ERNÖ GOLDFINGER FROM A REGIONALIST’S PERSPECTIVE :
A CASE FOR BALFRON TOWER AND TRELLICK TOWER AS CONTEXTUALLY SPECIFIC RESPONSES
ALICE (LI WEI) LOI 139099344 / 09258 A Research Paper submitted towards the Degree of Master of Architecture at the University of Bath, Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, 2018-19. Tutor : Prof. Vaughan Hart (5422 words)
ERNÖ GO L D F I N G E R F RO M A REGION AL IST’S P ERSP ECTIVE : A CASE FOR BALFRON TOWER & TRELLICK TOWER AS CONTEXTUALLY SPECIFIC RESPONSES.
ALICE (LI WEI) LOI
Fig.1 Trellick Tower as of November 2018.
AR40106 2018-19 ALICE (LI WEI) LOI
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge my debt of gratitute to Professor Vaughan Hart for his time, motivation and guidance in assisting me throughout the process of producing this work.
Anyone writing about Goldfinger will always owe a great debt to James Dunnett, who has been playing a pivotal role in the campaign for greater recognition and conservation of Goldfinger’s works. This work would not have been possible without his support and I would like to especially thank him for sharing with me his invaluable experience of working in Goldfinger’s office as well as his opinion on the enquiry raised in this research. My thanks also extend to Matthew Wickens for providing me with valuable reference materials and introducing James to me.
Finally, I am grateful to Richard Gooden from 4orm who has shared with me his passion for Goldfinger’s works, and sparked my interest in undertaking this research.
ABSTRACT
“The crass tendency to label Goldfinger a brutalist – a label he always repudiated on the grounds that, unlike the Smithsons, he took great pains to hide wiring and heating ducts - has made his declaration that he wanted to be remembered as a classical architect harder to understand.1”
• Nigel Warburton •
The usual affiliation and categorisation of Goldfinger’s works based solely on its perceived aesthetic under ‘modernism’ or ‘brutalism’ arguably prohibited a more holistic and multi-faceted reading of his approach. This perhaps explained the 1
2
3
Nigel Warburton, “Erno Goldfinger : The Life of an Architect”, (London : Routledge, 2009), 145 Gavin Stamp, “Conversation with Erno Goldfinger”, Thirties Society no.2 (1982), 19 Stamp, 1982, 19
limited number of literature at present that analyse his works and career in depth when compared to his peers, despite his contribution to British modernism being no less significant.
Erno Goldfinger (1902-1987) was born
approach and commitment towards his
in Budapest, Hungary and received his
aspiration. Although few have attempted
architectural training in Paris at the Ecole
to analyse his design methodology, there
des Beaux-Arts before moving to London
remained several aspects of Goldfinger’s
in 1934. His early training that tended
approach that could bear merit when
towards classical architecture, as well as
revisited, one of which is the extent of
subsequent correspondence with Auguste
influence ‘context’ as a place and culture
Perret, Le Corbusier and Adolf Loos were,
had towards his works. Contextualising
as he admitted in his conversation with
Goldfinger’s works, in particularly the
Gavin Stamp2, influential in his formative
controversial Balfron Tower and Trellick
years. After moving to London as an
Tower, in the social, cultural and physical
emigre architect, despite the lack of
norm of London between the pre-war and
opportunities and an environment that
post-war era allows one to reconsider his
was insufficiently appreciative of his
works as regionally-specific responses.
works, he chose to stay and made London his home instead of moving on across the
This attempt to understand and analyse
Atlantic like many others3.
Goldfinger’s works, which were seen as evident products of Modernism, from the
It was in London where he designed and
regionalist’s lens will be considered in
built most, if not all, of his significant
reference to the wider debate of Critical
works and reached the maturity of his
Regionalism. The term, most prominently
career. His most symbolic works ranged
expanded by Kenneth Frampton in the
from the domestic 2 Willow Road house
1980s, will be discussed and assumed as
in Hampstead to the 31-storey Trellick
a paradigm to frame the analysis in this
Tower in North Kensington. All of his
paper.
works embodied a consistent thread of
CONTENTS
I
INTRODUCTION
12
II
DEFINING CONCEPT : CRITICAL REGIONALISM
14
III
GOLDFINGER : FORMATIVE YEARS & EARLIER WORKS
19
IV
THE CONTEXT OF POST-WAR LONDON
26
V
ANALYSING BALFRON & TRELLICK TOWER IN DETAIL
29
VI
CONCLUSION
56
BIBLIOGRAPHIES
61
IMAGE CREDITS
69
APPENDICES
72
12
I INTRODUCTION
Goldfinger has always been perceived as an architect’s architect4, and has a unique place in the development of British Modernism. His rigorous and consistent pursuit of a distinctive approach towards architecture resulted in his works remaining largely outside the mainstream of British architecture5. Being an emigre architect in post-war London possibly had an effect on the way his version of modernism were perceived. His works have been generally viewed by the conservatives
Fig.2 Erno Goldfinger.
as alien aesthetic, bearing ideals born in the Continent and unsympathetic towards the English tradition5.
The available literature on Erno Goldfinger at present is limited when compared to his peers, and has mainly revolved around :
(a) detailed account that narrates his life and works in the form of biographs and monographs based on primary sources;
13
INTRODUCTION
(b) analysis of his approach from both the
research. Together with a brief evaluative
rational and classical perspectives;
reading of Goldfinger’s works during
(c) social and architectural analysis of
his formative years, a line of reasoning
Balfron and Trellick Tower as examples of
could potentially be established through
post-war social housing.
an analysis of Balfron and Trellick Tower based on the concept of Critical
This paper focuses on Goldfinger’s
Regionalism to reveal his consideration
approach to architectural design, and aim
towards context.
to explore the contextual aspect that has yet been highlighted in present literature. It sets out to analyse his works from a regionalist’s perspective, in particularly his most controversial projects, Balfron Tower in Poplar and Trellick Tower in North Kensington. Regionalism, in the context of this paper, is understood as responses specific to the particular conditions of place, time and culture. This definition is based on the theory of Critical Regionalism, most prominently explored by Kenneth Frampton, which will be discussed and considered as an approach to frame the arguments in this
4
Robert Elwall, “Erno Goldfinger”, (London : Academy Editions, 1996), 19
5
Elwall, 1996, 19
6
David Roberts, “Make Public : Performing Public Housing in Erno Goldfinger’s Balfron Tower”, The Journal of Architecture vol.22 (2017), 125-126
14
II DEFINING CONCEPT : CRITICAL REGIONALISM
The concept of regionalism, with roots
universal appearance and the rational use
linked to historicism and romanticism,
of new construction materials, was viewed
revolves around the concern for place
as absolute opponent to regionalism due
identity in architecture. Critical to the
to the concept being narrowly defined
picturesque movement and Gothic
and often misunderstood.
Revivalism unravelling in England in the late 18th century, for instance,
This dichotomy was first challenged
was a pursuit of national identity that
in 1947 by Lewis Mumford in his
sought to associate architecture with
controversial New Yorker article in which
place, as oppose to universalism7.
he started to suggest that regionalism
Interestingly but perhaps not surprising,
could be understood as way of mediating
it was of Goldfinger’s opinion, as noted
modernism, rather than a resistance.
in his interview with Stamp, that the
The article, as well as being critical
architectural styles pursued in England
of Modernism as a forceful impetus,
from 1500 onwards were all international
criticised at the same time the classical
in roots8. This view was arguably directed
regionalist idea that is essentially
towards those who sought to revive
anti-universal9. Mumford’s attempt
traditions and the vernacular in modern
at defining his interpretation of
times. Modernism, often characterised by
regionalism was however not exactly
7
Gevork Hartoonian, “Critical Regionalism : Whatever Happenned to Autonomy”, Fusion, no.4 (2014)
8
Stamp, 1982, 20
9
Alexander Tzonis, “Introducing an Architecture of the Present : Critical Regionalism and the Design of Identity”, in Tzonis, A. and Lefaivre, L, “Critical Regionalism : Architecture and Identity in a Globalised World”, (London : Prestel Verlag, 2003), 8-21
15
easy to comprehend as he never put forth
(Fig. 3) and argued that traits used to
a complete manifesto. Despite this, his
polarise Regionalism and Universalism
departure sufficiently sparked a refreshed
should be seen as points of dialectical
interest in the discussion of what
interaction11. Critical Regionalism should
regionalism in the context of globalisation
be understood as the interstitial middle
means or embodies.
