Sydenham School listing decision

[Tim Lund]

In a mayoral enewsletter, Sir Steve can hardly contain his glee

I have just heard this week about the surprise decision taken by John Penrose the Minister for Tourism and Heritage not to list Sydenham School. I care deeply about our nation's architectural heritage but I know that a balance has to be struck between retaining buildings of interest and the need to create buildings fit for the present day.

In this case the staff and students of this school will now be able to enjoy a fit-for-purpose school in which to further improve on their already impressive performance. This decision strikes me as a fine example of a "victory for common sense" and I am sure will be widely welcomed locally.

The building concerned is a little loved example of the post-war brutalism of Basil Spence - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basil_Spence. It is interesting that 'the usual suspects' - the Sydenham Society and Forest Hill Society - have not been campaigning on this. Will those who like to have a go at these organisations - might that include Sir Steve? - accept that this is an example of shared common sense - and that these organisations don't see their roles as being to prevent everything?

[stuart]

Tim,

I do question your labelling of the Sydenham School building as brutalist and little loved.

Brutalism, of course has nothing to do with English 'brutal' but was a term coined in France about buildings whose form was mostly exposed concrete. These could (in English terms) range from exquisite to quite brutal. I don't see the school building qualifying either way and the pejorative use could be misleading.

Spence's architecture was indeed much loved. Sussex University, Hyde Park Barracks and Coventry Cathedral were wonders their age. A true breakthrough in design and copied (usually in an inferior manner) by many others.

True that 50/60s ethos is currently decided out of fashion. Indeed one of the main justifications of listing is to conserve landmark and/or beautiful buildings for an age when they will be appreciated again. There are countless examples of what happens if you don't do that (Euston Arch anybody?).

So while we have preserved a truly brutalist building (Crystal Palace National Sports Centre) we have decided to lose Sydenham School - an important step on the road of post war brilliant British architecture. I too find Sydenham Society's silence baffling when they fought so hard to preserve the significantly less important and innovative Louise House. Perhaps someone from the relevant committee could enlighten us?

Personally I would have no problem with the demolition of this building (or Louise House) because they are no longer functional provided the listing guaranteed that the successor building would be of equal or greater architectural merit. After all some medieval gems had to be demolished to give us some of our generally acknowledged greatest buildings today.

Its just that I think the new Sydenham School building is unlikely to be listed in Wikipedia (or pretty well anywhere else ...)

Stuart

[Tim Lund]

As you well know, Stuart, this something SydSoc is unlikely to express any official view on. We share an interest in why this should be, but have different attitudes to their apparent position, since in this case I'm with it, and you're not. But this is not the time, or I the person, to reiterate why Louise House should have been saved.

[Eagle]

Are you serious . This 60's tower block is a blot on the landscape. If you were campaigning for the oldere building , which was the old grammer school, then I would agree.

[stuart]

There is no Sydenham School 60s tower block to blot your landscape Eagle.

There is an innovative 1953 tower block that spawned a mass of inferior copies in the 1960s which may have coloured your view. There is also a mass of well designed and beautiful buildings which are also rooted in this development in British architecture in the late 40s early 50s.

Lots of people loved it, lots loathed it. That's usually true with all cutting edge art and design. And the whole thing is now out of fashion as was Victorian architecture in the 1960s when a whole load of that was destroyed. The sort that we would, like Louise House, now conserve.

Which comes back to the criteria under which we should fight to list buildings. I would argue 'fashion' is not one of them. Or just because you or I like/dislike it. I would argue it has to do with the architectural merit (a tricky concept) and its historical significance. The Sydenham Society has a great influence in the SE26 area. It would be helpful if we all knew the criteria they, and indeed Lewisham Council apply.

Stuart

[Eagle]

Sorry you are correct it was the 50's , I know my sister was there from 55 to 61.

I think the old Forest Hill School completed about 57/58 was a better example , especially the library.
I was there from 60 to 66 and was a nice building.