C O N T E X T 1 1 3 : M A R C H 2 0 1 0 9 Periodically As is now customary, the longer-thannormal gap between the November and March issues of Context generates additional review material, so a greater selectivity of items of interest has been required this time round. The latest issue of C20, the magazine of the Twentieth Century Society (Winter 2009–10), leads on heritage minister Margaret Hodge’s apparent departure from the legislation in determining if buildings should be listed. Instead of special architectural and historic interest (the only test), Hodge thinks ‘fitness for purpose’ should be the defining criterion. This has prompted Catherine Croft, the society’s director, to ask rightly: ‘fitness for what purpose?’ As examples, Croft cites libraries in the information age, and schools with changing class sizes, which may not make these functions the best fit for the building but does not make them totally useless. Hodge’s personal dislike of post-war buildings is no secret (she recently rejected calls to list Birmingham Central Library), but the society intends to demand greater intellectual rigour from Hodge and to insist that she sticks to the legislative definition that works perfectly well. With a ministerial car, does Minister Hodge ever use the tube? If so, what would she think of some of the excellent pre- and post-war tube stations making the headline feature of this issue of C20 – particularly less well-known ones: Brent Cross (1923), Croxley (1925) and Perivale (1947)? It is over two decades since the Twentieth Century Society and the Victorian Society first lobbied for the conservation of London’s Underground architecture. Today 57 of the 257 stations are listed (including many designed by Charles Holden). This is a testimony to the effectiveness of the two societies. Would Hodge have listed any of these today? With passenger numbers increasing and massive investment in the capital’s transport infrastructure required, perhaps the protected ones are not ‘fit for purpose’ either? The society also echoes the recent concerns of the Independent and other national media and photographic organisations about the inappropriate use by the police of powers under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 to prevent the legitimate photography of buildings in public places. If you are in doubt about your rights to photograph 20th-century or any other buildings go to http://photographernotaterrorist.org/. In a bit of a return to form, the editorial in SPAB magazine Cornerstone (Vol 30, No 4 2009) expresses concern at the implications of a potential Tory government merger of English Heritage and the Heritage Lottery Fund, in the light of potentially drastic cuts of between 10 and 20 per cent of the former’s budget. The arguments about the lack of fit between the two organisations have been well rehearsed but heritage budgets look set for drastic pruning whichever party is in government by June. Also highlighted are the nearly 3,000 historic buildings at risk inWales, and the further 5,145 classified as vulnerable. In two thirds of cases this is attributed to lack of maintenance. While the society emphasises the importance of its National Maintenance Week, to this reviewer’s mind the situation also highlights the disgraceful absence of a current national policy statements (even in draft), or any other emphasis or initiatives to underline the crucial role of building maintenance during difficult economic times. One of the most disturbing stories for years was the news that window replacement firms had been lobbying the government since October 2009 to bring in a scrappage scheme to encourage the removal of traditional wooden sash windows. While this flies in the face of new research by English Heritage, which shows that simple repair and basic improvements bring significant reductions in draughts and heat loss, we have to hope that the muchmaligned Treasury will scupper this on grounds of cost. If not, traditional sash windows, which English Heritage stresses are ‘a unique feature of England’s built heritage’, could be confined to listed buildings and perhaps Article 4 direction areas? The issue also sets out the thoughts of new chairs – Heath (David of SPAB) and Andrews (Kay of English Heritage); and the shadow secretary of state – Hunt (Jeremy of DCMS). Needless to say they are all genuinely passionate advocates for heritage. But advocacy from the margins is useless without resources, so their views may need to be parked until the impact of the nation’s finances has been examined by the real
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=