ground between such oppositions12. This concept, which Frampton adopted
To approach regionalism as no longer an
as a paradigm to analyse several works
isolated phenomenon from modernism
representative of modernism, is
is central to Critical Regionalism,
important in validifying the line of enquiry
which was revisited by Kenneth
set out for this research. Goldfinger’s
Frampton in the 1980s who contended
works are evident products of universal
that the “fundamental strategy of
development and yet could contain
Critical Regionalism is to mediate the
within its conception the concern for
impact of universal civilisation with
locality. Similarly in a recent publication
elements derived indirectly from the
by William Hunter13, Le Corbusier who
peculiarities of a particular place10”. In
was ‘indeed a great advocate of universal
the discussion of Critical Regionalism,
industrial advances and purity of form as
Frampton adopted a set of opposites
well as functionalism’, was reassessed in
10
Kenneth Frampton, “Towards a Critical Regionalism : Six Points for an Architecture of Resistance” in H. Foster (ed), “The Anti-Aesthetic : Essays on Postmodern Culture”, (New York : The New Press, 1998), 23
11
Kenneth Frampton, “Critical Regionalism Revisited” in S. Amourgis (ed), “Critical Regionalism, The Pomona Meeting Proceedings”, (Pomona : Calfornia State Polytechnic University, 1991), 38
12
Chao-Ching Fu, “Regional Heritage and Architecture : A Critical Regionalist Approach To a New Architecture in Taiwan”, PhD, University of Edinburgh (1990), 202
13
William Hunter, “Debating Urbanism Globalisation and the Regionalist Alternative”, DPU Working
Paper no.138 (2009),17-18
16
Fig.3 Kenneth Frampton’s dialectical approach. Critical Regionalism as the interstitial middle ground. Diagram is derived from Frampton’s Six Points for Critical Regionalism.
17
DEFINING CONCEPT : CRITICAL REGIONALISM
a similar fashion. This revealed a more
continuity within modernity15’ rather than
contextually responsive hybrid approach
a style. To summarise Frampton’s points16
that Le Corbusier adopted in urban
which will be considered as criteria to
planning schemes for La Saint Baume in
frame the analysis in this paper, Critical
Provence, Chandigarh for New Delhi and
Regionalism is regional to the degree that:
an urban plan for Algiers. (a) it is dependent on certain site-specific
Architecture is a result of a state of mind of
factors which range from topography to
its time. [...] The techniques, the problems
local light;
raised, like the scientific means to solve them,
(b) it considers and builds upon regionally
are universal. Nevertheless, there will be no
based ‘world culture’ as opposed to
confusion of regions; climatic, geographic,
folkloristic vernacular;
topographic conditions, currents of race and
(c) where appropriate, it inserts
thousands of things still today unknown,
“reinterpreted vernacular elements” into
will always guide solutions toward form
the design.
conditioned by them. – Le Corbusier (1929) as translated by Alan Colquhoun14.
Hence it could be argued that architecture that were conceived out of regionalist consideration do not always appear in a certain way, and that it should be viewed as an attitude that ‘strives for
Alan Colquhoun, “Critical Positions in Architectural Regionalism”, in “Architectural Regionalism : Collected Writings on Place, Identity, Modernity and Tradition”, ed. Vincent Canizaro, (Calfornia : Chronicle Books, 2012), 142-144
15
Leen Meganck et al, “Regionalism and Modernity. Architecture in Western Europe, 1914-1940”, (Leuven : Leuven University Press, 2012), 13
16
Kenneth Frampton, “Modern Architecture : A Critical History”, (London : Thames and Hudson, 1997), 327
14
18
Fig.4 Design for Law Courts in 1925 by Goldfinger while at the Ecole des Beaux Arts, submitted to the Grand Jury but rejected due to the school’s strong preference for projects with more classical nuances.
19
III GOLDFINGER : FORMATIVE YEARS & EARLIER WORKS
Born in Budapest in 1902, Goldfinger’s
modern construction techniques yet
earliest encounter with English
adhered to classical theories. These
architecture during his childhood was
experiences combined led to the gradual
perhaps the time when his mother was
development of his own style over the
presented a copy of the ‘Das Englische
years, which often involved reference
Haus’ by the architect in charge of their
to historical sources to demonstrate a
home renovation17. During the 1920s, his
sense of continuity, while at the same
education at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts
time employing methods of construction
and subsequent training with Auguste
typical of that particular period of time.
Perret were both key in forming his ethical position and ideals in architecture.
Although he was undeniably a rationalist20
His experience under Leon Jaussely
and had great admiration for Le
who professed urbanism18 at the Ecole
Corbusier, many accounts including his
was seminal in shaping Goldfinger’s
own interview with Stamp21 highlighted
ability to consider architecture in the
his distaste for the anonymous white cube
wider context of an urban or city plan.
or what he termed the ‘kasbah style’. This
However, his frustration towards the
distaste, to a large extent, stemmed from
conservative teaching at the Ecole that
the lack of honest material and structural
rejected anything modern19 soon led
expression that Goldfinger adhered, but it
him to train with Perret who employed
is perhaps not illogical to argue that there
17
James Dunnett, “The Architect as Constructor”, Architectural Review (1983), 47
18
Erno Goldfinger, “In Paris in the Twenties”, Audio Recording : Pidgeon Digital (1980), accessed Jan 01, 2019. https://www-pidgeondigital-com.ezproxy1.bath.ac.uk/talks/in-paris-in-the-twenties/
19
Elwall, 1996, 10
20
Dunnett, 1983, 48
21
Stamp, 1982, 19-24
20
Fig.5 2 Willow Road in Hampstead - Goldfinger’s most prominent pre-war work. The facade was faced in red brick.
21
FORMATIVE YEARS & EARLIER WORKS
was a contextual reasoning of
Goldfinger claimed that it was Loos
placelessness that led him to reject such
who first introduced him to the subtle
aesthetic expression. Goldfinger’s time in
proportions of Georgian streets, and
Paris coincided with an interesting artistic
had great respect for the restrained
ferment where he had the opportunity to
urbanity of 18th century London24. His
meet many leading avant-garde figures22,
understanding and interpretation of the
most of which encounter revolved around
Georgian context led to the design of
the Cafe du Dome. It was there where
2 Willow Road (Fig. 5), where his sensitivity
Goldfinger met Adolf Loos, who told a
towards the surrounding and adaptation
young architect working for Le Corbusier
of the local architectural language were
that he was supposed to come to Paris to
evident. The house sits sympathetically
learn French and not ‘Esperanto’.
with its neighbouring residential buildings at Downshire Hill in Hampstead, and was
“Loos was a very en passant acquaintance.
constructed of concrete frame with red
I first met him in the Cafe du Dome. [...]
brick facing. This resulted in a classic
One time we were sitting in the Dome and a
reinterpretation in brick finish and
young Austrian architect came up : ‘Master,
bold horizontal fenestration of the 18th
I have achieved a fabulous thing. I am going
century Georgian terrace in London25.
to work for Le Corbusier.’ Loos says : ‘My
Noted by Nikolaus Pevsner who found that
dear boy, when you come to Paris you come
‘brick must have something extremely
to learn French, not Esperanto.’ He hated
appealing for the English atmosphere,
Corbusier’s architecture, just as I hate his
if it could even attract these foreign
‘Kasbah’ architecture – all the white stuff.23”
architects working in London26”, it seems
22
Gavin Stamp in Gavin Stamp & James Dunnett, “Erno Goldfinger : Works 1”, (London : Architectural Association, 1983), 11
23
Erno Goldfinger to Gavin Stamp in Stamp, 1982, 19
24
Stamp, 1982, 19-20
25
Elwall, 1996, 52
26
Nikolaus Pevsner, “The Modern Movement”, Special Collections : Getty Center for the History of Art and the Humanities, Architectural Review (1939), 28
22
Fig.6 Bedford Square elevation showing a composition based on 2:3 proportion.
Fig.7 Original drawing of Albemarle Street with annotations indicating golden section ratio on elevation.
Fig.8 Albemarle Street elevation, analysed through the 2:3 proportion.
23
FORMATIVE YEARS & EARLIER WORKS
clear that Goldfinger understood the
was largely instinctive29 and this could
appropriateness of this material language
suggest that his approach was developed
towards the context.
subconsciously based on his observation of the Georgian streets in London. This
To a larger extent, the influence from
assertion can best be supported by
Georgian architecture could also be
Dunnett’s review of Goldfinger’s works
argued to have helped Goldfinger develop
from this dimension over the years.
his proportional theory, an approach that has been analysed in detail by Dunnett.
