Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

Showing posts with label Passive aggressive. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Passive aggressive. Show all posts

Thursday, 3 July 2014

This is England (the A232)

Hello, well done and thank you, dear Reader.  Welcome to your very own cut-out-and-keep guide to English domestic architecture.


Well, sort of.

Rather, perhaps, a tour of the humid, sordid joys of suburban housing. You, smart, sexy Reader, will certainly recognise that the spectrum of styles covered below is likely to surround you. A ubiquity of limited proliferation.  In order to demonstrate that these building types can be found pretty much anywhere, and not necessarily out of laziness, I have limited the exploration below to the corridor between East Croydon station and West Wickham, known with good cheer as the A232.

Empire

Our first era together. I shall be gentle and yet thorough, my soft, diaphanous Reader.

I'm using the term Empire to cover off a large swathe of Victorian and Edwardian architecture. Empire was when England was Great.  Has anyone ever described themselves as Great British?

In this particular instance, the area to the north-east of East Croydon station is largely Empire, presumably knocked-up to cater for the burgeoning middle-class clerks (sort of ur-yuppies) drawn to the area by the fast rail links to London Bridge and Victoria (the latter opening in the 1860s).


The above view is entirely typical.  Bay windows - some single storey, some double - with mullions decorated to look like Grecian columns.  Completely not-in-keeping, the bays often evoke a castle's turrets. Clearly, laudanum was freely available to all commuters (a sort of ur-Starbucks).


This late-period fantasy is wonderful and bonkers in absolutely equal measure.  A large lovely pile of large lovely nonsense, all hanging tiles and big windows, topped with terracotta gargoyles and, superbly, sporting a full-on fairytale tower.  Let it never be said that our forebears were overly restrained or uncomfortably buttoned-up.  This is a vulgar as vulgar can be, without perhaps the addition of some bass-relief of priapic nudity, or a tasty 400-point imprecation gouged into the walls.

An Englishman's home is his castle, hence the moat (garden), barbican and drawbridge (porch and path to the front door) and turret (turret).

Arts and Crafts and thence Tudorbethan


Proper Arts and Crafts stuff here. It's in part a rejection of the mass-produced nature of Victorian industry (in both senses), a return to a simpler, twee-er time. There's a lower, more cottagey feel, with somewhat-laboured the impression of craftsmanship in the twiddly details (look at those chimneys twist into the sky!). It's precisely the same impetus as that which fuels the current trend for Farmers' Markets: now that one can acquire a bewildering range of world goods from any given ringroad Omnimarket, the middle-classes are drawn towards new ways of displaying their wealth and excellent taste by buying purportedly traditional English things. Such as £8 quiches, drizzled with a tasty jus of organic, rustic, artisanal, seasonal, unpasturised, single-varietal, hand-made, sour-dough, free-range, locally-sourced, rare-breed epithets. It's a way of inventing a history, of faking old-money - of pretending to be of landed stock (or, at least, an honest farm owner). And this is terribly important to the Englishman or lady.


A later exercise in the same very-English pretence. A sizeable and immacuately-maintained bit of Tudorbethan, with crown green-perfect lawns and an in-keeping garage. It's even got a wishing well (!) in the curiously-generous front garden.


The style was also applied, somewhat surreally, to parades of shops. Here we have Ye Olde Wimpy (est 1928) on Wickham High Street.

Moderne (-ish)


There's not a lot of Moderne along this route. Perhaps this suburban setup of Zone 5 appealed more to larger families, who preferred the more traditional stylings of Tudorbethan built at much the same time. But here is an example of a building, four single-floor maisonettes by the look of things, with a nod towards fashionable Moderne. The original central windows would have been sexy curved sun-trap windows (sadly now angular UPVC), with horizontal glazing bars and just a few vertical member. The clean white horizontal band is a sort of go-faster stripe to pair with the streamlined windows. But, other than those, it's a largely conventional building with hipped roof and unrendered brick. A safe version of the future, still recognisably English.

