Context 155 - July 2018

C O N T E X T 1 5 5 : J U L Y 2 0 1 8 7 century’ (and of the 20th century), and the importance of heritage protection, are discussed in a very good overview by Robert Drake. Progressive, innovative and optimistic architecture is the product of public-sector architects with those qualities (and leadership) in abundance. The work of two: Roger Booth, Lancashire county architect 1962– 83, described by Richard Brook, and Fred Pooley, Buckinghamshire county architect, described by Geraint Franklin, demonstrate a remarkable range and diversity of public-sector commissions. These are now quite difficult to comprehend, particularly in the shrunken or dissolved world of local government architecture after local government reorganisation in 1974. Having addressed inter-war town halls in an earlier part of the volume, Susan O’Connor provides an excellent critique of the symbolism in three 1960s ‘town halls’: Newcastle Civic Centre (1968), which graces the cover; Plymouth Civic Centre (1962); and Lanark County Buildings (1964). All three were designed wholly or in part by the councils’ in-house architect’s departments, and are rightly celebrated for, among other things, their decorative schemes. Elain Harwood traces the architectural development of the Post Office’s concrete transmitter towers, including those in Birmingham, Bristol and Manchester, and the iconic example off London’s Tottenham Court Road. In conclusion Susie Barson, a senior architectural investigator at Historic England, looks at the impact of decommissioning a number of specialised public building types. These include some discussed by other authors and some not (such as drill halls and post offices), and how the application of ‘constructive conservation’ might secure appropriate futures for these often under-regarded and not always protected heritage assets. Readers with an interest in specific 20th century specialist building types of the evolution of public architecture in Lancashire and Buckinghamshire should seek out this journal. Transactions The annual Transactions of the Ancient Monuments Society (2018, Volume 62), running to 156 pages, is also worth the cost of the annual subscription to the society. Like the remit of the society itself, the content is wide ranging and a stimulating read. The volume opens with a two valedictory contributions marking the retirement of Matthew Saunders after 40 years at the helm of the AMS – by far the longest-serving secretary of any of the national amenity societies. It places in context his remarkable career of tireless campaigning and persuasive advocacy in defence of historic buildings during an era of unparalleled change to the sector. One of the strengths of the AMS Transactions is the ability to publish papers at great length, often providing a definitive opinion on a subject area or a specific building. As there is a distinctive 20th-century theme to this review column, it is worth drawing attention to Genevieve Bovee’s paper ‘Convenience and community: the full-service flat developments of the mid-1930s’, focusing on schemes in London and on the south coast. The study addresses what made them so distinctive, who they were designed for, why they were unique to south- east England, and how they differed from the standard designs of the period. The buildings, offering the services of a hotel, contained flats that went beyond this level of service, offering residents a community atmosphere and recreational and social amenities. The paper provides a valuable insight into the architectural and social history of busy professionals between the wars. Also worth highlighting for the wider considerations that it explores is the essay by Michael Heaton ‘How medieval is a medieval house? Whitestaunton Manor, Somerset’. The specific investigations here between 2004 and 2011 can be opened out to stimulate thinking about the evaluation and analysis of the evolution and change to ancient buildings more generally. Some important observations are made about three aspects of the building that challenge conventional explanation, and one concerning the methodological significance for those engaged in this type of interpretation. Of particular interest is evidence of non-economic reuse of salvaged fabric and structures in the 17th and 18th centuries, for polemical purposes. Heaton tellingly concludes: ‘There is of course, no such thing as a ‘medieval’ building. There are many that retain much of their medieval fabric, and many more that retain or emulate medieval appearance, but all have been modified to a lesser or greater extent.Where those modifications visually distinct and appreciable in their own right, they might be considered to be part of the building’s history, and of equal or at least comparable importance to the medieval fabric. But where they are not distinct, or where they appear to be imitative of earlier fabric, we are on less certain ground. ‘Other cultures hold different attitudes to historical authenticity than ours, but the evidence at Whitestaunton does not fit the