In 1983 Dunnett initially established
Actual drawn evidences of this approach,
that according to the annotations on
of which importance often emphasised
Goldfinger’s drawings (Fig. 7) it could
by Goldfinger himself verbally, were
be safely assumed that the elevation of
however brief and inconsistent. An
Albemarle Street was based on the golden
elevational drawing of a house in
section30. However, revisiting this analysis
Bedford Square (Fig. 6) was included
in 1996 which led to the findings published
in Rasmussen’s ‘London : The Unique
as part of Campbell’s “Twentieth-century
City’ (1934) which demonstrated that
Architecture and its Histories”, he
the elevation was conceived out of a 2:3
challenged this assumption31. Assuming
ratio27. This proportion, as mentioned
the measurement on the original drawings
by Lucey, was commonly used in
are correct, it was found that it could in
London houses28. By Goldfinger’s own
fact be based on a 2:3 proportion (Fig. 8)
admission, his use of proportional theory
rather than the golden section (1:1.618)
27
Dunnett, 1983, 48
28
Conor Lucey, “Building Reputations : Architecture and the Artisan, 1750-1830”, (Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2018), 103
29
James Dunnett and Nigel Hiscock, “To This Measure of Man : Proportional Design in the Work of Erno Goldfinger” in L. Campbell (ed),“Twentieth-century Architecture and its Histories”, (Otley : SAHGB, 2000), 106
30
Dunnett in Stamp and Dunnett, 1983, 79
31
Dunnett and Hiscock, 2000, 106
24
Fig.9 Regent’s Park Road (1954).
Fig.10 Albemarle Street Offices (1955).
25
FORMATIVE YEARS & EARLIER WORKS
that Goldfinger had claimed32. One could
the scale and rhythm of the surrounding
assume, especially for projects up to
street, and further advocated by Lewis
the 1950s, this intuition that has led to
Mumford for its strength in urban
Goldfinger creating well-proportioned
continuity34. Perhaps as a form of respect
architecture has roots in the context
to the local context, the facade is here
where he regularly observed and took
cladded with Portland stone cladding
cues from.
rather than exposing the raw concrete frame35. It is hence clear that his earlier
When designing for infill sites, he
works demonstrated a continuous effort
remarked on the importance of ‘urban
to mediate modern construction theories
decency’, that to achieve would require
throughan architectural expression in
sensitivity and understanding of the
materials and proportion appropriate to
logic that sets out the surrounding
the context.
built context. It is a sense of propriety that, he felt, buildings with glass curtain walling didn’t and couldn’t possess33. His sensitivity in dealing with infill sites, in the case of Regent’s Park Road (Fig. 9) and Albemarle Street (Fig. 10) was also evidence of his respect for context. In particularly for Albemarle Street, the building was praised for conforming to
32
Dunnett and Hiscock, 2000, 106
33
Gillian Darley, “Don’t Teach Me”, London Review of Books vol.26 no.7 (2004)
34
Elwall, 1996, 74
35
Dunnett in Stamp and Dunnett, 1983, 79
26
IV THE CONTEXT OF POST-WAR LONDON
The end of the WWII meant that much
Goldfinger was particularly vocal in
of London had been damaged by the
expressing his visions for post-war
Blitz and following the election of a
London throughout his career. He
Labour government, there was an urgent
co-authored with E.J. Carter a condense
demand to provide more social housing36.
and highly illustrative version of Forshaw
Goldfinger saw this situation as a major
and Abercrombie’s County of London
opportunity to rebuild London, that even
Plan (1943), which indirectly outlined his
before the war ended he had actively
position on the reconstruction of
prepared himself by collaborating with
post-war London. It was his belief, as
Ove Arup to conduct studies on the use of
written in the text, that the fine existing
box-frame structure to construct
buildings need not be in conflict with
multi-storey maisonettes37. This would
modernity, and similarly, new building
later be a defining principle for his
constructed should recognise the quality
larger housing projects in the 1960s. It is
of the old, and be designed in a
known that he had always been a staunch
well-considered manner to fit in with it38.
believer in high-rise which Dunnett believed his attachment to the Parisian
In 1956, he attended, along with the
way of life could be a factor. His theory of
Smithsons, the propositional exhibition
high-rise social housing design was largely
‘This is Tomorrow’ and reported back to
based on the modernist’s approach of
the Sunday Times stating his vision for
‘sun, space, greenery’.
London to be a ‘park city’ with tall tower
36
Warburton, 2010, 123
37
Dunnett in Stamp and Dunnett, 1983, 82
38
Erno Goldfinger and E.J. Carter, “The County of London Plan”, (London : Penguin Books, 1945), 80
27
THE CONTEXT OF POST-WAR LONDON
blocks instead of churches towering
specific to that period of time. Proposals
over smaller buildings39, instead of
to include various on-site communal
garden city which Goldfinger believed
amenities on both of the large-scale social
had led to suburban sprawling. It was
housing developments (Rowlett Street
indeed a more sensible solution to
Estate and Cheltenham Estate) that he
the immediate problems that London
had put all his ideals and theories into
faced during that period. The urgency to
practice, represented a robust yet socially
rebuild the city in various aspect – social,
progressive intention, born out of
economic as well as physical – meant
post-war reconstruction.
that people needed to be rehoused into proper accommodation as rapidly as possible. Concentrating city dwellers in appropriate and well-considered tall residential blocks could allow economies of infrastructure and increase efficiency40. It is also important to emphasise on the view that Goldfinger’s inclination towards high-rise as a response to the context of post-war London was both a result and representation of the social vision
39
Elwall, 1996, 17
40
Hannah Lewi, “Look Away Prince Charles : Goldfinger is Classic”, Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians of Australia and New Zealand, (Melbourne : GOLD, 2016), 385
28
Fig.11 Principle elevation of Balfron Tower, Poplar.
Fig.12 Principle elevation of Trellick Tower, North Kensington.
29
V CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS : BALFRON TOWER & TRELLICK TOWER
Balfron Tower, as part of the Rowlett
proposal for a housing block in 1933.
Street Estate in Poplar, is a 27-storey social
The tower, essentially a social housing
housing block completed in 1967. Trellick
block, was designed with an aim to satisfy
Tower, on the other hand, was completed
the needs of modern living in an urban
in 1972 as part of the Cheltenham Estate
context. The use of box-frame structure
comprising of 31-storey. With Trellick
and reinforced concrete as construction
often known as Balfron’s younger twin,
techniques were all obvious decisions
both towers were at first glance very
typical of that particular time period,
much similar in terms of outlook (Fig. 11
when the industry was actively searching
and 12). This similarity is conceivable, as
for new and efficient construction
both schemes were commissioned under
methods using this material. The format
similar social, cultural, planning as well
of these two towers was a definitive or
as the wider geographical and physical
‘closed’ element for Goldfinger, similar to
context. It is worth noting that as Trellick
the case of the Unite d’Habitation for Le
came almost immediately after Balfron
Corbusier.
Tower was completed, and as Goldfinger himself admitted41, early development
The adaptation of this format onto both
of the basic format of the tower were
towers’ respective sites in London,
largely non-existent in the case of Trellick
however, could be seen as a targeted
as it was an appropriated version of its
response towards regional conditions.
predecessor.
Although conceived out of the similar conditions as mentioned above, there
Theories behind the conception of the
remained variations in the locale where
tower were driven by modern ideals, with
both towers were sited respectively,
roots possibly dating back to his CIAM
which had to an extent resulted in the
41
Dunnett, 1983, 46-48
30
Fig.13 Drawing shows variations of number of storeys (24,25 and 28) for Trellick Tower to achieve the brief requirement before finally settling for 31-storeys.
CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS : BALFRON TOWER & TRELLICK TOWER
difference in urban arrangement of the
A1 : Tower as Landmark to Counter the
tower in both schemes. A closer look at
Monotonous Context
31
the design of the tower itself would also reveal important adjustments made to
The Cheltenham Estate was
the form and elevation of Trellick that
commissioned in 1966 by the Greater
allowed for it to be visually different to
London Council (GLC) similar to Rowlett
Balfron. These accounted differences
Street Estate by the then London County
necessitate Balfron and Trellick Tower
Council (LCC) in 1962, with the difference
to be discussed in a comparative format
between these two commissions being
to highlight Goldfinger’s consideration
that the latter was designed in 3 phases
and response towards the respective
rather than a single plan from the
peculiarities of the given site. This method
beginning42. It is important to stress that
is also instrumental in encouraging the
despite the enormous efforts of the LCC
contextualisation of these two towers,
in delivering housing solutions in London,
which evidently bear similarities in many
the rate of building in the 1960s was
levels. This could demonstrate that
lower than projected in meeting housing
despite the similarities, both towers are
demand, hence the decision to pass down
not interchangeable due to them being
commissions to external architects in
grounded onto their respective context.
private practice was not uncommon43.
The following analysis to support this
The nature of client in this context is
assertion will be categorised into two
important as it provides justification for
main sections, (a) the tower in urban
the heights of both Balfron and Trellick.
design term and (b) format and design of
In the case of Trellick, the brief by GLC
the tower itself, both relating to the locale
on the number of flats required for
and the wider context of London.