Episode IV: A New Hope

The aftermath of the war gave architects the opportunity to try new things. Or, rather, it gave them time to think about what new things they'd want to build once the post-war building regulations were relaxed. Once they were, in 1954, we were treated to an optimistic compromise - a new way of living, but on the cheap (cf the valiant efforts of all the New Towns to build a new world on a budget).


This is a rather pleasant little block.  Notice that the weight is not being taken by the road-facing walls.  This 'free elevation' means you can do what you want with the outside: in this instance, have windows that run along the entire front and side of the building, including that rather sexy unsupported corner. There doesn't seem to be a chimney stack either, suggesting that the building came with some sort of space-age heating system, like an asbestos-lined CFC-burner, emitting infra-red heat and ionising radiation in equal measure.


Further rule-breaking.  The jaunty roof-line emphasises the buzz-saw frontage that affords each shop a few more square-footage of glass in which to display its wares.  Groovy.


Another demonstration of what was once state-of-the-art engineering.  Building-width strips of windows and huge panes of glass in the stairwells allow as much light in as the English climate permits us.  It looks like the office space at the top is deserted.  Frankly, I'm still impressed that the whole central section of that block can be supported on so few slim columns.  Note, however, that these buildings are deeply unfashionable and can therefore only attract cheapy tenants, like Iceland and The Original Factory Shop - compare with mummy-friendly M&S, which likes to take up new-builds (see below) or fashionably stylish buildings like Art Deco ex-cinemas.

Comforting stodge: vernacular (and PoMo)


Oh dear.  After all that scary optimism, we slid back into making things look a bit like old things. Here're some retirement flats in the style of a row of thatched cottages. Small windows, and an upstairs you can't stand up in properly. Genius. 


This, however, rather superbly bridges the gap between fashionable retro and 80s fashions - the blue-frame square-pane glazing to the left meets an Olde timber-clad gable (enlivened by the jazzy yellow chevron announcing the then-exciting thrill of Sunday opening).


The ground floor of this Sainsbury's also emulates the roof line of thatched cottages, but tops it with some dead-eyed nuclear bunker / gun-slit combo.  Happy shopping, comrades.


Part of PoMo's schtick was re-introducing Classical forms after all that New Hope stuff. These mock-Georgian terraces (we're back to vertical windows again) are decorated with wire-frame triumphal arches for some reason. Perhaps you can grow strawberries up them. The top gable window sort-of describes a split pediment.  Japes.


I think this is much newer, but the mindset is the same. A freakishly overgrown corner tower (topped with a rustic weather-vane) in a Venetian style (why not?), with an adjunct archway in render.  But this is of course quite consistent with English architecture - it's more important that the building borrows old forms, than that they necessarily make any sense together.

My argumentation here, which is essentially a unifying philosophy for much of English domestic architecture, has limits. Take a look at the pair of terraces below. On the left is a row of bargain-basement Victorian houses.  They are of meagre proportions, and come with just a pair of simple windows (no light-gathering bay windows here) and not even a single terracotta gargoyle.  The front garden is just a slither of space, keeping the passing pedestrian literally at arm's length.


Demonstrating face-hurting stupidity, the designer of the new-builds to the right chose to clone these impoverished hundred-year-old originals, despite the old ones being of zero architectural merit.   Even then, the clones' windows are somehow even pokier.  This is the sort of lazy crap that makes me want to dismember the architects' pets (and possibly those of the current residents, as a warning to those who support the market for this retrophiliac cack).

There is now at least somewhere to put the bins.  Hoorah for progress.

After Post-Modernism



What's not to like here?  Perhaps a roof-line to induce sea-sickness, the already-faded wood cladding, and the grimy porridge-beige render.  And such sophisticated details as the high-visibility guttering downpipies (see how it crunches awkwardly over the corner of that twee porch).  And nowhere to put the bins other than the front garden.  And the tartrazine-orange front doors.  Oh, and the bloody coaching lamps.  Come, friendly bombs and fall on the A232.


And, of course, after Post-Modernism comes good old-fashioned Modernism.  Here, M&S pretends to be in 1920s Germany.

