WITH MY TONGUE IN MY CHEEK
by Profssor W.C. Gregory, B. Areh., A.R.I.B.A.
LOOKING AT THE CITY HALL
RCHITECTURAL criticism can
The
only be valid when the critic is in full possession of all factors relating to the preparation of the programme, the design approach, the economic conditions, and the building processes available. assessment cannot be properly made unless the architect can be brought in, to explain his thinking and to bring out the influences, voluntary and compulsory, to which he was subject.
The professional critic is not al- ways able to delve as deeply as this and the casual critic rarely has the opportunity or inclination to meet the architect. The architect him- self, for professional reasons, has no opportunity outside the architectural press to justify or explain his work.
What follows is by way of com- ment or expressed criticism, gener ally uninformed, of the City Hall.
The architects of the City Hall have received their well-deserved congratulations. Apart from design- ing an outstanding building, they have considerably enhanced the stature of the architectural profes- sion in Hong Kong, and we in the profession are grateful to them.
However, the City Hall has not gone without criticism, proving in recent weeks an edifying cocktail time topic; edifying in view of the standpoint from which the architec- tural evaluation of this building is made, which ranges from the econo- mic to the pure aesthetic; and more often than not the latter is made in comparison with past examples in the classical styles.
The question arises; what should be the basis of architectural critic- ism?
D
The criteria, so often quoted and expressed in various ways "Com- modity, Firmness and Delight," summed up the standpoint of ar- chitectural evaluation from
from Vitru- vius onwards, but the point is, that each of these canons did not carry equal weight in each period of his- tory.
Although commodity, utility or function is stated first, it was gener- ally the least significant, because function of requirements were rela- tively simple. Firmness or structur- al stability could not be ignored since buildings had to stand up, but not too much credit was given to the lucidity of the structural con- ception despite the fact that this largely determined the "style" of the period Greek and Roman de- sign, stemmed from the principle of post and lintel construction, and Gothic design from the two-centred vault and the span it could achieve,
But the main basis of criticism was delight the aesthetic and good architecture was considered as that which conformed to canons of form, proportion and detail.
some
The evaluation of modern ar. chitecture, to continue to over- simplify, depends on equating func tion, structure and aesthetic impact. in more equal terms, and would say that function + structure = aesthetic quality. The complexity in use of modern building allied with the use of new forms of struc- ture very much determines its form.
In the past, more liberties were permitted to be taken with the use and structure to obtain a pleasing visual result than is permitted even considered a desirable objec- tive to-day.
THE HONG KONG & FAR EAST BUILDER-VOLUME 16, NUMBER 6
or
The City Hall group of buildings does not profess to stand as a pure aesthetic statement as does the "classic" concert hall or theatre of the past where function is subser- vient to form; where a proportion of the audience may see and not hear, or hear and not see, and where
full-house is not "box-office."
In order to criticise modern ar- chitecture, as has already been sug- gested, it is necessary to know and understand the architectural pro-
gramme
the architect's brief
―
and if it is desired to criticise the architect, it is necessary to know the extent to which he was consulted in preparing the programme.
In other words, it is necessary to know the problem as set and what were the factors involved in finding the answer, and from this what con- cessions had to be made because of functional or structural or other in- Aluences on the visual appearance of the building.
It must be accepted thatt certain programmes defy solution in terms of pure aesthetics, and the problem of "the silk
purse out of a sow's ear" is akin to that which the ar- chitect often has to face.
Good architecture stems from an efficient and pleasing realisation of a given problem. and does not emerge from the often longed-for "free-hand."
Given a free-hand the architects of the City Hall, for instance, might have been tempted to build the tall block higher and slimmer, probably at the same time providing a great deal of unwanted space and mak- ing less efficient use of the space that was required; and although
67