Cheltenham Estate was well documented as part of Goldfinger’s feasibility studies in 1967 (Fig. 13), where different
42
Stamp in Stamp and Dunnett, 1983,
43
Lewi, 2016, 384
32
Fig.14 Map showing site of Cheltenham Estate before development, 1950s.
33
CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS
configuration of the accommodation
impact onto its direct surrounding in
blocks were experimented. This
terms of daylighting46”. It is of no doubt
justified the proposed density as a
that high-rise living was a definitive
brief requirement. For Balfron Tower,
element that Goldfinger believed in
Confirmed through Tower Hamlet
regardless. The inclusion of both Balfron
Archives44, the brief was originally
and Trellick Tower in Poplar and North
intended as 3 15-storey point blocks, but
Kensington respectively was very much
was then challenged by Goldfinger who
an acontextual response to the London
then appropriated it into a dominant,
tradition especially in the 1960s, a time
27-storey tower block. Although this was
where buildings of such scale were still
dismissed by some from the housing
uncommon and often associated with
division of the LCC and subsequently
negative social connotations. In terms of
residents from the surrounding area, it
locale however, the physical and social
could be assumed that the LCC was able
context of post-war Poplar and North
to overrule all objections45 and approved
Kensington was not dissimilar. Both areas
for the tower to be built. The arguments
suffered from poverty, lack of proper
put forth against Balfron Tower, and surely
sanitary provision and linked to a history
was the case for Trellick Tower a few years
of agitation47. From the late 19th century
later, were undeniably valid at that stage.
onwards, both sites were predominantly
It was thought that at such height the
filled with endless rows of sprawling
tower could “mar the London skyline by
low-rise terraced housing (Fig. 14).
protruding in isolation for no particular
Specifically for Poplar, this phenomenon
reason, as well as causing a negative
was combined with vast industrial sites
44
Tower Hamlet Archives (1961) in David Roberts, “Balfron Tower : A Building Archive”, accessed 28 November 2018, http://www.balfrontower.org/document/1/archival-recordsw
45
London County Council, “Rowlett Street Housing, Poplar - Notes of Meeting at the Housing Division, held 1 February 1963”, RIBA Architectural Archive, Kensington, London
46
Tower Hamlet Archive, 1961
47
Charles Booth, “Life and Labour of the People in London”, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society vol. 1 (1902), 243
34
Fig.15 1945 London County Council, Bomb Damage map, North Poplar.
Fig.16 Brownfield Estate before Balfron Tower, 1960s.
CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS
Fig.17 Early view of Phase I and II of Rowlett Street Estate.
35
36
Fig.18 Balron Tower in context of Blackwall Tunnel Approach.
A
B
Fig.19 Trellick Tower (Block A) in context of key approaches from Westway and Grand Union Canal.
37
CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS
(Fig. 15 and 16) as well as being heavily
which was highlighted through the
damaged during the interwar period. The
direction of which Balfron and Trellick
sensitive inclusion of community services
Tower were individually orientated.
and amenity spaces within both towers
Conversation with Dunnett (Appendix A)
was arguably Goldfinger’s attempt to
confirmed that Goldfinger was indeed,
respond directly to the specific social
and as correspondence in the Tower
context of the two vulnerable areas48.
Hamlet archives50 shows, very conscious
Most importantly, the insertion of a
of the impact that Balfron Tower would
high-rise landmark was critical in both
have on the locale. Sited as it was, he
areas as a stark juxtaposition towards the
decided to expose the slender side
monotonous setting, providing a much
towards the North-South direction to
needed emphasis (Fig.17). It was as Alan
instigate a high sense of visual drama51 on
Powers described in the case of Balfron
those emerging from the Blackwall Tunnel
Tower, “It is a wonderful landmark, you
(Fig. 18). This argument that suggests
really know where you are in East London
Goldfinger’s sensitivity towards the tower
when you see this, it does matter49” .
impact on the locale is further supported by the design variation made to Trellick
A2 : Key Site Approaches as Primary
Tower. As part of the Cheltenham Estate,
Driver for Determining the Orientation
Trellick Tower was positioned with its
of Balfron and Trellick Tower.
slender side towards East–West, again considering the views perceived by those
It is also evident that Goldfinger was
approaching from the Western dual
sensitive towards the way both towers
carriageway as well as from both sides of
were perceived from key approaches,
the canal (Fig.19). At 31-storey high, the
48
Lewi, 2016, 385
49
Alan Powers, “Erno Goldfinger” in Maxwell Hutchinson (ed.), “The Architects Who Made London”, The Royal Academy, podcast audio, (2009)
50
Tower Hamlet Archives, 1961
51
Owen Hatherley, “A New Kind of Bleak: Journeys Through Urban Britain”, (London : Verso, 2012) 29
38
Fig.20 Abbots Langley, 1956. Drawing showed a detached service tower albeit with narrower separation.
Fig.22 Goldfinger’s sketch showing his initial iteration for a central corridor connection flats at both sides.
Fig.21 CIAM proposal, 1932-33.
Fig.23 Access gallery serving every third floor.
39
CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS
detached lift tower was streamlined to
a more human scale towards Golborne
be slimmer than its predecessor and was
Road, which was also used by pedestrians.
rotated 90 degrees, of which as a result the bulk of its elevation when perceived
B1 : Basic Format & Design of the Tower
from the Southside would appear to be much more slender and elegant.
Trellick Tower was the second built version of a similar format after Balfron
When considered as part of the cluster
Tower in Poplar. Although the design was
that formed the estates, the orientation
said to be preceded by an earlier unbuilt
of both towers as they were, further
version designed for Abbots Langley52
emphasised on Goldfinger’s concern
in Hertfordshire (1956) (Fig. 20) and with
for the context. Balfron Tower, having its
some elements arguably going back to his
bulk elevation positioned next to the the
CIAM housing proposal of 1932/3 (Fig. 21),
Blackwall Tunnel Approach reduced the
the format of this tower when designed
impact of overshadowing its surrounding
for Rowlett Street Estate was argued by
residential buildings. In the case of
Dunnett as ‘new in plan and section53’. In
Cheltenham Estate, the rear elevation of
response to the LCC brief, the design to
Trellick Tower faces the canal, offering the
some extent can be seens as a response
residents views of the canal to the North
to the social needs of London at that time.
as well as relieving the south-facing court
For example, the dual aspect flats served
in front of the Tower which he intended as
by an enclosed access gallery every third
playscapes to receive unhindered South
floor area (Fig. 22 and 23) was a new and
light. By designing the 7-storey Block B
satisfying response to the brief, and this
of Trellick Tower to the West facing onto
feature of the tower was dramatically
Golborne Road, it helped in mediating the
reflected in its elevation through the
different scales of housing blocks within
separation of the lift tower from the main
the estate. This decision also provided
accommodation block. With these raised
52
Elwall, 1996, 77
53
Dunnett, 1983, 45
40
Fig.24 Balfron Tower’s access galleries, separation from service tower to main accommodation block.
Fig.29 Expressed boiler house and chimney flues on the exterior of Balfron Tower.
From left to right as Fig.26-28. These sketches of the West Elevation of Balfron Tower from June to Nov 1963 showed Goldfinger experimenting with the service tower design, evidently he did not intend to specifically express the boiler house at this stage.
41
CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS
walkways as well as the access strategy to
interesting departure from his earlier
the flats, it was believed that Goldfinger
scheme for Abbots Langley, which was
“sought to construct a romantic image of
also composed in a similar manner but
moving relationships, chance encounters
with significantly narrower separation
and neighbourliness54”. In some respect,
(Fig. 20). The wide separation in the basic
his design propositions for the format
format of these two towers (Fig. 24) were
of Balfron Tower, of which was then
justified by Goldfinger as a measure to
appropriated to Trellick Tower, contained
eliminate the transmission of mechanical
motivations to replicate a traditional
noise generated by the lift mechanism
neighbourhood. Cited from the Heritage
onto the flats56. Although this must be one
Statement for Balfron Tower (2015),
of the considerations behind this design
Goldfinger felt that ‘it was important
move, it seems to be a big gesture for very
for normal life of the neighbourhood
little impact for this concern. To some
to continue as is, very similar to a
extent, the separated lift tower allowed
traditional East End street, despite the
for a greater lightness and verticality in
dramatic differences that high-rise living
terms of massing when perceived as part
entailed.55” Similar to his contemporaries
of the London skyline, as compared to a
experimenting on London social housing
single slab throughout. This distinctive
at that time, this design of the tower
profile sets it apart from the other
represented the ideals and solutions to
tall blocks, and further afforded itself
specific conditions of that particular time
as a recognisable sculpture within its
and social context of London.
surrounding urban landscape57, both in Poplar and North Kensington.