Whimsy



What is more English than daft, aspirational excess?  Here, a tiny bungalow with full-on pedimented arch.  And net curtains.  And partially off-street parking.  Win.

Thursday, 11 July 2013

Leeds: a caffeinated perambulation

Leeds gets coffee - there are some superb coffee shops, where you can get a Square Mile pourover whilst browsing Caffeine and toying with an aeropress.  Really lovely.


Leeds has beer, but doesn't get it - for some reason, craft beers are some kind of alternative (ie gothy, unwashed) experience. Brew Dog had a great range of unique bottled things, but is somehow aimed at punks (really? Is 1977 back in already?). Mr Foley's Cask Ale House has a similarly interesting selection, but the clientèle was decidedly beardy (is trampy back in already?).  The barman in the Brewey Tap was slightly embarrassed by their own micro-brewed pilsner, and was keen that I have an Amstell. Leeds, salute your unique brews! And perhaps market them to a larger, more hygienic demographic. 

The Picture House, incidentally, is really horrible.  You can tell that from the outside, and there's no need to go inside again [note to self].

The friendly / chippy nexus - Northern chums love to extol the uniformly warm-spirited wonders of the Northern soul, while observing that the average Southerner personally gouges the eyes from three kittens a day. Somehow the Northeners' self-proclaimed friendliness is powered by a loathing of the South, and particularly any la-di-dah Southern flâneur poncing about their cities with a Pevsner and an SLR.  

Keen to talk to a stranger, a Yorkshireman seems also keen to proselytise his view of the world.  I (aforementioned ponce, all espadrilles, manbag and words like flâneur) was advised in stern terms at no fewer than three separate establishments that I should not contemplate having milk in my filter coffee. Listen chaps, thanks for the recap of what you learned in barista school, but if I wish to adulterate my beverage (perhaps chilling a Beaujolais, or popping a Gewürztraminer next to the radiator for ten minutes before serving), I really should be allowed to. Perhaps I know what I'm doing, or at very least I know what I like.  

Got there in the end.

The shopping - In terms of presentation, the insanely handsome Arcades, the gleeful pomp of Corn Exchange (what a roof!), knock almost anywhere else into a cocked hat. Well done.  There is sadly no John Lewis, but there is the mother of all Marks and Sparks in the covered market, which makes up for it.

Lots and lots of this, plz.

Take note of how to do a roof properly, Leeds train station.

There's no-one in the Merrion Centre, and no reason to go there, but it's a fun romp in minty green and chromed metal.


It's probably illegal to say that The Light is a bit dull, but it's essentially just the Aspiration Village from Hammersmith's Westfield.  Yawn.  Trinity Leeds is likewise a copy-and-paste chunk of the same Westfield, although curiously open the the elements (thereby ignoring the wisdom of the Victorians who built the Arcades to keep out the Yorkshire sleet).  The unloved 80s Core is basically empty, although it does have some hoardings with fun CGI mock-ups including such copyright-safe stores as Hardy Ramsden'sCaffe Zero and Benny and Frankie's.  


The accent - the women all have the prophylactic vowels of Janice Battersby*. A horrible erection-defeating noise </misogyny>.  (*Yes, technically her accent is NW England, not NE, but there is no-one famous from Leeds, so it's impossible to cite an appropriate cultural reference).

The Universities - Chamberlain, Bon and Powell's Brutliast campus is wonderful. Its concrete is at once a superbly preserved piece of space-age past and yet still sci-fi futuristic. The smooth clean finish seems more accessible than the Barbican's bush-hammered concrete. Accessible visually, at least; it's still possible to be three feet horizontally and fifty feet vertically from where you want to be, with no idea how to get from one place to the other.


Still, the flying walkways are executed with such panache that they really make the UEA's skyways look like work of an upstart bumpkin in comparison (sorry, Denys).  

Viewed through the porthole of a passing Imperial cruiser.

The nearby Met Uni accommodation tower, pre-rusted and weathering beautifully, is a lovely exercise in Coreten steel too.  Easily the best new tower in Leeds.


