May_1965 — Page 30

HONG KONG ARCHITECTURE ...

T

some parting thoughts

HE prospect of taking a trip abroad which will inevitably involve looking at modern architecture and the architecture of the past in a number of countries, causes one to call into perspective the architecture of one's own environment.

One must always be ready to answer the question: "Tell me something about the architecture of Hong Kong. How good is it?" Indeed this is a question which visitors to Hong Kong, who are anxious to see a full kaleidoscope of Hong Kong affairs, are apt to pose.

It is a real poser. One becomes complacent about matters which are part and parcel of one's life, tending to judge by local standards. One is anxious to give an honest opinion, but may, if too critical, give a false impression.

In answering this question, it is important to keep in mind that in every country throughout the world for every example of good architecture there are many that are bad. The knowledge of other countries comes from the architectural press, and the tendency is to believe that the work illustrated is typical and because it is illustrated it is good. But if critically examined, it will often be seen that they are "not so hot."

How then does Hong Kong compare with other countries in the proportion of good architecture to bad? Considering the quantity and scale of new building and the opportunities the sites and programmes offer, I would say that there is a disproportionate amount of bad architecture.

A well-informed visitor recently said that in Malaya he gained the impression that the architects there were making a conscious effort to produce good architecture. and were pre-occupied with this. He did not say that all their efforts were successful.

Opportunities Not Taken

The architects of Hong Kong, admittedly, have a more difficult task than in Malaya. They have difficult sites with difficult foundation problems: they have typhoons to be countered and their programmes are frequently large and more complex. But it would seem true that the challenge that local conditions provide, is not taken up. Opportunities to seek the right architectural answers and to accept the chance to produce great archi- tecture, for which most of the elements are available, are not taken.

The majority of buildings in Hong Kong display their commercial origins, the demands of their owners to squeeze the maximum development potential from the site and their hurried erection. They have a tired ap- pearance rather as if nobody cared very much how they looked or how they functioned.

Perhaps what they show, most of all, is having lack- ed a thorough exploration of the possibilities of the project particularly in the use of sites. They give the impression that it is the first design off the drawing board that is built. There is a repetition of stock solutions adapted to meet all similar programmes. Elaborate and fanciful street facades often hide puny dimensioned, awkwardly planned and ill-lit interiors. There is a whole spate of narrow-fronted office blocks of this genus now being built.

The steeply sloping sites inevitably cause buildings to be viewed from unusual positions: from above, from below, and from narrow angles. Often part views are seen from narrow side streets, or above other buildings these produce the character, charm and interest seen in medieval clities.

64

By

Professor

W. G. Gregory

B Arch, ARIBA

A cannon of architceture is that it should be a whole, a unity, a completeness this is its life-giving element. But look down on many new buildings from the road above or from the roof of a neighbour and what do you Roofs littered with a shambles of tanks, motor- rooms, penthouses which like little topsy have just "growed." Some of the old squatter-occupied roofs have more character!

see:

Go round the back of a pretentious (high-rental) apartment block, in a residential area and again what do you see no order in the architectural elements, the plumbing system stretched haphazardly over the elevations (don't blame the Buildings Ordinance) and not even the functional requirements properly solved clothes drying, garbage collection ("what does it matter they are only the servants quarters anyway").

It does not cost the building owner any more, to design the whole of the building, it only costs the archi- tect more time.

Probably what the world traveller to Hong Kong misses more than anything else is the sense of daring. that can be found to some extent in most countries of the world. It is not important that every one should like these buildings which endeavour to meet the chal- lenges of environment and function that the activities of modern man demand of them. Neither is it a question of having to be different, but rather of tackling modern programmes with unprejudiced minds.

mean

Daring in this context is not intended to taking risks, but to mean unbound by convention, unafraid of the consequences of being different.

Expression of Structure

The key to good modern architecture is in the choice of appropriate structure: a building cannot be good architecture for instance when the choice of a steel or reinforced concrete frame is arbitrary, which is the case in many Hong Kong office blocks; in this circum- stance how can the design have that essential oneness.

Nervi, Neimeyer. Tange, to name a few, have shown how imaginative structural design gives freedom to the modern architect to solve his complex problems. Ex- pression of structure in Hong Kong is taken to mean merely showing the structural frame on the elevations: indeed it is ofte misrepresented, showing a logic and unity which does not exist behind the facade A building expressing its structure must be dependent on its struc- ture for its form: it must be seen that this is its deter- minant.

Factory building, where large spans are generally desirable, offers great opportunities for the exploitation of structure. Pre-stressed concrete and shell concrete in its many forms are missing from the local scene and, with few exceptions, the factory areas are to be steered clear of in any architectural tour.

Far East Architect & Builder May, 1965

Page 30Page 31