The separation of the lift tower from the main accommodation block was an
A particular feature of the lift tower,
54
Laura Chan, “Balfron Tower”, C20 Society : Campaigning for Twentieth-century Architecture, accessed 30 October 2018, https://c20society.org.uk/botm/balfron-tower/
55
Richard Coleman, “Balfron Tower : Heritage Significance Report”, Citydesigner (2015), 44
56
Dunnett in Stamp and Dunnett, 1982, 82
57
Coleman, 2015, 44
42
Fig.30 Elaborated chimneys as status symbols in Jacobean (Tudor) architecture.
Fig.31 Bedford Square Georgian houses in London.
43
CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS
however, could be argued to bear roots
British architects such as Lutyens made
of a vernacular expression typical
great use of in his Arts and Crafts country
of London architectural character.
houses, with an aim to revive and reinvent
Although Goldfinger favoured the
the British vernacular. It could perhaps be
honest expression of materiality and
argued that Goldfinger’s understanding
structure, he “took great pains in hiding
of this local vernacular language had to
wirings and mechanical ducts58”. The
some extent contributed to his design
expression of the cantilevered boiler
rationale. Futhermore, this connection is
house and chimney flues in both the
shown more clearly in the row of terrace
external elevations of Balfron and Trellick
housing he designed for the second phase
Tower thus presents itself as a curious
of Cheltenham Estate in 1973 (Fig.32),
anomaly. It is important to note that his
where a direct reference to the local
initial intention for the service tower
Georgian character is evident in the sense
of Balfron showed a more minimalistic
that chimney breast, located in shared
articulation (Fig. 26 - 28). This feature
party walls with gable parapets extending
arose because more space were required
above the roof lines, were expressed and
by the engineers59 which Goldfinger later
celebrated.
took the decision to express it. The fact that he chose to repeat and develop
B2 : Design of Elevation Responding to
this feature to full effect for Trellick
Orientation on Site
Tower perhaps indicated his belief in the appropriateness of this expression
Although the basic format of Trellick
in the context of London skyline. The
Tower is very similar to Balfron,
expressions of chimney structure are
Goldfinger made important alterations
some diagnostic features of 17th century
to the elevations when designing for
British Jacobean architecture (Fig.30)
Trellick Tower. As established earlier
as well as the typical London Georgian
in this paper, proportional theory was
Townhouses (Fig.31). It was a feature that
used as a principle tool in rationalising
58
Warburton, 2009, 145
59
Coleman, 2015, 44
44
Fig.32 Phase II of Cheltenham Estate (1973).
Fig.33 Bloomsbury Office Block (1955).
CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS
45
(Left to Right) Fig.34 and 35 Comparison of principle elevations of Balfron Tower (Left) and Trellick Tower (Right).
46
Fig.36 Part West Elevation of Balfron Tower.
Fig.39 Part South Elevation of Trellick Tower.
Fig.37 West Elevation of Balfron Tower, Horizontal.
Fig.40 South Elevation of Trellick Tower, Square Proportion.
Fig.38 Zoom in West Elevaton in Balfron Tower.
Fig.41 Zoom in South Elevation in Trellick Tower.
47
CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS
his elevational designs60. Possibly as a
however, it should be emphasised that the
way to mediate the visual impact of
surrounding context was very different
high-rise such as Balfron and Trellick,
compared to that of Bloomsbury Square.
he believed “that there was a limit to
There were very little, if not negligible
how many floors of a building someone
amount of, buildings of architectural
could take in with their eye. To facilitate
interest surrounding both sites due
perception of the building, he recessed
to comprehensive slum clearance
some floors, providing surface variety.
and damage from the war. Hence the
[...] Without this differentiation of the
view that there wasn’t any obvious
surface, the block would be a sheer cliff
connection between the observed
of concrete and windows.61” Speaking
elevational variation and both tower’s
to Dunnett, he revealed that in the
immediate built context respectively is
case of Bloomsbury Square (1955),
apprehensible.
Goldfinger was in fact very contextual and sensitive towards the neighbouring
Nonetheless, the approach that
scale. He chose to express the height
Goldfinger adopted for the elevations of
of Bloomsbury office block in units of
Balfron and Trellick Tower could be driven
5-storeys (Fig.33) using the protruding
by local environmental phenomenon,
bay windows as visual counterpoint, to
which is evidently one of the defining
respond to the surrounding Georgian
measure of Critical Regionalism62. In
buildings which were mostly 5-storey high.
the case of Balfron Tower (Fig.36 - 38),
This reaffirms that his approach towards
the principal elevation with balconies
elevation design could, under specific
presents itself to the West onto the
circumstances, be influenced by the
courtyard, while the rear elevation
characteristics and massing of the locale.
highlighted by the expressed access
In both the cases of Balfron and Trellick
galleries faces the busy vehicular road
60
Dunnett in Campbell, 2000, 106
61
Warburton, 2009, 157
62
Hunter, 2010, 14
48
Fig.42 Rear (East) Elevation of Balfron Tower.
Fig.45 West Elevation of Glenkerry House.
Fig.43 Rear (North) Elevation of Trellick Tower.
49
CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS
to the East. The principal elevation of
House63, which was built in 1967-68,
Balfron Tower was articulated horizontally.
before Trellick was built. Interestingly,
When compared to Trellick Tower
Goldfinger chose not to repeat the
(Fig.39 - 41), we can see that the principal
same elevational articulation as Balfron
elevation which faces South has more of
Tower for Carradale House even though
a square proportion. The rear elevation
both, one could practically assume, were
(Fig.42 and 43) which is overlooking the
considered concurrently for the same
canal, although similar to that of Balfron in
estate. This immediately emphasises that
principle, consists of more fenestrations
it was a conscious decision to have the
possibly due to its North orientation as
two separate sets of elevation design, and
well as the view it afforded. The change
that the elevation of Trellick Tower might
in the principal elevation of Trellick
not have been an overriding departure
Tower allowed the flats to benefit from a
from that of Balfron Tower per se.
more harmonious relationship with the direct Southern sunlight, as the expressed
This speculation can also be supported
structural frame and deeply modelled
by looking at the 14-storey Glenkerry
facades played a role in providing shade
House (Fig. 45), which was completed
to the flats internally.
in 1975 as Goldfinger’s last residential tower block and major development as
It is also important to highlight that
Phase III of Rowlett Street Development.
further investigation onto both the
Orientated East-West (Fig. 46), its principal
principal elevations of Balfron and Trellick
elevation facing West to Burcham Street
Tower reveals that they were in fact not
was reverted back to an accented
original syntheses. At phase II of Rowlett
horizontal expression, more relative to
Street Estate, Goldfinger had proposed
Balfron Tower, rather than appropriating
a very similar elevation design (Fig. 44)
Trellick’s elevation design directly into the
to that of Trellick Tower for Carradale
scheme. This elevation expression could
63 Historic England, “Carradale House”, accessed on 12 December 2018, https://historicengland.org. uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1246931
50
1956 Abbots Langley, Hertfordshire
Fig.47 1965-67 Balfron Tower, Rowlett Street Estate I
1967-68 Carradale House, Rowlett Street Estate II
Fig.44
1968-72 Trellick Tower, Cheltenham Estate
1972-75 Glenkerry House, Rowlett Street Estate III
Fig.45
CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS
51
also be seen as an almost direct adaptation from the Abbots Langley scheme in 1956, as the West elevation of this proposal appeared to be very similar to Glenkerry House. Although one possible explanation could be that this was a decision driven by economies subject to the enforcement of Housing Cost Yardstick64 in 1973, as the elevation of Glenkerry House consisted of less balconies, there are some consistencies in the articulation of elevations across two developments that point towards a contextual factor based on orientation. This analysis is illustrated and explained in Table 1.
64
Historic England, “Glenkerry House�, accessed on 12 December 2018, https://historicengland.org. uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1427917
52
Table 1 Summary of analysis of elevations presented in B2, in a comparative format.
Part Elevation
A1 Year of first adaptation Projects / Estates
1956 Abbots Langley (1956) Glenkerry House, Rowlett Street Estate (1975)
Orientation Distinctive Features & Analysis
West • •
Strong expression of horizontality through increased thickness of concrete banding. Parts of glazing panels project outwards to align with concrete frame.
53
CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS
• • •
B1
C1
1967
1968
Balfron Tower, Rowlett Street Estate (1967)
Carradale House, Rowlett Street Estate (1968) Trellick Tower, Cheltenham Estate (1972)
West
South*
Strong expression of horizontality. Parts of glazing panels project outwards to align with concrete frame. Perhaps as a development from the elevation of (A1) Abbots Langley (1956), the inclusion of solid planter box as part of the balcony helped further in shading the set back elevation. At the back of this section houses the living area which is presumed to be used more frequently during the evenings.
