C O N T E X T 1 4 4 : M A Y 2 0 1 6 7 projected new guide, which remains unpublished. (The building appears as The Old Manor in the National Trust’s 2016 Handbook). Tours d’horizon are also valuable in setting the historical and architectural context for particular building types. Anthony Jenkins has performed a service by looking at the influence of the parsonage in English domestic architecture. This 30-page paper is a companion piece to his valuable and informative examination of Victorian parsonages that appeared two years ago in Volume 58. The paper compares the parsonages to other houses of it period, to determine the extent to which it may be said to have influenced domestic architecture. Jenkins detects differing influences in different periods, analysing them in architectural terms and examining the underlying reasons. Some general conclusions are reached, including the contribution of the parsonage to the ‘dilemma of style’. Two papers deal with 20th-century architecture. Peter Larkham and David Adams consider issues surrounding the contentious conservation of recent architecture, particularly large-scale, city-centre brutalist buildings that are neither widely loved nor always critically praised. Birmingham’s Central Library is used as an example of the varying attitudes expressed by experts, politicians and the public. The heritage minister Margaret Hodge refused to list the building, against the recommendation of the then English Heritage. An intensely polarised debate preceded the building being recently demolished, just before its certificate of immunity from listing was about to expire. In something of a departure from the normal compass of the Transactions, there is a paper by VictoriaWatson with a distinctly international focus. Watson questions whether the work of Mies van der Rohe should be divided into two historical periods either side of 1933. Her question is prompted by the installation in 2013 of a full-sized plywood model of a rural golf clubhouse in Krefeld in north-west Germany, on a site close to that of Mies’ original proposal. JeffreyWest, formerly a director of English Heritage, gives some personal reflections of an insider on the emergence of the organisation as a public voice in defense of the historic environment. In particular, he discusses its role in property management, and how this related to its other conservation responsibilities, and its role in promoting historic landscapes. TheVictorian (No 51, March 2016), the magazine of the Victorian Society, highlights concerns about Victorian pubs. Geoff Brantwood looks at the reasons why they have been closing in record numbers. Pub-going is not the leisure activity it once was, and consumption is down, particularly among younger adults. Furthermore, a discrepancy has developed between the value of buildings as pubs and other uses, particularly residential conversions or redevelopments. However, although pubs are operating in a tough environment where margins are tight and customers have plenty of other leisure opportunities, the picture is not entirely grim. Brantwood notes the rise of the community-owned pub; the role of the Localism Act in defining pubs as assets of community value; and the successful innovation of micro pubs that have been easier to set up since the passing of the Licensing Act 2003. While heritage professionals understand the differences between conservation and preservation, misconceptions about the distinction remains widespread among non-experts. In Michael Hall’s article ‘When aspic is not on the menu’ (have you ever tried ‘savoury jelly made with meat stock, set in a mould and containing pieces of meat, seafood or eggs’?), excellent examples are given of the sensitive, adaptive and creative reuse of Victorian and Edwardian buildings. These range from the Coal Exchange in Leeds to the CoffinWorks in Birmingham. Both represent challenges overcome, but the society is keen to hear views fromContext readers about the issues surrounding other difficult building types, and particularly the contentious issue of fittings in building such as law courts, banking halls, pubs, chapels and churches. It is now about 20 years since the government proposed a review of the ecclesiastical exemption and there is not currently any sign of an appetite to investigate its workings. From time to time specific cases have emerged suggesting that the system is not functioning properly. Christopher Costelloe cites one in his editorial. The society has recently won an appeal in the Court of Arches against a consistory court ruling – a rare event. The case concerned the removal of a font from the church at Shipton Bellinger in Hampshire. The society considered this to be damaging to the special interest and lacking any practical justification. As this is a Grade II church, Historic England was not involved; the Church Buildings Council decided not to comment; and the diocesan Chancellor approved the Faculty application with the blessing of the Diocesan Advisory Committee. Approval came as a huge surprise to the society as an important principle was at stake: the removal of a valued element of the church’s Victorian interior because of what was seen as ignorance and prejudice. The Court of Arches concluded that ‘in the handling and determination of this case at every level almost everything that could go wrong did go wrong’. The society concludes that the case has a wider significance in directing attention to the flaws in the operation of the ecclesiastical exemption. If it is not to be reviewed, it is hoped that the diocese will learn from the flawed process in this case and revise its procedures.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=