What's the worst bodging you've had to put right?

[MatthewC]

I don't know the circumstances of course, but perhaps fifty years ago an impoverished parish faced with a deteriorating wall might have said knock it down, or can you do a cheap bodge for us?

You are too generous. It's the wall on a parapet with a quatrefoil frieze along its length, 15 feet above the south aisle wall; the church was originally built in about 1100AD and I am sure that, even in the worst of times, such vandalism as "knock it down" was never an option! Mind you, before proper controls were introduced, there have been rectors who (for instance) burned lots of mediaeval church records as "unwanted" and removed lots of gravestones in the cemetery "to make it easier to cut the grass", but even they had some respect for the building itself.

 

[formerly known as]

I don't know the circumstances of course, but perhaps fifty years ago an impoverished parish faced with a deteriorating wall might have said knock it down, or can you do a cheap bodge for us?

You are too generous. It's the wall on a parapet with a quatrefoil frieze along its length, 15 feet above the south aisle wall; the church was originally built in about 1100AD and I am sure that, even in the worst of times, such vandalism as "knock it down" was never an option! Mind you, before proper controls were introduced, there have been rectors who (for instance) burned lots of mediaeval church records as "unwanted" and removed lots of gravestones in the cemetery "to make it easier to cut the grass", but even they had some respect for the building itself.

so, the church in question escaped Victorian restoration then?

 

[MatthewC]

so, the church in question escaped Victorian restoration then?

Now, that's a leading question - it was re-ordered completely in 1862 and you must have guessed that the Victorians wind me up sometimes. I have been known to regard them as vandals (e.g. they did dig out the mediaeval floor and lower the level) but in general they knew what they were doing and were quite good at it. However, one thing they didn't properly consider was the need for ventilation under the pew platforms which now suffer from damp and are rotten, hence the need for a new floor; another thing they got wrong was drainage and the floor level below the ground level. However, they left the actual structure of the building itself pretty well untouched otherwise - apart from the windows....

My old church in London was "beautified" three times in the 19th C - well, as they say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder (and the Victorian Society)!

 

[JanieB]

I was house hunting both for and with my brother a few years ago and one of the houses had been "updated" by the owners late husband. She very proudly showed us where he'd ripped out the original oak panelling and replaced it with some sort of wood effect hardboard, and showed us the stone mullions that were stacked in the garden. Those weren't the only things he'd done but are the 2 that stick in my memory.

I often wonder if anyone reported the vandalism to the local CO.

 

[Keithj]

Shortage of funds is a very real problem for village churches faced with repair needs!

We were fortunate in having a very generous benefactor many years ago, but it was not always so. When the tiles were removed from the chancel roof for the recent repairs, we found that one of the timbers had rotted seriously in times past. A large piece of treetrunk has been used to shore it up. It looked decidedly odd, but had done its job for probably 200 years or so. It's now been repaired "properly".

Yes, we had the Victorian vandalism as well as Victorian additions (all done without a faculty), now much beloved of the Victorian Society and English Heritage.

 

[formerly known as]

so, the church in question escaped Victorian restoration then?

Now, that's a leading question - it was re-ordered completely in 1862 and you must have guessed that the Victorians wind me up sometimes. I have been known to regard them as vandals (e.g. they did dig out the mediaeval floor and lower the level) but in general they knew what they were doing and were quite good at it. However, one thing they didn't properly consider was the need for ventilation under the pew platforms which now suffer from damp and are rotten, hence the need for a new floor; another thing they got wrong was drainage and the floor level below the ground level. However, they left the actual structure of the building itself pretty well untouched otherwise - apart from the windows....

My old church in London was "beautified" three times in the 19th C - well, as they say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder (and the Victorian Society)!

the ICBS (incorporated church building society) archive is often a good form of reference for 19th c works. They do plans etc on line.