• •
•
Strong expression of crosswall, square proportion. All glazing panels set back from the concrete frame. This feature helps to shade the facade from the Southern sunlight at summertime, prevent overheating. More balconies. South-facing balconies for capturing sunlight, ideal for the weather in Britain.
* The only exception in the orientation for this elevation type occurred in Block B of Trellick Tower. Block B consists of only 7-storey, and has this type of elevation (the principal elevation) facing West, onto Golborne Road. As previously established, the orientation of the towers were based on key approaches hence it can be seen that the decision to have Block B (scale of which relates more sensitively to the street) act as a frontage onto Golborne Road. As Block B was perceived as part of Trellick Tower rather than being a separate building, it made sense to continue the same expression for consistency.
54
Fig.46 Location Map showing Glenkerry House in relation to Balfron Tower.
CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS
Fig.48 Perry House perspective.
Fig.49 Perry House as built.
55
56
VI CONCLUSION
At approximately the same time of the development of Balfron Tower in 1965, Goldfinger received another commission from a private client to design a family home in the countryside of Surrey. Perry House (Fig. 48), which was finally built in 1977 as his last executed project, represented “an unusual but successful exercise in organic architecture65”, resembling some elements present in Frank Llyod Wright’s works. It should perhaps be mentioned that Wright’s influence on Goldfinger was considerable, that back in the 1930s he once organised an exhibition showcasing Wright’s work66. Hence the resemblance of Perry House to Wright’s Jacobs House (1936) in Madison was perhaps not a coincidence. Perry House was resolved 65 66
67
Elwall, 1996, 97
sensitively onto the unusual topography,
Benton Charlotte, “The Importance of Being Erno.” Building Design, no. 642 (May 27, 1983): 24–25.
with rooms deliberately positioned to
Richards, J. M. “Pleasures Offered to the Eyes. Erno Goldfinger.” AA Files, no. 5 (1984): 94–99.
constructed of laminated timber beams and
afford spectacular views out. The house was
posts (Fig. 49), responding to the surrounding
57
CONCLUSION
woodlands context. The understanding
this paper demonstrated, should be
of this scheme is key to put in context
considered equally in the assessment
Goldfinger’s ability to respond to a
of his works. Contextualising his works
diverse range of settings, producing
revealed that whilst remaining at the
architecture of different spirits relating to
forefront of architectural technology as
the particulars of a place.
well as responding to modern needs, he had invested efforts into grounding his
It would be counter-intuitive to brand
buildings within each locale in a sensitive
Erno Goldfinger as a critical regionalist
and considerate manner. This arguably
architect, which ultimately wasn’t the
satisfied Frampton’s definition of Critical
objective of this paper, as it is undeniable
Regionalism. Ultimately, his rationalism
that his architecture represents first
in the resolution of building design
and foremost the pursuit of modern
combined with this sensitivity resulted
rationalism. Furthermore, the concept
in a significant contribution to British
of Critical Regionalism denotes a design
architecture, as shown in both Balfron
approach rather than a style, to mediate
and Trellick Tower specifically. As J.M.
the two polarities of vernacular and
Richards remarked, Goldfinger had indeed
universal.
“provided an invaluable correction to the English tendency towards amateurism and
It is hence pertinent that his sensitivity
provincialism67”.
towards the context and at times subtle reference to the local vernacular, which
(5422 words)
58
Fig.50 Balfron Tower viewed in context of Brownfield Estate.
CONCLUSION
Fig.51 Trellick Tower viewed from Golborne Road.
59
60
61
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS Banham, Reyner. The New Brutalism. 1st ed. (London: Architectural Press, 1996) Boughton, John. Municipal Dreams : The Rise and Fall of Council Housing. (London: Verso, 2018) Campbell, Louise. Twentieth-Century Architecture and Its Histories. (Society of Architectural Historians of Great Britain, 2000) Canizaro, Vincent B. Architectural Regionalism: Collected Writings on Place, Identity, Modernity, and
Tradition. (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2007)
Carter, E. J. The County of London Plan. (Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1945) Colquhoun, Alan. “Critique of Regionalism.” in Vincent B. Canizaro (ed), Architectural
Regionalism: Collected Writings on Place, Identity, Modernity, and Tradition, 141–55. (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2007) Corbusier, Le. Towards A New Architecture. (New York: Dover Publications, Inc, 1986) Dunster, David. Key Buildings of the Twentieth Century, Vol. 1 : Houses 1900-1944. Vol. 1. (London: Architectural Press, 1985) Elwall, Robert. Erno Goldfinger. (London: Academy Editions, 1996) Frampton, Kenneth. Modern Architecture : A Critical History. (London: Thames and Hudson, 1997) Frampton, Kenneth. “Towards a Critical Regionalism: Six Points for an Architecture of Resistance.” in Hal Foster (ed), The Anti-Aesthetic: Essays on Postmodern Culture, 17–34. (New York: The New Press, 1998) French, Hilary. Key Urban Housing of the Twentieth Century. Plans, Sections and Elevations. (New York: W.W.Norton & Company, 2008)
62
Harwood, Elain. Space, Hope, and Brutalism : English Architecture, 1945-1975. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2015) Hatherley, Owen. A New Kind of Bleak: Journeys Through Urban Britain. (London : Verso, 2012) Jencks, Charles. The Language of Post-Modern Architecture. (London: Academy Editions, 1984) Lucey, Conor. Building Reputations : Architecture and the Artisan, 1750-1830. (Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2018) Mallgrave, Harry Francis, and David Goodman. An Introduction to Architectural Theory. 1968 to
Present. (West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, 2011)
Meganck, Leen. Regionalism and Modernity. Architecture in Western Europe, 1914-1940.(Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2012) Norberg-Schulz, Christian. Genius Loci : Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture. (New York: Rizzoli International Publications, 1984) Powers, Alan. Modern : The Modern Movement in Britain. (London: Merrell, 2005) Powers, Alan. Britain : Modern Architectures in History. (London: Reaktion, 2007)
St John Wilson, Colin. The Other Tradition of Modern Architecture. (London: Black Dog Publishing, 2007) Stamp, Gavin, and James Dunnet. Erno Goldfinger : Works 1. (London: Architectural Association, 1983) Swenarton, Mark. Cook’s Camden : The Making of Modern Housing. (London: Land Humpries, 2017) Tzonis, Alexander, and Lianne Lefaivre. Critical Regionalism: Architecture and Identity in a Globalized
World. (London: Prestel Verlag, 2003)
Warburton, Nigel. Erno Goldfinger : The Life of an Architect. (London: Routledge, 2003) Wilkinson, Tom. Bricks and Mortals : The Great Buildings and the People They Made. (London: Bloomsbury, 2014)
BIBLIOGRAPHY
63
PERIODICALS Cameron, Neil. “Urderstanding Erno: Erno Goldfinger: The Life of an Architect.” The Architects’
Journal 220, no. 2 (July 8, 2004): 44.
Charlotte, Benton. “The Importance of Being Erno.” Building Design, no. 642 (May 27, 1983): 24–25. Booth, Charles. “Life and Labour of the People in London”, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society vol. 1 (1902) Davies, Colin. “Modernism Meets Playful Picturesque - Emo Goldfinger: Clough WilliamsEllis.” The Architects’ Journal 203 (May 9, 1996): 54. Dunnet, James. “The Architect as Constructor.” Architectural Review (1983) Dunnet, James. “Roots of Goldfinger’s Design: Throughout His Career, Erno Goldfinger Made Use of Proportional Systems, as an Analysis of Three of His Houses Reveals.” The
Architects’ Journal, no. 52 (March 28, 1996): 24–26.
Erkilic, Mualla. “Legitimisation of the Regionalist Idea in Architecture Through Mumford’s Early Writings.” METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture 18, no. 1–2 (1998): 5–23. Forty, Adrian. “Being or Nothingness: Private Experience and Public Architecture in Post-War Britain.” Architectural History, SAHGB Publications 38 (1995): 25–35. Frampton, Kenneth. “Prospects for a Critical Regionalism.” Perspecta : The Yale Architectural
Journal 20 (1983): 147–162.
Gold, John. “Modernism and Reconstruction : Architects, Networks, and Plans.” Planning
Perspectives 19, no. 3 (July 2004): 333–38.
Goldfinger, Erno. “The Sensation of Space.” The Architectural Review 90 (November 1941): 129–31. Goldfinger, Erno. “Urbanism and Spatial Order.” The Architectural Review 90 (December 1941): 163–66.
64
Goldfinger, Erno. “The Elements of Enclosed Space.” The Architectural Review 91 (January 1942): 5–8. Goldfinger, Erno. “Books : One-Track Planning : Overture to Planning.” The Architectural Review 91, no. 545 (May 1, 1942): 128. Goldfinger, Erno. “Books : Housing, Economics and Scandinavia - Housing in Scandinavia.”
