The English love their heritage. I am continuously amazed and heartened at how much care is lavished on everything from prehistoric dolmens, to Roman ruins, to Victorian facades, to Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. This love isn't limited to a vanishingly small elite. The National Trust, one of many NGOs that look after England's heritage, has a paid up membership of four million people, not including sympathizers like me (my membership has lapsed).
However, I am discovering that my sympathy for heritage has its limits. I am unable to grasp how a large, concrete bus station in a small town in Lancashire is heritage worth preserving. Yet, there is a movement to do just that.
Preston Bus Station has been declared a "monument at risk" by the World Monuments Trust. Dr Jonathan Foyle, chief executive of the trust, described Preston bus station as "fabulously, boldly expressive of the year it was built". Apparently, this bus station is a prime example of the Brutalist style of architecture, which was in vogue in 1969. The term Brutalist comes from beton brut, French for raw concrete, which was the avant garde architect's material of choice in 1969. I suspect the term has stuck because "Brutalist" captures the spirit of these structures precisely.
This argument is happening about a functioning bus station, not a piece of abstract art. The local council, which wants to demolish this structure, says on BBC's Radio Four that this Brutalist structure doesn't work properly as a bus station: it is way out on the edge of the town and too far away from other transportation hubs like the railway station. With pragmatism and aesthetics on the same side of the argument, usually there would be only one winner. However, in England, I suspect the Brutalist bus station on the edge of Preston has a bright future. Google found me many web-petitions defending the Brutalist bus station, and none supporting the council's demolition plan.
2 comments:
Nothing inherently wrong with concrete masses. I think you may be subject to the India bias - almost any concrete structure in India, by definition, is ugly.
But the bust station doesn't look all that shabby in the black and white photo. And as we all know, aesthetics can be hugely subjective. At the very least, I think they should preserve it to remind everyone why such another shouldn't exist!
@ Vishnu...Vikram, who is a practicing architect, has a similar view. Brutalism isn't necessarily bad. It includes Le Corbusier's Chandigarh.
I still find it curious that conservation is winning the argument against common-sense pragmatism at a functioning bus station. Most urban planners would want the bus station near the railway station. Maybe they will split the difference, build a new bus station, and turn this structure into a skate-park :)
Post a Comment