The train station of three halves - there's a rubbish late-60s airless box (compare with, say, the spacious, light-filled and contemporary station in Barking), a dirt-grey millennial thing with the roof of a B&Q warehouse, and yet also a magnificently-restored Art Deco hall on the side. It's pleasingly surreal to see a Moderne McDonald's (even if the font isn't quite Gill Sans).  


Beneath the station, the River Aire sloshes through a series of Victorian channels, the Dark Arches.  Fun for imagining you're on the way to a gin palace and about to be slain by Jack the Ripper.


Where's the grass? - Leeds appears to be home to about ten square feet of greenery, in Park Square.  Millennium Square is shaded green on the (rather helpful) street-side information maps, but is actually a gentle paved slope forming an informal rake of seats facing the jumbo TV mounted on the wall of the Carriage Works theatre.  Other than that, it's all buildings and tarmac.

Where's the rest? - there's a curious feeling that Leeds is only half there. The railway and river Aire cuts east-west, and the bypass describes a semi-circle to the north of that. But there's nothing much south of the river. Just some 'stunning-development' guff like Bridgewater Place (the 'Dalek' - a dire stab at being iconic; one imagines the name came first and the architect then came up with something to fit), and a (ho ho!) leaning-tower-of-Leeds effect made through fenestration.  And you thought English Post-Modernism died in 1989.  


Rubbish.

I am too annoyed with the joke to be able to like this.

Speaking of PoMo - Whilst I like PoMo as much as (realistically, more than) the next man, I really think that the worst possible place for playful architecture is somewhere from which you might get sent to prison.  Shame on you, Leeds Magistrates' Court, which has been made out of wooden blocks and coloured in by a child.  

What larks!  Only a PoMo morgue would be less tasteful.

Leeds would be a strong card in the pack of British Cities Top Trumps. It's one of the largest city in the UK (Bigness: 3) and had the good fortune to be spared the wrath of Luftwaffe bombs (Impervious to Nazis: 98).  It therefore got to decide what to do with its building stock, and it thankfully chose to retain a wonderful selection of Victorian civic buildings, mills and shopping streets (Proud heritage: 90).  The Arcades are glorious (Posh shopping: 88), and the University is architecturally world-class (Brutalism FTW: 92)

It inevitably feels so very much smaller than Birmingham, Manchester or London, each of which is bulging at the seams in comparison.  But, of course, Leeds can be smaller without becoming overcrowded, because of all those Northeners in London banging on about how much better things are back in Yorkshire.


Friday, 15 July 2011

Yourselves is the new you

I have a story to tell.  It's about you and Pippa Middleton and Shakespeare and chavs.

Are you sitting comfortably? It all began when the phone rang...


Patronisingly literal visual accompaniment.


"Was that yourselves I was speaking to earlier?" asked the caller, shortly before I reached through the telephone and punched him so hard in the face that his face, and then the entire universe, collapsed in on his face.

That reflexive pronoun is immensely irritating. Particularly in the plural. Yourselves?  Massive idiot. But then, gasp, I heard myself say it. At which point, of course, it shifted from unforgivable grammatical transgression into credible and incisive demonstration of the zeitgeist.  So - and I do this not to defend the use of bad English, only to defend my use of bad English - I herewith suggest a vaguely-credible excuse for my actions.

Let me take you back to slightly before Shakespeare's time.  Please.  Go on, it'll be fun. Thenabouts, the English language did the 'you' thing by:

Singular - thou / thee
Plural - you / ye

But, about Shakespear's time, 'you' could be used to mean the singular or plural (like today), and also had an additional special role.  I draw your attention to a bit of Henry IV, pt 1.  You may have been made to read this at school.  But, because I can't differentiate between the singular and plural 'you', you don't know how many of you I am talking to.  Do you?

Anyway - I digress.  Henry IV, Pt 1, Act II, scene 3.  You will of course remember it well.  Hotspur has to leave his wife that night (played in my imagination by Pippa Middleton) and romp off.  She, however, just wants her husband to stay with her.  She is probably wearing quite a slinky nightie.