The Architectural Review 92, no. 548 (August 1, 1942): 52. Goldfinger, Erno. “Books : Twentieth Century Summary : This Changing World.” The
Architectural Review 46, no. 576 (December 1, 1944): 188.
Goldfinger, Erno. “Miscellany : Memoir : Auguste Perret.” The Architectural Review 115, no. 689 (May 1, 1954): 341. Goldfinger, Erno. “Office Building, South East London.” The Architectural Review 133, no. 792 (February 1, 1963): 95–101. Hunter, William. “Debating Urbanism : Globalisation and the Regionalist Alternative.” DPU
Working Paper, no. 138 (2009)
Lewi, Hannah. “Look Away Prince Charles : Goldfinger Is Classic.” In Proceedings of the Society of
Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand 33, (2016): 380–92
Maciuika, John V. “Adolf Loos and the Aphoristic Style : Rhetorical Practice in Early Twentieth-Century Design Criticism.” Design Issues 16, no. 2 (2000): 75–86. Mead, Andrew. “Aj Interiors and Fit-Outs: The Importance of Being Erno: Avanti Architects Has Refurbished Erno Goldfinger’s Willow Road House on Behalf of The National Trust.” The
Architects’ Journal, no. 52 (March 28, 1996): 41–44.
Mejia, Catalina. “Erno Goldfinger and 2 Willow Road: Inhabiting the Modern Utopia Hampstead, London.” DEARQ, no. 7 (December 1, 2010) Melhuish, Clare. “Review: Humanist Ambition: The Measure of Man: Erno Goldfinger and His Architecture.” The Architects’ Journal 216, no. 1 (October 10, 2002): 52–53.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
65
Mumford, Lewis. “Sky Line.” The New Yorker, (October 1947) Richards, J. M. “Pleasures Offered to the Eyes. Erno Goldfinger.” AA Files, no. 5 (1984): 94–99. Roberts, David. “Make Public: Performing Public Housing in Erno Goldfinger’s Balfron Tower.” The Journal of Architecture 22, no. 1 (January 2, 2017): 123–150. Santiago, Ignacio, R. “Elevation of the Willow Road House, Erno Goldfinger.” Cuadernos de
Proyectos Arquitectenicos 5 (2015): 139–42.
Stamp, Gavin. “Conversation with Erno Goldfinger.” Journal (Thirties Society) no.2 (1982): 19–24. Winter, John. “Goldfinger at 80.” The Architects’ Journal 176, no. 37 (September 15, 1982): 52–54. Winter, John. “Golden Years.” Building Design, no. 1620 (August 4, 2004): 12–13. “Current Architecture 2 : Erno Goldfinger and G. W. Flower.” The Architectural Review 81, no. 482 (January 1, 1937): 24–25. “Offices in Albemarle Street.” The Architectural Review 123, no. 733 (February 1, 1958): 118–123. “Features : Erno Goldfinger.” The Architects’ Journal 186, no. 47 (November 25, 1987): 28–29.
66
OTHERS (REPORTS, THESIS, AUDIO RECORDINGS) Avanti Architects, “Conservation Management Plan: The Brownfield Estate, Poplar”, (2007). Coleman, Richard. “Balfron Tower : Heritage Significance Report.” Planning Document. Citydesigner (September 2015). Corrine, Julius. “Dunnett, James (1 of 15)” National Life Story Collection: Architects’ Lives. Audio, (2002). Accessed September 11, 2018. https://sounds.bl.uk/Oral-history/ArchitectsLives/021M-C0467X0066XX-0001V0. Wal, Marijke de. “Architecture of Affect : Conceptions of Concrete in Brutalist Buildings.” (MA Thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen, 2017). Dunnet, James. “Balfron Tower Planning Application. Comments to Tower Hamlets Council on Planning
Applications”, Planning Document, (October 10, 2015).
Dunnet, James. “The Case for Building Taller Residential Accommodation in London Outside the Central
Area, with Specific Reference to a Site in Honor Oak, in the London Borough of Lewisham,” Manuscript, (September 2016).
Goldfinger, Erno. “In Paris In The Twenties,” Audio. Pidgeon Digital, (1980). Accessed September 1, 2018. https://www-pidgeondigital-com.ezproxy1.bath.ac.uk/talks/in-paris-in-the-twenties/. Haworth Tompkins, “Cheltenham Estate : Conservation Management Plan.” Planning Document, (October 2015). McGibbon, Shea, and Dennis Boon. “A Spatial Analsis of Anti-Social Behavior and Transformation
Strategies within Post-War Council Housing.” (Research Report, ETH Zurich, 2016).
Moss, Julie. “An Investigation into England’s Legacy of Post-War Social Housing and Its Heritage Value.” (PhD, Leicester University, Dept. History of Art and Film, 2016). Murphy, Kevin. “Trellick Tower and the Edenham Estate : An Appraisal of Heritage Significance.” Heritage Appraisal, (May 24, 2013).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
67
Powers, Alan. “Interview with Cadbury-Brown, Betty on Erno Goldfinger, 1922-2002.” Audio, (1999). Accessed on September 11, 2018. https://sounds.bl.uk/Oral-history/Architects-Lives/021MC0467X0051XX-0001V0. Powers, Alan. “Erno Goldfinger” in Maxwell Hutchinson (interviewer), The Architects Who Made
London, The Royal Academy, Audio, (2009).
Sirikiatikul, Pinai. “Constructional Theory in Britain 1870s-1930s.” (PhD, University College London, n.d.)
“Trellick-Edenham Planning Brief : Supplementary Planning Document.” Planning Document. The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, (January 2015).
WEBSITES Carter, Philip. “Erno Goldfinger and a Visit to 2 Willow Road, Hampstead”. January 10, 2018. Accessed November 15, 2018. https://blog.history.ac.uk/2018/01/erno-goldfinger-and-a-visitto-2-willow-road-hampstead/. Historic England. “Balfron Tower.” Accessed September 2, 2018. https://historicengland.org. uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1334931. Historic England. “Carradale House”. Accessed December 2, 2018. https://historicengland. org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1246931. Hstoric England. “Glenkerry House”. Accessed December 2018. https://historicengland.org. uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1427917. Historic England. “Trellick Tower Cheltenham Estate”. Accessed September 1, 2018. https:// historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1246688. Roberts, David. “Balfron Tower : A Building Archive”. Accessed September 2018. http://www. balfrontower.org. Wakefield, James. “Balfron Tower : From Socialist Housing to Luxury Apartments”. 2017. Accessed November 2018. http://www.urban-exposure.com/balfron-tower-study/.
68
69
LIST OF ILLUSTRATION : IMAGE CREDITS
Fig. 1 : Author’s Image. Fig. 2 : Erno Goldfinger in The Daily Mail. (2018) https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5412623/Fancy living-Bond-villains-lair.html
Fig. 3 : Chao-Ching Fu. Frampton’s Dialectical Approach in Regional Heritage and Architecture : A Critical Regionalist Approach To a New Architecture in Taiwan, (1990) 202 Fig. 4 : Elwall, Robert. Design for Law Courts in Erno Goldfinger. (London: Academy Editions, 1996)
Originals from RIBA Archive.
Fig. 5 : 2 Willow Road in Time Out London. (2012) https://www.timeout.com/london/attractions/2-willow road-1
Fig. 6 : Dunnet, James. Bedford Square by Rasmussen in The Architect as Constructor, Architectural Review (1983)
Fig. 7 : Elwall. Albemarle Street (1996) Originals from RIBA Archives. Fig. 8 : Dunnett, James and Hiscock, Daniel. Albemarle Street in Campbell, Louise. Twentieth-Century
Architecture and Its Histories. (Society of Architectural Historians of Great Britain, 2000)
Fig. 9 : 10 Regents Park Road in Modernism in Metroland. Accessed 12 Nov 2018. http://www.modernism in-metroland.co.uk/10-regents-park-road.html
Fig. 10 : 45-46 Albemarle Street in Manchester History. Accessed 13 Sep 2018. http://manchesterhistory.net/ architecture/1940/albemarle.html
Fig. 11 : Balfron Tower in E-Architect. (2018) https://www.e-architect.co.uk/architects/erno-goldfinger Fig. 12 : Trellick Tower in Brutalism. Accessed 3 Nov 2018. http://brutalism.online/brutalist-buildings/13 uk/462-trellick-tower-london-england
Fig. 13 : Erno Goldfinger in RIBA Archives. Fig. 14 : Trellick Tower Site. Adapted from Digimap, accessed 18 Nov 2018. Fig. 15 : 1945 London County Council, Bomb Damage map (published by the London Topographical Society) in Coleman, Richard, Balfron Tower : Heritage Significance Report, Planning Document.
