6 C O N T E X T 1 7 2 : J U N E 2 0 2 2 Letter Good design From Bob Kindred MBE May I be the 94th person to express my astonishment at the planning inspector’s opinion (‘Out of Context’, Context 171, March 2022) that ‘beauty is in the eye of the beholder’ and ‘any further discussion is unlikely to be helpful’? Clearly the current imperative for good design has passed the Planning Inspectorate (PINS) by, notwithstanding the work of, for example, the Building Better, Building Beautiful Commission; and the fact that the amended NPPF has strengthened the requirement to deliver well-designed places that are beautiful, enduring and successful by setting out the essential characteristics of what good design means in practice. Clear principles of good design in historic places were set out as long ago as 1994 in paragraph 2.14 of PPG 15. Perhaps someone in PINS should read it, together with the wealth of recent advice on beauty and good design, and train its inspectors better? Bob Kindred FromThe Infinity of Geometric Design Exemplified by Robert William Billings (1849) Architecture is the solitary branch of the great tree of knowledge which is not only not allowed to grow, but which is systematically kept stunted; for it cannot be denied that architectural design… reached its limits of excellence long, long ago; and the result is, that professed architects, whose practice and prosperity too frequently depend on the worldly influence of such associations, are literally not permitted to design for themselves at all. They are chained down to copy from existing authorities; and, no matter whether these types be good or not, antiquity is the sufficient guarantee for imitation. While architects, as a body, continue to bend before these self-constituted tribunals, there is no hope for the progression of their art; for, according to them, the man who can patch together, in one jumble, the largest number of old parts into a new building, is the greatest architect, the most finished artist. In other words, it is only saying that the greatest copyist has the highest and most original talent—a reductio ad absurdum certainly; or, to use the language of analogy, that the man who borrows his light from an old lamp ought to shine brighter in the temple of fame than the genius who illumines the temple by the radiance of his own creations. It is an attempt to make imitation triumph over original conception, such as no profession, save architecture, has ever for a moment submitted to; and it is time, surely, that the architect and the mere builder should cease to be synonymous. We look and, until very recently, look in vain, among the enormous bulk of books published on medieval architecture during the last half century, for anything resembling an elucidation of principles. We have representations of buildings beautifully rendered, it is true, but they are without precepts; we have the body, minus the soul of science. And why? The modern artists who executed these works were merely the tools of book-makers, and not interested in the matter, farther than in being remunerated for their employment. The results of practice alone, or, in other words, of accomplished design, were thus given to the public; but the theoretical principles which regulated or originated that practice were utterly overlooked; for no sooner, probably, was the building delineated, than the principles which had guided the artist in his development were carelessly thrown aside, and for ever lost to the world of art. Augustus Pugin,… the great reviver of Gothic architecture in Britain, stands out as an honourable exception to this showy, anti-theory school; for his works not only contain much of principles, but it is evident that he and his pupils not only knew, but aimed at, and gave out more than the world was prepared to appreciate.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=