And so to London, where English Heritage have been hard at work cementing their reputation as unenlightened guardians of post-war architecture with their far-from-unexpected decision to allow the Commonwealth Institute (Peter Newnham and Roger Cunliffe for RMJM, 1960-62) to be severely compromised by an ‘enabling’ development by Rem Koolhaas/OMA. The architecture press have leapt upon this with aplomb, with an admirably vicious degree of opprobrium towards English Heritage in the comments section. There is far more at stake here than the loss of a functional office wing, axially and ideologically an integral part of the original scheme, highly unfortunate though that is. No; the crux of this, what rises to the surface once again in this case, is the idea that post-war architecture is simply too difficult to sustain to full conservation standards, and that we shouldn’t try. The political substance and aesthetic meaning of architecture like this, so the message goes, is too foreign to the desires and approaches of contemporary developers and architects. What they like is a straightforward silhouette, a napkin sketch-shape that can be immediately appreciated, with none of the addenda which made the building substantively what it was intended to be. They also, it goes without saying, like physical and creative space for the expression of the contemporary design ego and the realisation of full profit potential.
All of this represents a highly dangerous approach, all in the name of constructive conservation and the greater good. It is a truism that the listing process – a tough enough system to navigate in the first instance – is only the beginning of successful conservation. The unfortunate facts of the matter are that the entire programme of post-war listings, an urgent enough process that has itself stuttered out of breath too soon, has happened sufficiently quickly that research-based knowledge, and both expert and popular opinion, have had nowhere near enough time to catch up with it.
English Heritage are almost solely responsible for cock-ups like this, barring the interference of ministers with exquisitely suburban tastes, and they are beginning to add up to quite a catalogue of failure, and one worthy of noting. This is the first, therefore, in an occasional series: Concrete is Too Hard.
Posted by beyondthewalls 
