Architectural Abominations

dod

Architectural Abominations

How easy it is now to look back at some of the mistakes we made in the past in the name of fashion: would that we had never endured such trend travesties as Legwarmers, Fluffy Earmuffs, narrow leather ties, the 'CHiPS' mirror sunglasses that you could buy in the Pound-shop. Thankfully these, and many other outrages that at the time passed as fashion statements, have found their proper place as obscure footnotes to the history of the eighties, rearing their ugly heards only as paraphenalia at retro-parties and the occasional Gay-pride march.

We can conceal our embarrasment at having allowed ourselves to be swept along on this wave of bad taste by giving our "I'm with Stupid" t-shirts a new lease of life as car-rags. We don't tell people about the black plastic bag in the attic where the stonewashed pre-torn denim jeans have been stashed for when they become cool again. Nobody need ever know about the ultra-tight Speedo swimsuits and the frilly, bubbly swim-hats that 80s guys wore to make a positive impression at the municipal swimming pools.

Fortunately the clothes dilemma is easily resolved. We bin the old cheesecloth shirts, bring the plaid suits down to the local St. Vincent de Paul office, line the dog-kennel with the Val Doonican chunky cardigans, and buy a new wardrobe in a lenten-esque commitment never to make the same mistakes again.

There are, however, expressions of fashion that are not as easily consigned to the taste dustbin. Architectural styles and the resulting buildings, just as prone to fickle trends as clothing , are not comparably transient, have a much longer lasting impact, and are not as easiy remedied. See for example how long it has taken to come to a consensus about demolishing the flats in Ballymun. At the time of construction, socially progressive, efficient, architecturally consistent with modern sixties style, they quickly became symbolic of all that was wrong with sixties cool. So bad were the Ballymun flats that our public representatives in the seventies felt comfortable to publicly damn them. They truly were fine bastions of good taste, our representatives in the seventies.

It is easy now to criticise the extraordinary poor taste which allowed some of the more infamous buildings that grace our skylines to have been constructed in the first place. In light of the revelations from the planning tribunals, it is easy to assume that some of these constructs would never have been permitted but for that glorious house of planning propriety and rectitude, Dublin City Council. The problem of architectural eyesores is not by any means confined to Dublin - I would imagine that few enough of our burghs have escaped being burdened by some sort of 60s or 70s architectural abomination.

Some of these buildings are abominable only because they are unfamiliar, or perhaps difficult to appreciate when seen out of context. The first skyscraper built in Manhattan was probably unsympathetic to the other buildings in the vicinity at the time. Now, however, Manhattan without skyscrapers is unimaginable. The new British Embassy building on Merrion Road in Ballsbridge is apparently architecturally highly meritorious, its use of light quite innovative. What I see, however, is a building constructed quite out of sympathy with the surrounding housing landscape. Liberty Hall... realistically no words can explain just how bad Liberty Hall is. The jury seems still to be out on the various Sam Stephenson buildings, for example the Central Bank on Dame Street, and the original Civic Offices in Christchurch. It is a fine balancing act to ensure that we continue to embrace innovation and that we maintain some semblance of sympathy with the surrounding heritage.

This is my (abbreviated) 'hate list' of buildings in Dublin City Centre, buildings that I would like to see demolished immediately, if not sooner (as you can see by the list, I use 'buildings' in the loosest possible sense). Leaving the buildings as a pile of post-demolition rubble would be an improvement on their being allowed to remain standing. Maybe there are other buildings I should have added. Perhaps there is a case to be made that we need to maintain these awful piles in situ as a reminder of just how wrong we can get it. They could permitted to remain as our permanent legacy to future generations of Mullet-haircut, Quicksilver-with-Bunny-Carr, Noel-Edmonds-jumper, Timothy-Mallett expressions of bad taste:

#1 Hawkins House (The Department of health building, opposite Mulligans pub on Poolbeg Street)
#2 Liberty Hall
#3 O'Connell Bridge House (the office building just on the southside of O'Connell Bridge, used to house the Harp bar, now the Q bar)
#4 The Liffey railway bridge at Tara Street Dart Station (for obscuring the view of a glorious Custom House)
#5 All of Temple Bar. Maybe if we demolish it in its entirety and rebuild it from scratch, we might get it right second time round...

Pigman II

Don't know if I agree with you on Temple Bar but you're spot on with the other four. Hawkins house in particular looks like it'd be more at home in an industrial estate than the centre of a city trying to remain true to its pre-1900 image.

Off the top of my head other building I feel worthy of mention are the Irish Life building on Middle Abbey Street and that building directly across from NIB on College Green. Ugh!

[Iramus]

god you should see UCD.

As a wise chemistry lecturer once said to me
...it was built by 60s architects on LSD

sceptre

From an architectural appreciation point of view, Liberty Hall is the best building in Dublin to work in. It's the only building in Dublin where you definitely can't see Liberty Hall if you look out the window.

It really is terrible.

I'm actually quite divided on the Central Bank myself. Can't actually decide whether it's an architectural achievement or nothing more than an eyesore.

Dublin's kind of special. It's the only city in the country where so many fine buildings have survived. Most of the rest of the country has a few castles and country houses, the odd Georgian terrace and that's about it really. People wandering around London (leaving out the tourist attractions, I'm thinking of a quick walk up Regent Street looking above the ground floor or anywhere around Great Portland Place while viewing from Regents Park) really don't realise how lucky they are to still have these buildings well kept, and apart from the BT Tower (or whatever it's called this week), having a lack of real eyesores like Dublin unfortunately has. It's still better off than most of the rest of the country though.

Most Irish buildings from the 60s and 70s could do with being bulldozed to be honest. I don't know any 60 year old Irish architects that could explain what the hell they were thinking but I'd like to meet a few.

mike65

Originally posted by sceptre
Most Irish buildings from the 60s and 70s could do with being bulldozed to be honest. I don't know any 60 year old Irish architects that could explain what the hell they were thinking but I'd like to meet a few.

Its no mystery - they and plenty others around the western world were working to a style which is sometimes known as New Brutalism. Which basicly means very square with no room for anything other than ruthless efficency through concrete and glass. Except of course many such buildings were anything but most of them are cold and draughty hell holes in winter while killing you with heat in the summer.

http://www.open2.net/modernity/4_15.htm

Waterford has a few buildings which might fall into this catagory like the ESB offices on the Mall, Shaws on the Quay (this has been softened over the years) the Ard Ri hotel on the hill
overlooking Ferrybank and Plunket Railway Station.

Mike.

Crash

Tbh the central bank i believe is an architectural acheivement, as i enjot the intricies of the hanging design, (and my amusement at the effort they had to go through to remove a floor )

however, its in completely the wrong place. ****e place for it IMO