar) that a floor joist laid on its short edge will be stiffer than one laid on its long face.

The weight of the wall that rested on the jettying had the effect of counterbalancing the spring in the joists, on the other side of the bearing plate.

Of course: clever Penners. Certainly in our case, at the time the house was built only the jettied end had floor joists, the rest was open hall. And the jetty end, with it's upstairs private room, faced the sun. The road, and what outsiders could see from it, was irrelevant.

 

[middi]

A jettied building that ( nowdays) faces away from public view or road is mainly due to the rearranging and progression of better access for transport. An old muddy track or walkway and position may have been unsuitable as the " village scene" changed it's shape, and over centuries the " front" of the house is now the " back".

Middi