Kate:  Do you not love me? do you not, indeed? Well, do not then; for since you love me not, I will not love myself. Do you not love me? Nay, tell me if you speak in jest or no.

Hotpsur: Come, wilt thou see me ride? And when I am on horseback, I will swear I love thee infinitely...

Kate, as befitting an inferior (ie a lady), is using 'you'.  Hotspur is brushing off Kate's pleas for intimacy, and demonstrating his superior manliness by using the more formal 'thou'.  But, at the very end of the scene, Hotspur leans in to Kate's ear and whispers:

But hark you, Kate.  Whither I go, thither shall you go too;  To-day will I set forth, to-morrow you.  Will this content you, Kate?

So, here, Hotspur's 'you' is an intimate, placatory moment with his wife.  He lowers himself to her level. And then he romps off <spoiler> and gets killed </spoiler>.


Christie's Director of Books & Manuscripts Thomas Venning holding 
Shakespeare's first folio
He is also imagining Pippa Middleton.


What's my point?  Well, today, we only have 'you' - there is no 'thou'.  Which means that we can't use that distinction to indicate subservience / dominance.  And we English are unconsciously very careful about breaking social rules / causing a scene / being impolite.  We don't want accidentally to say 'thou'.

Which is where the earlier 'yourselves' come in. It's being used like Kate's subservient 'you' above. 'Yourselves' is the new 'you' - it's the only plural version we've got left.  This stress is particularly important over the phone, where we are robbed of various non-verbal indicators (apologetic smile, upturned palms, friendly lick of the face).  'Youselves' is a defensive, diffuse, offence-avoiding 'you' - 'Was it someone, somewhere, quite possibly not you personally, in your office to whom I spoke before...?'

Does this mean that you (pl.) should all use 'yourselves' at every opportunity? No, please, please don't. But, perhaps, you (sing.) may understand why certain weak-minded fools might. Even if it does make them sound like utter plebs.

Kate:  Does yourselves not love myselves? does yourselves not, indeed? Well, do not then; for since yourselves loves myselves not, I will not love myselves. Does yourselves not love myselves? Nay, tell myselves if yourselves speak in jest or no.

It's the sort of thing you might hear in an Elizabethan Gregg's the Bakers.  In Skelmersdale.


Monday, 11 July 2011

I +1 you

Cheerful, advert-packed and privacy-invading Facebook.  The addictive hashtagging stranger-stalking fun of Twitter.  The gleaming white and gaping white and empty white of Google+.  And now this very blog.

So, accepting that I can only wring a finite amount of amusement from my just-in-Zone-1 existence, where should I put the best bits?  Should I scatter the jokes and highlights around each of them?  Or should, say, Twitter be a masterwork of vas deferens-damaging chortledom, whereas Facebook could house all my upsettingly prosaic mind-jetsam.  'I seem to have run out of milk'.  'I quite like some of Coldplay'.  'At what point should I go to the doctor with it?'.  Etc.

Or should I post the same thing on all of the platforms, ensuring that every single person I electronically know is exposed to the same level of brain-alteringly witty give-that-man-more-sex banter?  This would however mean that anyone who knows me on more than one forum would get bombarded by a face-hurtingly repetitive barrage of identiupdates.  YES I KNOW YOU HAVE RUN OUT OF MILK.

And this leads to the problem of terminology.  I follow people on Twitter.  People can be my friend on Facebook.  People, very few, very damaged people, are the audience of this blog (or, as I like to call you, traffic).  Not sure what it's called on Google+.  Perhaps you circle people.  But, given Google+'s design ethic, any text describing this would be in white on a white background.  It's sooo empty.  It's like spending a Wednesday in a caravan filled with foam.

So, anyway, I have decided that where I place things will depend entirely on their length.  Tiny thoughts: Twitter.  Mediocre-length updates: Facebook.  Cascading logorrhea: here.  Which leaves what for Google+?  Quite.


Yes, you *do*.


Sunday, 10 July 2011

Passive agressive: Mexico


Yes, Mexico is *still* waiting.