Jump to content
Fancy running a forum? Sheffield Forum is for sale! Learn more

Demolition (Channel 4) - Vote for a horrid Sheffield Building

Recommended Posts

Yeah, the imagination of this council's planners doesn't stretch far beyond Casinos, Strip Bars and Car Parks - anything their greedy developer mates want to invest in. So this is what 'regeneration' means to them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by nick2

They would strole home down broad leafy evenues through a neo-classical masterpiece of town planning with architecture to rival Rome or Venice. They might linger in one of the many parks and squares for a rest and to watch the children happily playing with their kites or to admire the well-tended flower borders. Finally they arrived home at their quaint little cottage which was small and humble but served their needs.

 

Oh, if only we could turn the clock back ?

 

One of the problems with the debate on architecture is this patronising tendency of those who think they're being "modern" to class anyone who disagrees with them as being "old fashioned". It's an easy stereotype and allows architects, planners and designers to gain the moral high ground.

 

In fact, this debate has nothing to do with whether buildings are "old fashioned" or "modern". It has everything to do with people and human nature. Human beings weren't meant to live in cities. We do so out of necessity. Many of us believe that if we have to live in a city, it should be beautiful.

 

Unfortunately, architectural dogma for the last 70 years has been based on human ideals that real people don't match up to. The principal theory which has taken hold of architecture is that if a building functions as it should, then people will, in time, recognise its inherent beauty. What cobblers.

 

I want to live in a vsiually stunning city, and I don't especially care whether it's stunning because of its old buildings or because of new buildings. If people look back on old buildings with misty-eyed fondness, it's because until comparatively recently, the goal of architects was to create beautiful buildings. It's no coincidence that many of the pinnacles of architectural achievement have drawn on the past for their inspiration (try the renaissance, or the gothic revival or neo-classicism).

 

Sadly, we live in times where people arrogantly believe that they can change the way things have been done for thousands of years, and - more importantly - that they can change human nature.

 

Sorry for the length of the post but ill-informed people trying to force an argument on fallacious grounds wind me up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That told me - last time I try to have a bit of a laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Houndsfieldjr. How eloquent. How well put. Brilliant! Brilliant! Brilliant!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by hounsfieldjr

One of the problems with the debate on architecture is this patronising tendency of those who think they're being "modern" to class anyone who disagrees with them as being "old fashioned". It's an easy stereotype and allows architects, planners and designers to gain the moral high ground.

 

Too right, mate! Like someone said earlier, this is the sort of attitude that, if left unchallenged, would turn the city into another Milton Keynes. Functional but bland!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although, I'd still debate how 'functional' St Appauling's place is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by JimFX

Too right, mate! Like someone said earlier, this is the sort of attitude that, if left unchallenged, would turn the city into another Milton Keynes. Functional but bland!

 

Milton Keynes was built from scratch, so all the buildings are modern, there is no mix of old/new, thats why it looks so dull. Sheffield will never end-up like that, unless we get rid of every old building first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by nick2

Milton Keynes was built from scratch, so all the buildings are modern, there is no mix of old/new, thats why it looks so dull. Sheffield will never end-up like that, unless we get rid of every old building first.

 

So, now are YOU saying that Modern = Dull ? :confused: I don't believe that at all and it certainly doesn't have to be that way. It boggles my mind that this city is supposed to have some of the best architecture and design schools in the country and yet much of the new stock of buildings cropping up here are some of the ugliest in the world. What happens to all of those bright young graduates - do they all F-off to London or what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by JimFX

So, now are YOU saying that Modern = Dull ?

 

I'm saying Milton Keynes is dull.

 

I don't think all modern buildings are dull, I think some modern buildings are dull, as are many old buildings.

 

As for the architecture students, yes, I think they do go to London or another city where people are a bit more foreward thinking and prepared to take a risk or two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe that it is Sheffield people that aren't forward thinking enough. I think we're victims of clueless or corrupt planners in the council as someone else mentioned earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we do kind of have ourselves to blame, look at the reaction of people on here to

 

a) the winter gardens

b) the new hotel

c) the office block

d) the proposed tower

e) the re-development of Leopold Street buildings

f) the NCPM kettles

 

we don't give anything a chance, people saying they look crap before their even finished, even (and this I found most amusing) people saying they look worse than the egg-box. Anyone from the council reading it would think "good grief, they dont' like anything new", so they only give permission to bland buildings that don't provoke any kind or reaction, like Derwent house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JimFX, the planners aren't (on the whole) clueless, and I have never ever seen or heard any evidence of them being corrupt either.

 

However, Sheffield gets the buildings that its economy can support.

 

Higher rents will mean more expensive buildings. However, when most new buildings are occupied by Government Departments or low wage wage earners the money will not be spent on more expensive architecture, materials and design.

 

Blame the economy of Sheffield, not the planners, developers or architects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.