6 C O N T E X T 8 7 : N O V E M B E R 2 0 0 4 Periodically… Is heritage going through a mid-life crisis? Do historic buildings ‘carry a weight of association which can be uncomfortable or off-putting’? Claire Fox explores the disturbing implications of these questions in an article entitled ‘Monumental folly’ in the latest issue of Civic Focus, the Civic Trust Newsletter (Issue 47, Summer 2004). The first question was prompted by the Heritage Lottery Fund’s recent conference ‘Who do we think we are?’ The second question, posed by the AttinghamTrust’s Opening Doors report, goes on to define ‘intangible heritage’ as ‘whatever people like to think of themselves’. Fox suspects that by following the trend towards an ever-broadening and inclusive definition of heritage, incorporating everyday experiences, the concept becomes almost meaningless. Heritage as a discreet area of life, she argues, is replaced by life itself, its undercurrent and exposes a tension between the special-elitist versus the commonplace-populist. New audiences (a Tessa Jowell obsession) can apparently only be won over to heritage by relating it to ‘their’ particular experience, with personalised heritage being dressed up in the clothes of empowerment. She concludes that, if heritage carries on in this vein, it is likely to talk itself out of existence. As the Director of the Institute of Ideas, she has certainly posed some thought-provoking concerns about a plebeian heritage currently detectable in a ‘me too’ mentality among those leading heritage organisations seeking largess from Ms Jowell. Elsewhere in the same issue, Dame Jennifer Jenkins criticises the Government’s Heritage Protection Review for its failure to tackle the problems of conservation areas or underpin it with adequate resources. It is a little surprising to note a statement (in the publication of the very organisation instrumental in setting up conservation area legislation) that this was initiated in 1957 (glaring howler or howler? Conservation areas were first introduced by the Civic Amenities Act 1967). One other phrase caught this reviewer’s eye in this issue. In discussing Liverpool in the context of Jane Jacob’s The Death and Life of Great American Cities, Tristram Hunt memorably describes the British architectural establishment of late 20th century as ‘destroying much of the nuanced social fabric’, and at once one recognises that it is nuance that is so easily lost but so difficult to recreate. The latest issue of Cornerstone, the renamed newsletter of the SPAB (Volume 25, No 3) devotes itself primarily to the subject of Britain’s 50,000 thatched buildings, half of them listed. No other building craft has given rise to such dispute and dissention as thatching. The society is in the thick of the debate over techniques, materials and regional and local traditions. On one side of the argument are the conservation professionals (supported by the Planning Inspectorate), anxious to maintain character and authenticity. On the other are the estimated 250 to 300 full-time professional thatchers, concerned at what they see as attempts to stifle a living craft. Underlying this is a tensionWilliam Morris would have recognised – the importance of continuing artistic creativity versus the need to respect the historic value of a building. Aspects of straw, reed and heather; the law; current research; skills; regional varieties; and the growing and harvesting of the right materials are all addressed. Peter Rumley attempts to separate fact from fiction over what is ‘authentic’ mission watered down. Actual places and artefacts are abandoned in favour of what the HLF calls the ‘intrinsically intangible and ephemeral… the living experiences of people’. Places of universal historical significance, of national value, give way to the local and parochial. There must be no intellectual challenge, no effort to understand or appreciate. Fox detects a patronising thatch, but concludes that there is no clear answer – philosophically at least – even with extensive and far-reaching forensic investigation. Architect Ruth Blackman sets out some guidelines on deciding whether a thatched roof can be repaired, with reference to three Norfolk churches. David Brock of English Heritage looks at current planning issues in the light of their recent Guidance Note and Research Transactions. This column does not usually reproduce letters, but the issue of ‘reversibility’ posed by JohnWinstone of Wells is worth quoting here. ‘Discussion of the claim that reversibility is justification for changes to historic buildings is long overdue, especially as it is widely quoted by agents, planning committees and chancellors to justify unwelcome alterations. That there are few examples of reversals is perhaps stating the obvious. Members will know that this meaning is entirely different
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=