Citydesigner (September 2015).
Fig. 16 : Balfron Tower Site. Adapted from Digimap, accessed 18 Nov 2018. Fig. 17 : Early view phase II in Architecture d’Aujourd’hui, no. 120, (1966) Fig. 18 : Trellick Tower Site. Adapted from Digimap, accessed 18 Nov 2018.
70
Fig. 19 : Balfron Tower Site. Adapted from Digimap, accessed 18 Nov 2018. Fig. 20 : Stamp, Gavin, and James Dunnet. Erno Goldfinger : Works 1. Abbots Langley. (London:
Architectural Association, 1983) Originals from RIBA Archive.
Fig. 21 : Elwall, CIAM 1932-33. (1996) Originals from RIBA Archives. Fig. 22 : Elwall, Balfron Tower Development Sketch. (1996) Originals from RIBA Archives. Fig. 23 : Presentation Drawing of Block A Trellick Tower in RIBA Archives. Fig. 24 : Balfron Tower Elevation in Dezeen. (2014) https://www.dezeen.com/2014/09/24/brutalist-buildings
balfron-tower-london-erno-goldfinger/
Fig. 26 : Balfron Tower Development Drawings from London Metropolitan Archives. Fig. 27 : Balfron Tower Development Drawings from London Metropolitan Archives. Fig. 28 : Balfron Tower Development Drawings from London Metropolitan Archives. Fig. 29 : Balfron Tower Lift Tower in The Modern House. Accessed 16 Dec 2018. https://www.
themodernhouse.com/directory-of-architects-and-designers/erno-goldfinger/
Fig. 30 : English Jacobean Designs in History of Design Through the 18th Century. (2011) https:// iammodernman.wordpress.com/2011/
Fig. 31 : Bedford Square by Russ London. Fig. 32 : Stamp and Dunnet, Block D Cheltenham Estate (1983) Originals from RIBA Archive. Fig. 33 : Stamp and Dunnet, Bloomsbury Block (1983) Originals from RIBA Archive. Fig. 34 : Balfron Tower West Elevation from Studio Egret West. Fig. 35 : Trellick Tower West Elevation from John McAslan Partners. Fig. 36 : Author’s Own Image. Fig. 37 : Stamp and Dunnet, Balfron Tower (1983) Originals from RIBA Archive. Fig. 38 : Balfron Tower by David Borland. RIBA Archives. Fig. 39 : Author’s Own Image. Fig. 40 : Stamp and Dunnet, Trellick Tower (1983) Originals from RIBA Archive. Fig. 41 : Trellick Tower by Ian Tall.
71
Fig. 42 : Balfron Tower Elevation in Dezeen. (2014) https://www.dezeen.com/2014/09/24/brutalist-buildings
balfron-tower-london-erno-goldfinger/
Fig. 43 : Trellick Tower in Modern Architecture London. (2009) http://modernarchitecturelondon.com/ buildings/trellick-tower.php
Fig. 44 : Carradale House in Evening Standard (2016). https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/design/why
every-design-fan-should-follow-notreallyobsessive-on-instagram-a3320796.html
Fig. 45 : Glenkerry House by Simon Phillips. Fig. 46 : Glenkerry House context map adapted from Historic England Heritage Listing. Accessed
December 2018. https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1427917.
Fig. 47 : Elwall, Abbots Langley, (1996). Originals from RIBA Archive. Fig. 48 : Elwall, Perry House, (1996). Originals from RIBA Archive. Fig. 49 : Perry House in c20 Architects. Accessed in 10 Sep 2018. https://c20society.org.uk/ publications/20th-century-architects/
Fig. 50 : Balfron Tower in Municipal Dreams, (2014). https://municipaldreams.wordpress.com/2014/10/21/ balfron-tower-poplar-2/
Fig. 51 : Trellick Tower by Sbally1.
72
APPENDIX A
Excerpts from Interview with James
on Goldfinger a long time ago, there was
Dunnett on December 6, 2018.
this group of students looking into this great debate about whether services
AL : I found it quite interesting that not
should be exposed in buildings, a time
many who had written about Goldfinger
when Richard Rogers was riding high in
emphasise on the influence London
exposing his pipes and structures. And
as a city had on his approach. Being a
these students had written to Goldfinger
Hungarian architect who trained in Paris,
to ask about the chimneys in Trellick
and ultimately made a career in London,
Tower, whether he was specifically
do you think he was quite conscious of his
trying to express the services. And I
surrounding context when designing?
saw on his reply saying that in Jacobean architecture the chimney had always
JD : Yes, I mean of course Goldfinger was
play a very important role so there was
praised, in fact, by Lewis Mumford in an
actually nothing new in trying to expose
article about his building in Albemarle,
this feature. Of course, Lutyens made
which he termed contextual modernism.
significant use of this feature and so did
And I was contacted once by a British
Mackintosh.
architect writing about modernism in context to understand more about
AL : In terms of urban sense, which I
Goldfinger’s works. So yes, his works were
understand was an area of particular
perceived by some as contextual in some
interest for him, do you he was aware of
way. And I think this idea of a bay window,
how Balfron and Trellick, at both their
it could be seen as a reference to a very
heights, would be perceived as part of the
typical English architectural expression,
London skyline?
Jacobean and so on. And also, I remember reading about something Pevsner wrote
JD : Trellick Tower, as you will know,
73
was the second built version of that
design decision?
format, the first being Balfron Tower in Tower Hamlets, with an earlier un-built
JD : Well I think I have hypothesised in
version designed for Abbots Langley, and
somewhere, that, you see in the case
some elements arguably going back to
of Abbott Langley, there weresimilar
Goldfinger’s CIAM housing proposal of
expressions as well albeit in a less
1932/3. So the basic format of Trellick
pronounced manner. I think this idea of
cannot be regarded as having been
a route between the main route and the
devised as a response to its immediate
circulation is something that he had been
locality. However the organisation of the
exploring, shall we say. I have a feeling
site round Trellick is an interesting variant
that in the case of Balfron, you have the
on that round Balfron, and was - I am sure
roadway going through it for rubbish
- a response to locality. Goldfinger was in
collection and so on, and that roadway
fact quite pragmatic and also contextual
was perhaps a way of his to rationalise
as correspondence in the Goldfinger
the process of refuse management, and
archive at the RIBA shows, he was for
make a complete circle (pointing to
example very conscious of the impact
drawing). By spacing them out through the
that Balfron would have, sited as it was,
detached lift tower, it allows the vehicle to
on people emerging rom the Blackwall
move a complete circle and go out. This
Tunnel, and I am sure he would also have
is a suspicion that I have, anyway. But who
been aware of and considered the views
knows exactly...
of Trellick from Westway. AL : Was he the kind of architect who AL : In terms of the detached lift tower,
test his ideas in context, and experiment
which the reason he gave for such a
through multiple iterations?
big gesture was for isolating the noisy mechanical noise from the flats, do you
JD : Yes definitely. Especially in the case of
think that was the only reason for this
Bloomsbury, which was unbuilt
74
unfortunately, it requires the demolition
buildings there. But also the fundamental
of Sicilian Avenue. Well nobody cared
point of the scheme was that by dividing
about Sicilian Avenue at that time, it was
the tower in 5-storey units , they were
just a Victorian stuff, but they did care
relating to the scale of the typical London
about the Georgian houses, so I guess
buildings. Similarly for a scheme that he
the developers at that time which were
worked with Cadbury-Brown in Moorgate,
about 1963 thought that the reputation of
again not developed, the tower here was
someone like Goldfinger could perhaps
divided in units of 9-storeys, there was
be able to help them get planning
text I think by Cadbury-Brown that argued
permission for such a senstive case.
this relationship with the surrounding
As they do now for the same purpose
building height.
actually. And it was proven to be quite successful actually because Goldfinger
AL : In the case of Balfron and Trellick
was able to call on John Summerson and
then, it was interesting because the
J.M. Richards, and Pevsner himself to
elevations of Balfron were expressed
give evidences in support of his scheme,
horizontally when compared to Trellick,
which they did. Though it wasn’t quite
which has an almost square proportion.
enough to persuade the council, which
Could this be a result of the surrounding
they wouldn’t back down on letting
context do you think?
him demolish building z,y,x making the scheme impossible. But the point of the
JD : I wrote a piece about proportional
argument was that, Goldfinger’s own
design of Goldfinger so there was
justification for the design of the tower
obviously a shift between the proportion
was answering to the Sennet House,
used for Balfron and Trellick. I’m not sure
so these two buildings will act as both
if the surrounding context has had any
ends for Georgian Bloomsbury, though
bearing, but proportions were some his
completely ignoring the fact that he
primary concerns definitely.
was demolishing most of the Georgian
(end)
APPENDIX A
75